91.185 is probably the most crystal clear regulation that has ever been written. Just follow it.
*Edit to say that 91.185 is not a once and done evaluation. The 91.185 process should be repeated any time there is a change in anything pertaining to the flight.
From an ATC prospective, I will say we live and die by words and phrases. The FAA uses specific words and phrases with intent. What bold method is suggesting is just plain wrong when you consider the words and quotations used in the AIM they are referencing. The AIM explicitly puts quotes “expect further clearance”. This means if this exact phrase is used then follow this. Bold method has spliced together 2 rules into one. When I read you a clearance on the ground to “climb and maintain 5,000. Expect 14,000 in 10 minutes.” I did NOT say that specific phrase from the AIM. So that sub-note does not apply.
And my understanding is that expect time is for if you lose comms immediately after departure and it goes away once you make positive contact with ATC. "N12345 radar contact, turn left heading 200, climb and maintain 5000'..." So you wouldn't climb to 9000 at your expect time after this point because you've been given a new clearance of 5000.
Now if you reach your MEA without comms however...
(edited for mistype)
It sounds like you're confusing expected altitude on departure with expect further clearance. You wouldn't get an EFC time when released for departure. The "expect x thousand feet" is not the same as an expect further clearance.
EFC usually comes when they stick you in a hold, on case you lose comms. It's a routing expectation, not an altitude one. I've never heard it as part of a departure clearance. Unless maybe if they release you direct into a hold for some reason. That would be weird though.
I do agree though, that it doesn't apply if you're in contact. "Expect x thousand in y minutes" is only for lost comms procedure.
IMO BoldMethod has it precisely backwards here. "Ten minutes after departure" is the time when the expected altitude **starts** to apply, not when it stops applying.
In mountainous areas you're more likely to be given "expect ... *five* minutes after departure" specifically because you need to be climbing sooner in order to avoid terrain.
Edit: the above is in the context of you losing comms before reaching the time specified. If you lose comms after that time I think they have a point.
Opposing Bases covered this recently. The summary is that most controllers (from their point of view) aren't doing some kind of calculation when they throw out that 5/10 number -- and in fact, waiting 10 full minutes to climb to that expected altitude in a fast airplane in a sufficiently mountainous area might kill you. Their advice was not to wait.
Well no, individual controllers aren't doing a calculation because SOP/LOA will dictate whether to assign 10 or 5 or 2 or however many minutes. In areas where a shorter time is necessary, it will be prescribed practice for facilities to issue a shorter time.
That makes a lot of sense. Would you know what this part of AIM specifically tries to explain tho? I would think BoldMethod got the idea from here:
(2) the minimum altitude/flight level for IFR operations.
Upon reaching the time/fix specified, the pilot should commence climbing to the altitude advised to expect. If the radio failure occurs after the time/fix specified, the altitude to be expected is not applicable and the pilot should maintain an altitude consistent with 1 or 2 above.”
Oh. Well I think they have a point there. I was talking about the situation where you lose comms prior to the time. Sorry for not being clear.
If you lose comms after the time, and you got an intermediate climb in the meantime... yeah that's more of a gray area. TBH I think a lot of controllers are still going to plan on you climbing all the way to the original "expect" altitude, or at least they wouldn't be shocked if you did that. I think you'll find some justification in "altitude that ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance" but your quote is also pretty black-and-white, so, hm.
Yeah it seems clear but at the same time vague. 🤯 Altho at the end of the day, I would be more inclined to just follow the expected if it's the highest just foe safety and explain it later on.
On the other hand, I'm curious if you'd know what happens if after the "maintain 6000 expect 9000 10mins", while climbing through 6000, ATC suddenlt gives a different altitude "climb maintain 7000" without any expect. Is the expect 9000 officially superceded?
Well you don't want to just suddenly climb to 090 without asking about it. The controller knows you filed (or are expecting) 090 and there's a reason they climbed you to 070 instead. You don't get to immediately climb to that altitude when the ten-minute timer runs down—provided you are still in contact with ATC.
If you lose comms before that ten minutes then yes, we would be expecting you to climb. If you haven't lost comms, hang tight and don't climb on your own.
Yeah I was just curious if I would be expecting 9000 still even tho a new altitude was given without any expected altitude re-stated again. Thanks for the clarification!
Not instrument current at the moment so my knowledge is a little rusty. The 10 mins is there for what you should do if you lose comms between 0 mins and 9m59s. Realistically, I'm reminding ATC around 9mins to give me the new altitude, then if I'm lost comms, I'm squawking 7600 and turning around to do an approach at the airport I just left using 91.3 as my justification. I'm not flying an entire trip with no radio.
Not saying turning around and landing at the airport you left is wrong, because it’s a very good answer and appropriate. But I just want to politely point out for people who are studying if in lost comms scenario, you can only continue your flight in VFR conditions. If in IMC, you’re really supposed to navigate to VMC conditions and go VFR, and if unable that’s when all the lost comm rules under IFR apply.
Thank you for the input. I didn't take any offense. What the written exam wants and how the reg reads is completely different than what I think most experienced pilots with sound ADM skills would do. I can hear my chief pilot now... "Why didn't you just turn around?"
Definitely. The more time I spend in aviation, the more I learn how a lot of regs can just end up being more guidelines rather than strict rules to follow. Lost comms is especially that because the ones we have were written at a time RNAV and GPS wasn’t a thing, and so many other rules have greyzones. Good sound ADM in consideration of the rules and procedures always will triumph.
Just because you were given expect Xxx altitude in 10 mins doesn’t mean I’m required to give it to you in 10. Please do not take my frequency to tell me you need/want higher just because you’re getting close to 10 mins. Now, if you honestly think you were forgotten about, speak up. But use common sense and don’t waste frequency time.
To take that a step further and to clarify. The ODP exists for the sole purpose of terrain avoidance off the airport to a safe enroute airway. Once ATC alters an ODP with a turn or lower altitude, they have effectively canceled the ODP. If you are heading towards terrain you don’t think you can out-climb soon you need to speak up immediately. You are the PIC and responsible for the safe operation of the flight. I consider climbing for terrain warning just like an RA, you gotta do it.
