Odd IFR clearance

[slowflyin]

On vacation I had an unusual clearance.  We were IFR inbound Petit Jean, AR and had been cleared for the RNAV 03, radar services terminated,  at or above 3500 until established, report JETSI inbound.   So far, easy day.  We were 7 miles out from JETSI, in the soup, running downhill through 4000, around 040 on the heading.  Then Memphis issues, "descend and maintain 3000".     I was caught off guard.  I wasn't expecting any additional instructions until after the IAF and then only the freq. change, cancel with me or on the ground......   The chart clearly shows 3500 as the minimum prior to JETSI and the same 3500 minimum for any arrivals from the SW for 30 miles out.   I acknowledged the clearance, descended with discretion, and crossed JETSI at 3500 as planned.

 

Am I missing something?  Maybe this is ok but I've never had it happen.  Seems very odd as Radar services had been terminated.

 

Advice please.

 

joe

 

[Stefanovm]

After looking at the approach plate, I might have asked for a repeat. However, since you were descending already and were cleared for the approach, you complied as far as I can tell by crossing JETSI at the procedure required altitude. I will be interested in following this thread.

[PTK]

Very weird indeed.

Radar seevices terminated and no regard for approach altitudes. Also no regard for MSA. I don't think this was the controller's intent.

I would've done the same. Fly the approach as published. I would also have asked for a confirmation that you're asked to deviate from published approach.

Controllers are human.

[N33GG]

You could always say "unable", but that would be a bit adversarial and unnecessary.

Always be ready to talk to controllers about what is going on, in a non confrontational and friendly tone. IFR is a team sport. I have had many weird directions and clearances. Early in my career, I was hesitant to visit with ATC. But as I experienced more and more, it became just a matter of procedure. Most controllers welcome this win-win dialogue.

If all else fails, and you feel real danger, you can always say "unable", and that will certainly get a conversation going.

Whatever you do, don't be a jerk. Controllers don't need jerk pilots, just like we don't need jerk controllers.

FWIW YMMV etc...

[1964-M20E]

I only flew in there once and it was a visual approach.  I think you handled it good.  You controlled your decent to pass thorough 3500 at JETSI and continued your decent on the approach.  You kept everyone happy.

 Did you report JETSI inbound with the added confusion I can easliy see you  misssing this?

 

 

I hope you had fun at Petit Jean.  Did you camp at the airport or stay at the main park?

 

I did Petit Jean a year ago with my son and camped at the airport it was real nice.

[moodychief]

Without telling you, they may have picked you up on radar again. The primary and secondary radar sites that cover that area are at Russelville and Little Rock. If one is out of service they rely on the other for partial coverage. When the primary radar went out during the government shutdown it impacted the Radar coverage between Little Rock and Springfield. Center couldn't see anything below 8,000 between Harrison and just north of Morrillton.

This one possibility.

[Dave Marten]

Gents,

 

Remember ATC's min vectoring altitudes and MSAs depicted on the approach plate are NOT (I repeat NOT) coincident. Take a look at practically any approach with radar service (even the one at your home field). Most likely your min vectoring alt in the approach corridor (your last vector to intercept the loc) is below the MSA published on the plate. IE, "Turn L/R heading XXX, Maintain XXXX' till established, Cleared ILS/LOC/RNAV approach". 

 

In this example, query the controller immediately to clarify. An elegant way to do so would be to have read back "Maintain 3000 till established, confirm cleared RNAV 03?"

 

Question: Did you break out at 3000' MSL? Controllers take pride in knowing where the cloud bases are in their sector and will do there best to get aircraft down through. As MoodyChief mentioned he probably noticed that you were still in coverage and in a position where he could work you down to 3000' so he gave it to you. He attempted to throw you a bone, but his timing was off. Just CLARIFY with ATC. 

 

BL: If in doubt ALWAYS clarify the clearance. Communication is a two way process.