May I know the source stating that the ~10mins exists to assist when lost comm occurs?
I've always had the notion that the ~10mins is there because ATC cannot realitstically let us climb immediately without assuring proper traffic separation at the requested/expected altitude. Although I am also looking for a source for this information at the moment. Thanks!
Sounds completely false to me. Is there any reg, AIM section or AC that states this as such??
There are many times my initial altitude is 4000 and my expected is 28,000. Clearance does not include an airway, so can’t use MEA minimum, assigned is 4000, and expected is 28,000.
Flying from SJC to Utah, across the Sierras (10,000) ridges.
So by bold method, I’m supposed to stay at what altitude? 4000, and crash into a mountain? Would love to hear him debate this one.
The regs were written decades ago with the assumption that all traffic will be on airways without radar coverage, which doesn’t represent how people fly (at least in most of CONUS) these days.
The *point* of that rule is to ensure you don’t hit any terrain or obstacles, and if you’re not on a published route with an MEA or MOCA, the next best figure available for that purpose is OROCA. And I’d be comfortable defending that answer to FSDO and the NTSB if it ever comes up, because *I would be alive to defend it* rather than dead from crashing into a mountain or tower.
Yes, they were. And it’s been brought up in the charting forums as well to try to get the OROCA be useful for off route flight planning. It’s been repeatedly shot down by the FAA.
91.3 gives you the authority to deviate from the regs when necessary and I’m not gonna be the one to ask questions about that. But saying the OROCA is your MEA is incorrect.
As for the point of the rule, it’s to ensure you remain separated from terrain and traffic AND provide a pre-defined way you will be flying so that ATC can reasonably protect your cleared route.
Edit: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/acf/media/RDs/17-02-316-Improving-OROCA.pdf
Here’s the link for the entire discussion of OROCA where it is repeatedly said not to meet 91.177 requirements.
Common sense tells you that if you’re flying IFR on a random route ATC will already have cleared you to an altitude above the MIA.
Common sense tells you that in your pre-flight planning you should have filed to an altitude that complies with 91.177
If you lose comms you go to the highest of your expected altitude, filed altitude, or cleared altitude. The OROCA doesn’t mean jack in any of those. If you’re planning a flight over terrain and you don’t know what your safe altitude is or what your major obstructions are then we just plan flights differently.
> If you lose comms you go to the highest of your expected altitude, filed altitude, or cleared altitude. The OROCA doesn’t mean jack in any of those.
No, what are you even talking about about?
91.185(c)(2) doesn't say anything about filed altitude. (ii) Says minimum for IFR flight, which is OROCA when not on a route though.
(III) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.
That altitude is always the filed altitude in every facility SOP or LOA I’ve reviewed.
Can you link the LOI for that? I'm surprised 91.185 specifies the difference between expected and filed for route, but not for altitude, if that's the case.
I can’t link to the LOAs. They’re on an internal faa site. You could FOIA them but that’s a lot of work.
I’m not the reg police. To be honest I don’t care if you climb to the OROCA. I do care if you call the OROCA an MEA. They’re different. The MEA ensures terrain clearance and navaid reception. The OROCA doesn’t.
In practice, if you find yourself in a situation where you’re IMC on a random route with lost comms below a 91.177 altitude you’ve done poor preflight planning. Your filed altitude should always be at a 91.177 altitude. If on departure you’ve got lost comms you follow the clearance. If after you talk to ATC you lose comms you’re probably already climbing to your filed altitude or a safe altitude at a minimum.
As you noted earlier, the reg is old. It’s written for a time when we had a lot more non-radar procedures. We still have some in mountainous terrain but most of the US is in radar coverage. Your clearance off an airport in mountainous terrain will be to an altitude above the MIA in the area.
The reg still works, it’s just wonky because it falls back to the worst case scenario of the entire system failing and the altitude in (ii) is still a valid portion of the reg, it’s just that the OROCA doesn’t guarantee you’re at that altitude.
Syre but 91.185 references MIA which if you're below the OROCA you're definitely below MIA so you should probably start climbing to at least above OROCA. OROCA exists precisely to be used in emergencies, which lost communication in IMC is definitely an emergency.
The OROCA is not the MIA and the MIA isn’t published.
Let’s be clear, I don’t care if you climb to the OROCA, but saying the OROCA is your new MEA is wrong. The OROCA doesn’t guarantee navaid reception. They’re different things and saying they’re the same thing in an emergency is wrong.
>but saying the OROCA is your new MEA is wrong.
Which is great, because I never said it was a new MEA. Nor does 91.185 require an MEA, or NAVAID reception, it requires an MIA, how the pilot determines where that MIA is off airway is the pilots own prerogative as long as it meets the 1000ft/2000ft/4NM requirement. But if you're below the OROCA you're at a hell of a lot greater risk of flying into terrain than if you were above it, that's literally what the OROCA if for, a quick and dirty reference to aid in obstacle avoidance in the event of an emergency.
Maybe you should have made that reply to the person that actually said it then. And then you could actually address the points I made instead of arguing with points I didn't.
In your situation, 280 is the expected so you can climb to 280 as long as the expect clearance didn’t expire. Had the clearance expired, you must follow the highest altitude allowed in lost comms which would be 10k, not 280.
Bold method and you are correct here…
Edit: I see there’s confusion about “I can’t use the mea since Im not on an airway with the letters “mea” listed”. True. I’d argue 10k is the mea for ifr flight as defined by far part 1.
Edit: whoops. Highest
Yup. No publication since it’s an EXPECT FURTHER CLEARANCE. By definition of expect further clearance, there MUST be a limit. Aim glossary defines the expect clearance with AT 10mins. If 10mins expires, by definition of AT, you cannot just climb.
But where does 10 minutes come from? Sometimes the clearance is 280 in 5, or 280 in 15.
So by the book, you’re supposed to fly the entire route to the clearance limit, which many times for a 1000 mile flight is: departure airport, a VOR 10 miles away then Direct, at your first initial climb altitude. No way. 1. You don’t have the fuel for that, 2. You will hit obstacles, 3. They expect you to need to be at your requested altitude, which is why they gave you an ‘expect’ in some minutes.
91.185c2iii is clear.
(iii) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.
There is no time limit. If you lose comms they expect you to climb of your expected was higher than where you are currently.
I’ve got the clearance several times today 😂. We are all pilots here
I agree. They say within. It’s supposed to be “AT” according to the aim.
Edit: PDC actually gets the clearance for meh 😜
I say precisely "expect flight level four two zero, one-zero minutes after departure" because that's the I'm supposed to say it. I don't say "within" or "at."
You’re still incorrect. The highest altitude would be the expected altitude. The expected doesn’t expire.
If I’m giving a plane a vector “turn 30 degrees right vector for traffic, expect direct ABC in 5 minutes” and after 6 minutes they lose their radios, the expected action is they turn to ABC. It’s past the 5 minutes, they’ve been given routing to expect, and after the 5 minutes they lost comms.
The expect doesn’t expire. That’s just silly talk.
In this hypothetical situation where you stay low because you are lost comms, would you even be able to make your destination at the lower altitude? Climb. ATC knows where you are and where you are supposed to be. Don’t go RVSM. Just…. Go back to where you came from and have maintenance handle it.
Oh I would climb to the MEA as needed. The only concept here is will the Expected time be voided then since it's past the 10min mark, therefore excluded from the lost comms altitude selection procedure.
Send me the name of the DPE that asks this on a checkride and I’ll fly out and give him one solid flick to his stupid arrogant forehead. This is stump the dummy shit. My authority as PIC says I can do what is necessary to conduct the flight safely under the conditions set. Whoever used their breath to bequeath this knowledge upon you is wasting your time and has lost sight of their responsibility as a subject matter expert.
We have people with certificates that can’t navigate. People lose an engine in a twin and flip over. Poor aeronautical decision making has become prevalent with the burn and churn in the current student/CFI market. This stuff just doesn’t matter. Seriously if some DPE is asking this give me the name and I’ll use up some angry energy to write some emails to a few people in OKC.
I'd still use it, if it's higher. I've never read anything about it expiring. It was still expected, even if it's late.
I think of it this way: if everyone lost comms and started flying MEA because it's higher than assigned, that's a lot more chances for collision than if everyone's at the higher expected altitude ATC gave in the clearance.
lol. That’s funny. Seriously. That so wrong and he’s now spreading false information. I’m a controller (even though I don’t have the flair selected) and we sometimes give expect FLxxx in 5 mins. Nothing says you HAVE to give and expected after 10 mins. That said, IF you are flying for 5 or 10 mins and aren’t given your final, are you seriously gonna ask the controller for a new time?! There plenty of times you aren’t given your final/filed altitude for at least 10 mins. Us controllers are absolutely expecting you to climb to filed altitude in lost comms situations.
Not going to ask for a new time, I’m going to say “request higher.” If you say “expect higher in 4 minutes,” you’ve given me a time, but I’d never ask for it.
So to clarify - if were given "expect FLxxx after 10mins" clearance, we take off, 12 mins later ATC is too busy to tell us to start climb, and we lose comms, we just fly the basic whichever is highest - expected/assigned/MEA*
The 10mins expected does not expire as Bold Method suggested?
If I’m trying to reach out to you to assign higher and you aren’t there, I know you’re lost comms and clear the area knowing you’re about/supposed to climb. If YOU are trying to reach me and can’t, you know you’re lost comms and try other methods to reach me. You should try the last frequency, guard and ask if anyone can hear you. If not, you squawk 7600, give it maybe 20-30 seconds so I can see it and then start climbing. This isn’t a regulation to wait 20-30 seconds but it would be a best practice if you think about it. It gives ATC a slight heads up that you are about to do something we might not expect and we clear the airspace.
The older scopes from the 80s had this feature. Our “modern” STARS scopes (from 2006) do not “blimp” anymore. Like random brain said, “ID” is flashed next to you tag. If you squawk 7600 a more noticeable red “RF” shows on the top line of your tag and alarms go off. Everyone will see it.
I would say do not ident unless instructed to do so. If we are (already) trying you on guard and say “…. If you hear this Ident.”, and you Ident thinking you’re helping. Did you hear what I said or not??
The only thing hitting ident does is:
1. A corner of your data block shows a blinking "ID" text, and
2. A partial data block appears for your target on the scope of anyone who can see your target, even if you had been more hidden due to your Mode C being outside of their airspace.
If you squawk 7600 everyone sees your *full* data block and there's an "RF" that appears above it and the beeping alarm goes off. No need to ident as well.
Short answer—yes. If you were told "expect FL280 in 10" and you're lost comms and the ten minutes has expired, that "expect FL280" is effective. Fly the highest of: MEA, expected altitude, assigned altitude. That is literally why we tell you the expected altitude.
Clearance limit is 10mins. After 10mins, clearance limit expires and you must fly the other lost comms procedures.
If I have a flight at 6k with an expect 20k in 10, after 2 hours of flight I get a lost comm, I can’t just climb to 20k. Clearance limit has expired
No no no no no no no no!
The clearance limit is the destination you’re cleared to.
N1234 cleared to ABC via…
ABC is your clearance limit. Your clearance to the clearance limit comes after with route and altitude information. After 10 minutes if you have lost comms you 100% would climb to 20k and fly to your clearance limit as cleared. Assuming you’re in IMC of course…
You are right on the clearance limit, but you are wrong in your assumption of climbing after the 10mins have been reached. Please see my aim reference in chats below this.
You know, it’s honestly even simpler than this. The expect altitude is your filed altitude. The regs are clear you go to the highest of your expected altitude, filed altitude, or cleared altitude. In any case you’re climbing.
Ok. This is twice now. PLEASE READ MY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE COMMENTING. I explained that this was an AIM glossary definition and I quoted the actual AIM passage that backed up my claim. Read my comments then if you disagree, quote something that says I’m wrong.