[Stefanovm]

At 7 miles out on my numbers is 2 nm/min or 3.5 minutes to 3500 as I am "usually" at 300 - 400 fpm up to the IAF. From 4000 to 3500 would use up about 1.5 of the 3.5 minutes. The CFII, Dave, recommended communicate more, as I did, which is only the task out of "Aviate (Fly), Navigate, Communicate and Manage" that was missing in this case. A readback was done in this case, but one should keep the priority of aviating and navigating this close to the ground in IMC at the top of list as you did. It appears that the descent was slow, but not halted. Considering the circumstnaces of the 040 course vs 026 approach track, and the wording of "descend to 3000 and maintain", all were accomplished, the ATC instructions were followed in a seemingly timely manner, AND the procedure was followed.

[slowflyin]

John,

I did call inbound, and yes we had a great time at Petit Jean.  Stayed in a small cabin with a nice fire place.  Very nice.

[slowflyin]

Dave,

The tops were at 3500 with bases at 2600.

 

All, thanks for you comments.  It's very helpful to hear the community wisdom.   All in all I think I would have handled it the same.  I failed to mention previously the controller seemed to be in a little over his head that day.  He appeared to be struggling a little not only with me but two others on the freq.   Lots of corrections and changes.... Not the confident vibe you usually get.   I remember thinking there was no use in embarrassing him if he was wrong and I really didn't see any advantage in descending into the soup only to level off.   This was of particular concern I was worried about ice.

 

thanks again, 

joe

[moodychief]

The controller may have been training on a new position in which a supervisor would have been monitoring all communications and providing corrections to be recited. Only if an urgent transmission was warranted would the supervisor break in on the freq to provide direction. In today's environment, depending on the locale, roughly 45-55 % of controllers are seasoned...the rest are in initial/upgrade training.

To help our local tower, I will call and ask if they have any controllers that need qualification training in any procedure that is seldomly used. Since I am flying anyway for VOR check, currency etc. I might as well give everyone the biggest bang for my buck. This also gives the supervisors an opportunity to prepare for the special request. You might be surprised how appreciative they are for the offer. Many times I have learned as much as the trainee since the procedures usually aren't your every day procedure (radar approaches, etc).

[slowflyin]

moodychief,

 

I agree, our local tower is often training controllers and the Tower Chief really appreciates the traffic count.  I assumed this person was training or the holiday schedule had come into play.  Either way, no complaints here.  I remember those early days trying to recite a clearance back and keep up with the flic.   Heck even now at least once on a long cross country I'll dumb thumb a freq or say something sideways on the radio.   Like someone else said, "IFR is teamwork".

 

Thanks for your comments.

[Parker_Woodruff]

Ask to clarify, but minimum vectoring altitudes can be lower than the approach plate.

I have had ATC make a mistake on an approach before, and I questioned it before it became a problem.

Just succinctly ask "verify 3000 for NXXXXX; plate says 3500?"

[DrBill]

Ask to clarify, but minimum vectoring altitudes can be lower than the approach plate.

I have had ATC make a mistake on an approach before, and I questioned it before it became a problem.

Just succinctly ask "verify 3000 for NXXXXX; plate says 3500?"

Thats what I would have replied with...  PLate says MSA is 3500.  Please verify 3000.

BILL

[M20F]

I acknowledged the clearance, descended with discretion, and crossed JETSI at 3500 as planned.

I would have questioned the controller. You acknowledged the clearance therefore the controller would have the expectation you would descend at 500 FPM to 3000, not discretion. It potentially causes us all an issue when we get a clearance we aren't clear on and then don't question it. Best thing to always do is question it, not just assume and go about doing what you think was intended. Fly safe!

[slowflyin]

I agree asking for clarity is always best. However, he had cleared me for the approach therefore a 500 foot per minute descent is not required or expected. Oh but not really, to further complicate things, technically I was no longer cleared for the approach as my last clearance was descend and maintain 3000. In addition, he never acknowledge radar contact or confirmed my position after terminating radar services. All of this supports your position. Ask for clarification. He made several errors and I violated a clearance... Thanks for your input. Always learning..

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[M016576]

I wouldn't bring up the plate msa in the comm, because the controller may know something you don't. I'd give him the same courtesy that you'd expect as a PIC and just say "say again for Nxxxxx." Or... "Understand down to 3000 for Nxxxxx?" W/ a question mark being voice inflection. Help them to help you- but certainly ask the question if you think it's a safety of flight concern and/or error. You could also go plain English: Nxxxxx down to 3000... Understand still cleared the rnav xx approach?