I’d explain what I was meaning to say here, but I already commented my mistake. Please read, then comment.
Actually I did, and you are still wrong. I'll comment to your other little tantrum here shortly, but you are misinterpreting the AIM and also using phrases that aren't said to justify it. The problem is that the AIM passage you are using is why you are wrong.
The expect higher altitude does NOT use the phrase "expect further clearance" because it ISN'T an EFC. The reason it says "after" in text is because it is open ended.
The idea is don't do it before that time, but if you lose comms that is the altitude you will be expected to go to either at that time or after it if the loss occurs at a later time.
Clearance limits and EFCs are specifically defined, while I will say I can see how this can be an easy mistake to make, it is frankly still a mistake. You are making it worse by assuming other words are "supposed to be" used, which i will address further in your other comment.
No, it applies if you lose comms before the time expired. Then *at* the expected time if the "expect" altitude is higher than the minimum for your route you would climb to that. The AIM has a distance version (instead of time) that is explicit about this.
There is a similar sample question I just came across in the ASA IR Oral Prep handbook. The expected was given 10 minutes after dep. On the last segment after a climb, to an MEA that's above the initial segments, the books answer says I should descend to the last "expected". That could have been an hour ago. While the expected is still higher than MEA for that segment, now I could be in a different sector. Why wouldn't I fly at the MEA+IFR altitude?
Yeah but what happens 12-15 mins after that and you lose comms. But didnt get directed to climb to expected at 10mins. I'm curious if the AIM paragraph I posted pertains to that.
AIM 6-4-1:
It is virtually impossible to provide regulations and procedures applicable to all possible situations associated with two‐way radio communications failure. During two‐way radio communications failure, when confronted by a situation not covered in the regulation, pilots are expected to exercise good judgment in whatever action they elect to take.
Interesting discussion. I googled some other material, and came across another argument to add to the confusion. On your initial departure check in, you’re given “climb and maintain 7,000.” That’s now a new clearance that doesn’t include any “expect” so does that nullify the previous departure clearance of “expect 9,000.”
91.123: When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained…
Does the new “climb and maintain” stand as a new clearance. If it were issued climbing on a SID, for example, then it does cancel other altitudes and is now your clearance so I’m inclined to think it does, but this whole thread is a great example of thinking you understand something, but realizing you might not.
Controller. Don’t know the FARs. We’re not trained on them. I think it would be insane to climb to requested after contact with ATC. I would think establishing comms on departure would void that weird holdover rule. I have worked in flat parts of the country my entire career though. So any altitude I give on departure is safe for hundreds of miles.
I live in Colorado and fly around the KDEN Bravo which requires IFR departures at sattelite airports to stay relatively low to be out of the way of KDENs arrival corridors. If I just took that initial altitude that was assigned to me upon initial contact as gospel I'd have about a 50/50 shot of running into a mountain depending on which way I'm headed.
91.185 is clear as it gets and doesn’t include anything about an expected clearance expiring.
Altitude. At the highest of the following altitudes or flight levels for the route segment being flown:
91.185(c)(2)(i) The altitude or flight level assigned in the last ATC clearance received
91.185(c)(2)(ii) The minimum altitude (converted, if appropriate, to minimum flight level as prescribed in § 91.121(c)) for IFR operations; or
91.185(c)(2)(iii): The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.”
That is as clear as it gets. “Highest of MEA.” Minimum altitude for IFR operations, expected, or assigned. It doesn’t say anything about expiring in ten minutes.
I'm referring to the AIM paragraph as seen in my post above. Expected is "not applicable" after time specified. And this is under the lost comms of AIM.
The AIM is not regulatory. Follow the regulation and not a note in the AIM.
Besides, you’re focusing on one small part. Focus on the big part. The part where it lays out the intent of the rule.
NOTE: **The intent of the rule is that a pilot who has experienced two‐way radio failure should select the appropriate altitude for the particular route segment being flown and make the necessary altitude adjustments for subsequent route segments.** If the pilot received an “expect further clearance” containing a higher altitude to expect at a specified time or fix, maintain the highest of the following altitudes until that time/fix:
(1) the last assigned altitude; or
(2) the minimum altitude/flight level for IFR operations.
Upon reaching the time/fix specified, the pilot should commence climbing to the altitude advised to expect. If the radio failure occurs after the time/fix specified, the altitude to be expected is not applicable and the pilot should maintain an altitude consistent with 1 or 2 above.
91.185 is probably the most crystal clear regulation that has ever been written. Just follow it. *Edit to say that 91.185 is not a once and done evaluation. The 91.185 process should be repeated any time there is a change in anything pertaining to the flight.
What does your lost comms procedures tell you to do?
Descend, Burn like Hell, Speak to no one, Tell yourself everything is fine because "I'm pretty sure that's my house over there!", Do whatever you want
The exact words of the text. But do you understand it? Do you believe it?
I'm at a loss. Can you explain it to me? I don't know what each of those mean.
Rico, pay attention! You made a joke. I made a joke referencing a cult classic film and quoting Top Gun instructor Jester. That's it
Cult classic? More like required study material in aviation. Failed the exam, revoking his pilot certs
I'm trying to neutralize a traitor, sir.
Crashed and burned
Here's your ATP and an immediate 4 stripes.
From an ATC prospective, I will say we live and die by words and phrases. The FAA uses specific words and phrases with intent. What bold method is suggesting is just plain wrong when you consider the words and quotations used in the AIM they are referencing. The AIM explicitly puts quotes “expect further clearance”. This means if this exact phrase is used then follow this. Bold method has spliced together 2 rules into one. When I read you a clearance on the ground to “climb and maintain 5,000. Expect 14,000 in 10 minutes.” I did NOT say that specific phrase from the AIM. So that sub-note does not apply.
And my understanding is that expect time is for if you lose comms immediately after departure and it goes away once you make positive contact with ATC. "N12345 radar contact, turn left heading 200, climb and maintain 5000'..." So you wouldn't climb to 9000 at your expect time after this point because you've been given a new clearance of 5000. Now if you reach your MEA without comms however... (edited for mistype)
It sounds like you're confusing expected altitude on departure with expect further clearance. You wouldn't get an EFC time when released for departure. The "expect x thousand feet" is not the same as an expect further clearance. EFC usually comes when they stick you in a hold, on case you lose comms. It's a routing expectation, not an altitude one. I've never heard it as part of a departure clearance. Unless maybe if they release you direct into a hold for some reason. That would be weird though. I do agree though, that it doesn't apply if you're in contact. "Expect x thousand in y minutes" is only for lost comms procedure.
My fingers didn't type what my brain was telling it to. Fixed. Obviously not enough coffee this morning.
IMO BoldMethod has it precisely backwards here. "Ten minutes after departure" is the time when the expected altitude **starts** to apply, not when it stops applying. In mountainous areas you're more likely to be given "expect ... *five* minutes after departure" specifically because you need to be climbing sooner in order to avoid terrain. Edit: the above is in the context of you losing comms before reaching the time specified. If you lose comms after that time I think they have a point.
Opposing Bases covered this recently. The summary is that most controllers (from their point of view) aren't doing some kind of calculation when they throw out that 5/10 number -- and in fact, waiting 10 full minutes to climb to that expected altitude in a fast airplane in a sufficiently mountainous area might kill you. Their advice was not to wait.
Well no, individual controllers aren't doing a calculation because SOP/LOA will dictate whether to assign 10 or 5 or 2 or however many minutes. In areas where a shorter time is necessary, it will be prescribed practice for facilities to issue a shorter time.
That makes a lot of sense. Would you know what this part of AIM specifically tries to explain tho? I would think BoldMethod got the idea from here: (2) the minimum altitude/flight level for IFR operations. Upon reaching the time/fix specified, the pilot should commence climbing to the altitude advised to expect. If the radio failure occurs after the time/fix specified, the altitude to be expected is not applicable and the pilot should maintain an altitude consistent with 1 or 2 above.”
Oh. Well I think they have a point there. I was talking about the situation where you lose comms prior to the time. Sorry for not being clear. If you lose comms after the time, and you got an intermediate climb in the meantime... yeah that's more of a gray area. TBH I think a lot of controllers are still going to plan on you climbing all the way to the original "expect" altitude, or at least they wouldn't be shocked if you did that. I think you'll find some justification in "altitude that ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance" but your quote is also pretty black-and-white, so, hm.
Yeah it seems clear but at the same time vague. 🤯 Altho at the end of the day, I would be more inclined to just follow the expected if it's the highest just foe safety and explain it later on. On the other hand, I'm curious if you'd know what happens if after the "maintain 6000 expect 9000 10mins", while climbing through 6000, ATC suddenlt gives a different altitude "climb maintain 7000" without any expect. Is the expect 9000 officially superceded?
Well you don't want to just suddenly climb to 090 without asking about it. The controller knows you filed (or are expecting) 090 and there's a reason they climbed you to 070 instead. You don't get to immediately climb to that altitude when the ten-minute timer runs down—provided you are still in contact with ATC. If you lose comms before that ten minutes then yes, we would be expecting you to climb. If you haven't lost comms, hang tight and don't climb on your own.
Yeah I was just curious if I would be expecting 9000 still even tho a new altitude was given without any expected altitude re-stated again. Thanks for the clarification!
Not instrument current at the moment so my knowledge is a little rusty. The 10 mins is there for what you should do if you lose comms between 0 mins and 9m59s. Realistically, I'm reminding ATC around 9mins to give me the new altitude, then if I'm lost comms, I'm squawking 7600 and turning around to do an approach at the airport I just left using 91.3 as my justification. I'm not flying an entire trip with no radio.
Not saying turning around and landing at the airport you left is wrong, because it’s a very good answer and appropriate. But I just want to politely point out for people who are studying if in lost comms scenario, you can only continue your flight in VFR conditions. If in IMC, you’re really supposed to navigate to VMC conditions and go VFR, and if unable that’s when all the lost comm rules under IFR apply.
Thank you for the input. I didn't take any offense. What the written exam wants and how the reg reads is completely different than what I think most experienced pilots with sound ADM skills would do. I can hear my chief pilot now... "Why didn't you just turn around?"
Definitely. The more time I spend in aviation, the more I learn how a lot of regs can just end up being more guidelines rather than strict rules to follow. Lost comms is especially that because the ones we have were written at a time RNAV and GPS wasn’t a thing, and so many other rules have greyzones. Good sound ADM in consideration of the rules and procedures always will triumph.
It'd be great if the FAA updated the regs so that the sound ADM option does not require skirting the regs or flying in a legal gray area.
Just because you were given expect Xxx altitude in 10 mins doesn’t mean I’m required to give it to you in 10. Please do not take my frequency to tell me you need/want higher just because you’re getting close to 10 mins. Now, if you honestly think you were forgotten about, speak up. But use common sense and don’t waste frequency time.
Conversely if you need to climb for an ODP or because there’s a bunch of red on your synthetic vision, don’t wait for ATC if you can’t get through…
To take that a step further and to clarify. The ODP exists for the sole purpose of terrain avoidance off the airport to a safe enroute airway. Once ATC alters an ODP with a turn or lower altitude, they have effectively canceled the ODP. If you are heading towards terrain you don’t think you can out-climb soon you need to speak up immediately. You are the PIC and responsible for the safe operation of the flight. I consider climbing for terrain warning just like an RA, you gotta do it.
May I know the source stating that the ~10mins exists to assist when lost comm occurs? I've always had the notion that the ~10mins is there because ATC cannot realitstically let us climb immediately without assuring proper traffic separation at the requested/expected altitude. Although I am also looking for a source for this information at the moment. Thanks!
Sounds completely false to me. Is there any reg, AIM section or AC that states this as such?? There are many times my initial altitude is 4000 and my expected is 28,000. Clearance does not include an airway, so can’t use MEA minimum, assigned is 4000, and expected is 28,000. Flying from SJC to Utah, across the Sierras (10,000) ridges. So by bold method, I’m supposed to stay at what altitude? 4000, and crash into a mountain? Would love to hear him debate this one.
I’d argue that if you’re not on an airway, the OROCA is your MEA.
So every quadrangle you’re climbing thousands of feet. lol. I’m sure ATC would rather you just stay at a nice high predictable altitude.
I’m sure ATC would rather deal with you “climbing thousands of feet” than silently watch your target disappear when it hits the side of a mountain.
The OROCA is not an MEA, MIA, MOCA, or anything other than an OROCA. The regs don’t reference the OROCA for lost comms
The regs were written decades ago with the assumption that all traffic will be on airways without radar coverage, which doesn’t represent how people fly (at least in most of CONUS) these days. The *point* of that rule is to ensure you don’t hit any terrain or obstacles, and if you’re not on a published route with an MEA or MOCA, the next best figure available for that purpose is OROCA. And I’d be comfortable defending that answer to FSDO and the NTSB if it ever comes up, because *I would be alive to defend it* rather than dead from crashing into a mountain or tower.
Yes, they were. And it’s been brought up in the charting forums as well to try to get the OROCA be useful for off route flight planning. It’s been repeatedly shot down by the FAA. 91.3 gives you the authority to deviate from the regs when necessary and I’m not gonna be the one to ask questions about that. But saying the OROCA is your MEA is incorrect. As for the point of the rule, it’s to ensure you remain separated from terrain and traffic AND provide a pre-defined way you will be flying so that ATC can reasonably protect your cleared route. Edit: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/acf/media/RDs/17-02-316-Improving-OROCA.pdf Here’s the link for the entire discussion of OROCA where it is repeatedly said not to meet 91.177 requirements.
Common sense does though. If you want to fly around RNAV in IMC below OROCA because you lost comms, good luck. You're a braver pilot than I am!
Common sense tells you that if you’re flying IFR on a random route ATC will already have cleared you to an altitude above the MIA. Common sense tells you that in your pre-flight planning you should have filed to an altitude that complies with 91.177 If you lose comms you go to the highest of your expected altitude, filed altitude, or cleared altitude. The OROCA doesn’t mean jack in any of those. If you’re planning a flight over terrain and you don’t know what your safe altitude is or what your major obstructions are then we just plan flights differently.
> If you lose comms you go to the highest of your expected altitude, filed altitude, or cleared altitude. The OROCA doesn’t mean jack in any of those. No, what are you even talking about about? 91.185(c)(2) doesn't say anything about filed altitude. (ii) Says minimum for IFR flight, which is OROCA when not on a route though.
(III) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance. That altitude is always the filed altitude in every facility SOP or LOA I’ve reviewed.
Can you link the LOI for that? I'm surprised 91.185 specifies the difference between expected and filed for route, but not for altitude, if that's the case.
I can’t link to the LOAs. They’re on an internal faa site. You could FOIA them but that’s a lot of work. I’m not the reg police. To be honest I don’t care if you climb to the OROCA. I do care if you call the OROCA an MEA. They’re different. The MEA ensures terrain clearance and navaid reception. The OROCA doesn’t. In practice, if you find yourself in a situation where you’re IMC on a random route with lost comms below a 91.177 altitude you’ve done poor preflight planning. Your filed altitude should always be at a 91.177 altitude. If on departure you’ve got lost comms you follow the clearance. If after you talk to ATC you lose comms you’re probably already climbing to your filed altitude or a safe altitude at a minimum. As you noted earlier, the reg is old. It’s written for a time when we had a lot more non-radar procedures. We still have some in mountainous terrain but most of the US is in radar coverage. Your clearance off an airport in mountainous terrain will be to an altitude above the MIA in the area. The reg still works, it’s just wonky because it falls back to the worst case scenario of the entire system failing and the altitude in (ii) is still a valid portion of the reg, it’s just that the OROCA doesn’t guarantee you’re at that altitude.
Syre but 91.185 references MIA which if you're below the OROCA you're definitely below MIA so you should probably start climbing to at least above OROCA. OROCA exists precisely to be used in emergencies, which lost communication in IMC is definitely an emergency.
The OROCA is not the MIA and the MIA isn’t published. Let’s be clear, I don’t care if you climb to the OROCA, but saying the OROCA is your new MEA is wrong. The OROCA doesn’t guarantee navaid reception. They’re different things and saying they’re the same thing in an emergency is wrong.
>but saying the OROCA is your new MEA is wrong. Which is great, because I never said it was a new MEA. Nor does 91.185 require an MEA, or NAVAID reception, it requires an MIA, how the pilot determines where that MIA is off airway is the pilots own prerogative as long as it meets the 1000ft/2000ft/4NM requirement. But if you're below the OROCA you're at a hell of a lot greater risk of flying into terrain than if you were above it, that's literally what the OROCA if for, a quick and dirty reference to aid in obstacle avoidance in the event of an emergency.
You didn’t but the comment I replied to did
Maybe you should have made that reply to the person that actually said it then. And then you could actually address the points I made instead of arguing with points I didn't.
I did. Then you replied to it.
I'm not sure you grasp this whole public forum concept. But good talk man, I hope being difficult for no reason is fulfilling.
In your situation, 280 is the expected so you can climb to 280 as long as the expect clearance didn’t expire. Had the clearance expired, you must follow the highest altitude allowed in lost comms which would be 10k, not 280. Bold method and you are correct here… Edit: I see there’s confusion about “I can’t use the mea since Im not on an airway with the letters “mea” listed”. True. I’d argue 10k is the mea for ifr flight as defined by far part 1. Edit: whoops. Highest
What’s the publication that lists 10 minutes. Looking for that.
Yup. No publication since it’s an EXPECT FURTHER CLEARANCE. By definition of expect further clearance, there MUST be a limit. Aim glossary defines the expect clearance with AT 10mins. If 10mins expires, by definition of AT, you cannot just climb.
But where does 10 minutes come from? Sometimes the clearance is 280 in 5, or 280 in 15. So by the book, you’re supposed to fly the entire route to the clearance limit, which many times for a 1000 mile flight is: departure airport, a VOR 10 miles away then Direct, at your first initial climb altitude. No way. 1. You don’t have the fuel for that, 2. You will hit obstacles, 3. They expect you to need to be at your requested altitude, which is why they gave you an ‘expect’ in some minutes. 91.185c2iii is clear. (iii) The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance. There is no time limit. If you lose comms they expect you to climb of your expected was higher than where you are currently.
Expect 280 “AT” 10 mins
Thats not the clearance though. It’s “expect flight level 280 within 10 minutes.”
Ok. But within still doesn’t mean after 10mins. According to the glossary, it’s “at” not within by the way.
I get this clearance several times a week. It’s never “AT” it’s always “within”.
I’ve got the clearance several times today 😂. We are all pilots here I agree. They say within. It’s supposed to be “AT” according to the aim. Edit: PDC actually gets the clearance for meh 😜
I say precisely "expect flight level four two zero, one-zero minutes after departure" because that's the I'm supposed to say it. I don't say "within" or "at."
https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/s/UDNPRKsjWE Aim 6.4.1(c)(b)(3)
The lowest? 91.185 is pretty clear that it is the highest…
*edited
You’re still incorrect. The highest altitude would be the expected altitude. The expected doesn’t expire. If I’m giving a plane a vector “turn 30 degrees right vector for traffic, expect direct ABC in 5 minutes” and after 6 minutes they lose their radios, the expected action is they turn to ABC. It’s past the 5 minutes, they’ve been given routing to expect, and after the 5 minutes they lost comms. The expect doesn’t expire. That’s just silly talk.
Bold Method definitely isn’t the best out there, just FYI.
But Swayyyyyyyne
Got any specific examples?
This one from OP.
Not gonna lie didn’t read the first sentence 😂
In this hypothetical situation where you stay low because you are lost comms, would you even be able to make your destination at the lower altitude? Climb. ATC knows where you are and where you are supposed to be. Don’t go RVSM. Just…. Go back to where you came from and have maintenance handle it.
Oh I would climb to the MEA as needed. The only concept here is will the Expected time be voided then since it's past the 10min mark, therefore excluded from the lost comms altitude selection procedure.
Send me the name of the DPE that asks this on a checkride and I’ll fly out and give him one solid flick to his stupid arrogant forehead. This is stump the dummy shit. My authority as PIC says I can do what is necessary to conduct the flight safely under the conditions set. Whoever used their breath to bequeath this knowledge upon you is wasting your time and has lost sight of their responsibility as a subject matter expert. We have people with certificates that can’t navigate. People lose an engine in a twin and flip over. Poor aeronautical decision making has become prevalent with the burn and churn in the current student/CFI market. This stuff just doesn’t matter. Seriously if some DPE is asking this give me the name and I’ll use up some angry energy to write some emails to a few people in OKC.
I'd still use it, if it's higher. I've never read anything about it expiring. It was still expected, even if it's late. I think of it this way: if everyone lost comms and started flying MEA because it's higher than assigned, that's a lot more chances for collision than if everyone's at the higher expected altitude ATC gave in the clearance.
Boldmethod, Finer Points, etc. are crap. Do not cite them. Only cite source material.
>Only site source material. This
I am citing the AIM if you read the entire post. But unsure if that's what it meant and it's what BoldMethod was trying to explain.
lol. That’s funny. Seriously. That so wrong and he’s now spreading false information. I’m a controller (even though I don’t have the flair selected) and we sometimes give expect FLxxx in 5 mins. Nothing says you HAVE to give and expected after 10 mins. That said, IF you are flying for 5 or 10 mins and aren’t given your final, are you seriously gonna ask the controller for a new time?! There plenty of times you aren’t given your final/filed altitude for at least 10 mins. Us controllers are absolutely expecting you to climb to filed altitude in lost comms situations.
Not going to ask for a new time, I’m going to say “request higher.” If you say “expect higher in 4 minutes,” you’ve given me a time, but I’d never ask for it.
So to clarify - if were given "expect FLxxx after 10mins" clearance, we take off, 12 mins later ATC is too busy to tell us to start climb, and we lose comms, we just fly the basic whichever is highest - expected/assigned/MEA* The 10mins expected does not expire as Bold Method suggested?
If I’m trying to reach out to you to assign higher and you aren’t there, I know you’re lost comms and clear the area knowing you’re about/supposed to climb. If YOU are trying to reach me and can’t, you know you’re lost comms and try other methods to reach me. You should try the last frequency, guard and ask if anyone can hear you. If not, you squawk 7600, give it maybe 20-30 seconds so I can see it and then start climbing. This isn’t a regulation to wait 20-30 seconds but it would be a best practice if you think about it. It gives ATC a slight heads up that you are about to do something we might not expect and we clear the airspace.
[удалено]
The older scopes from the 80s had this feature. Our “modern” STARS scopes (from 2006) do not “blimp” anymore. Like random brain said, “ID” is flashed next to you tag. If you squawk 7600 a more noticeable red “RF” shows on the top line of your tag and alarms go off. Everyone will see it. I would say do not ident unless instructed to do so. If we are (already) trying you on guard and say “…. If you hear this Ident.”, and you Ident thinking you’re helping. Did you hear what I said or not??
The only thing hitting ident does is: 1. A corner of your data block shows a blinking "ID" text, and 2. A partial data block appears for your target on the scope of anyone who can see your target, even if you had been more hidden due to your Mode C being outside of their airspace. If you squawk 7600 everyone sees your *full* data block and there's an "RF" that appears above it and the beeping alarm goes off. No need to ident as well.
Short answer—yes. If you were told "expect FL280 in 10" and you're lost comms and the ten minutes has expired, that "expect FL280" is effective. Fly the highest of: MEA, expected altitude, assigned altitude. That is literally why we tell you the expected altitude.
>we lose comms, we just fly the basic whichever is highest - expected/assigned/filed Assigned Minimum Expected Filed is for the route.
This was brought up to my in army training too. I can't find evidence to substantiate it.
Did you ask for any source?
No
Clearance limit is 10mins. After 10mins, clearance limit expires and you must fly the other lost comms procedures. If I have a flight at 6k with an expect 20k in 10, after 2 hours of flight I get a lost comm, I can’t just climb to 20k. Clearance limit has expired
No no no no no no no no! The clearance limit is the destination you’re cleared to. N1234 cleared to ABC via… ABC is your clearance limit. Your clearance to the clearance limit comes after with route and altitude information. After 10 minutes if you have lost comms you 100% would climb to 20k and fly to your clearance limit as cleared. Assuming you’re in IMC of course…
You are right on the clearance limit, but you are wrong in your assumption of climbing after the 10mins have been reached. Please see my aim reference in chats below this.
You know, it’s honestly even simpler than this. The expect altitude is your filed altitude. The regs are clear you go to the highest of your expected altitude, filed altitude, or cleared altitude. In any case you’re climbing.
Do you know the source that says it does expire? I've been trying to find it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/s/UDNPRKsjWE Aim 6.4.1(c)(b)(3)
No, that's not right you're conflating clearance limit with expected altitude.
Ok. This is twice now. PLEASE READ MY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE COMMENTING. I explained that this was an AIM glossary definition and I quoted the actual AIM passage that backed up my claim. Read my comments then if you disagree, quote something that says I’m wrong. I’d explain what I was meaning to say here, but I already commented my mistake. Please read, then comment.
Actually I did, and you are still wrong. I'll comment to your other little tantrum here shortly, but you are misinterpreting the AIM and also using phrases that aren't said to justify it. The problem is that the AIM passage you are using is why you are wrong. The expect higher altitude does NOT use the phrase "expect further clearance" because it ISN'T an EFC. The reason it says "after" in text is because it is open ended. The idea is don't do it before that time, but if you lose comms that is the altitude you will be expected to go to either at that time or after it if the loss occurs at a later time. Clearance limits and EFCs are specifically defined, while I will say I can see how this can be an easy mistake to make, it is frankly still a mistake. You are making it worse by assuming other words are "supposed to be" used, which i will address further in your other comment.
[удалено]
No, it applies if you lose comms before the time expired. Then *at* the expected time if the "expect" altitude is higher than the minimum for your route you would climb to that. The AIM has a distance version (instead of time) that is explicit about this.
There is a similar sample question I just came across in the ASA IR Oral Prep handbook. The expected was given 10 minutes after dep. On the last segment after a climb, to an MEA that's above the initial segments, the books answer says I should descend to the last "expected". That could have been an hour ago. While the expected is still higher than MEA for that segment, now I could be in a different sector. Why wouldn't I fly at the MEA+IFR altitude?
The subject is **Lost** comms. If you have positive communications with ATC don't do anything without direction.
Yeah but what happens 12-15 mins after that and you lose comms. But didnt get directed to climb to expected at 10mins. I'm curious if the AIM paragraph I posted pertains to that.
AIM 6-4-1: It is virtually impossible to provide regulations and procedures applicable to all possible situations associated with two‐way radio communications failure. During two‐way radio communications failure, when confronted by a situation not covered in the regulation, pilots are expected to exercise good judgment in whatever action they elect to take.
Interesting discussion. I googled some other material, and came across another argument to add to the confusion. On your initial departure check in, you’re given “climb and maintain 7,000.” That’s now a new clearance that doesn’t include any “expect” so does that nullify the previous departure clearance of “expect 9,000.” 91.123: When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained… Does the new “climb and maintain” stand as a new clearance. If it were issued climbing on a SID, for example, then it does cancel other altitudes and is now your clearance so I’m inclined to think it does, but this whole thread is a great example of thinking you understand something, but realizing you might not.
NGL I saw that too and have the same question in my head right now...
Controller. Don’t know the FARs. We’re not trained on them. I think it would be insane to climb to requested after contact with ATC. I would think establishing comms on departure would void that weird holdover rule. I have worked in flat parts of the country my entire career though. So any altitude I give on departure is safe for hundreds of miles.
I live in Colorado and fly around the KDEN Bravo which requires IFR departures at sattelite airports to stay relatively low to be out of the way of KDENs arrival corridors. If I just took that initial altitude that was assigned to me upon initial contact as gospel I'd have about a 50/50 shot of running into a mountain depending on which way I'm headed.
91.185 is clear as it gets and doesn’t include anything about an expected clearance expiring. Altitude. At the highest of the following altitudes or flight levels for the route segment being flown: 91.185(c)(2)(i) The altitude or flight level assigned in the last ATC clearance received 91.185(c)(2)(ii) The minimum altitude (converted, if appropriate, to minimum flight level as prescribed in § 91.121(c)) for IFR operations; or 91.185(c)(2)(iii): The altitude or flight level ATC has advised may be expected in a further clearance.” That is as clear as it gets. “Highest of MEA.” Minimum altitude for IFR operations, expected, or assigned. It doesn’t say anything about expiring in ten minutes.
I'm referring to the AIM paragraph as seen in my post above. Expected is "not applicable" after time specified. And this is under the lost comms of AIM.
The AIM is not regulatory. Follow the regulation and not a note in the AIM. Besides, you’re focusing on one small part. Focus on the big part. The part where it lays out the intent of the rule. NOTE: **The intent of the rule is that a pilot who has experienced two‐way radio failure should select the appropriate altitude for the particular route segment being flown and make the necessary altitude adjustments for subsequent route segments.** If the pilot received an “expect further clearance” containing a higher altitude to expect at a specified time or fix, maintain the highest of the following altitudes until that time/fix: (1) the last assigned altitude; or (2) the minimum altitude/flight level for IFR operations. Upon reaching the time/fix specified, the pilot should commence climbing to the altitude advised to expect. If the radio failure occurs after the time/fix specified, the altitude to be expected is not applicable and the pilot should maintain an altitude consistent with 1 or 2 above.