No STAR clearance

[Jouka Ahponen]

No you cannot. ICAO 4444 section 6.5.5.5 and 6.5.5.6

 

6.5.5.5

Holding and holding pattern entry shall be accomplished in accordance with procedures established by the appropriate ATS authority and published in AIPs. If entry and holding procedures have not been published or if the procedures are not known to a flight crew, the appropriate air traffic control unit shall specify the designator of the location or aid to be used, the inbound track, radial or bearing, direction of turn in the holding pattern as well as the time of the outbound leg or the distances between which to hold.¨

 

6.5.5.6

Aircraft should normally be held at a designated holding fix. The required minimum vertical, lateral or longitudinal separation from other aircraft shall be provided. Criteria and procedures for the simultaneous use of adjacent holding patterns shall be prescribed in local instructions.

[Martin Loxbo]

I can think of several situations (real world and VATSIM) where entering a hold just because you are the last waypoint in the flight plan would not be the most prudent thing to do. For example if you get a late frequency change, which could happen particularly if it's very busy, and then it might be difficult to get a word in on the new frequency, where the STAR clearance would otherwise happen. So you are fast approaching the first waypoint of the STAR, maybe you have traffic behind you on the same route, perhaps even cleared to the same level as you. Think about what happens if you start holding in that situation, with no instruction from ATC. I know I would prefer to start flying the expected arrival route and sort the details out when there's room on the frequency...

[Andreas Fuchs]

LOL! Let me put you into a real aircraft bound for London-Heathrow. Approaching BIG VOR you'll get a late handover to Heathrow Director and when you switch you his frequency you realize that he is being bombarded with calls. Oh yes, you will enter the hold. No doubt.

 

Jouka, that's the nice world of books, but those procedures do not cater for all situations. If I need to hold, then I will just do it and let ATC know as soon as possible. In China, for example, you are not allowed to divert from airways, as you would be entering military airspace. So, if there's weather on your airway you may be in the situation where you need to enter a holding "at present position" to stay clear of it. Vectors around it are no option.

 

Again, my clearance limit is the last point on my flightplan. And that normally is a waypoint or navigation aid. If I do not have clearance to proceed past it, I treat it as a COM-failure: hold.

[Martin Loxbo]

OK Andreas, let's say you are going to Barcelona (my home base incidentally). Your last filed waypoint and the first point of your STAR is PUMAL. You get a late handoff from Bordeaux and you struggle to get a word in on the Barcelona frequency because it's super busy. You can hear the Speedbird ahead of you and the KLM behind you also going into PUMAL. In fact you have all been cleared by Bordeaux to FL230. French ATC even gave all three of you the same speed for sequencing. What do you do in that situation?

 

I know what I would do. I have listened to the ATIS so I know the RWY in use, and hence that I would expect to fly the PUMAL 3T arrival. There is no suggestion on the STAR chart that I should hold at PUMAL, so I would start flying the arrival and try to get a word in as quickly as possible. I would of course make every effort to get a STAR clearance before I reach PUMAL, but if this is not possible just going into a hold on your own could be really risky...

 

Your Heathrow example is quite different as BIG is the clearance limit and it's quite clearly stated like that on the chart. In fact BIG is the last point of the STAR in this case. What we are talking about here is what if you have not received your STAR clearance at the first point of the STAR.

[Andreas Fuchs]

Ok, then make it ALESO for the Heathrow bound flight. I hold at ALESO. And I would hold at PUMAL. But that's just me. Luckily I never had that situation before, because I was always able to push other traffic away on the frequency to get through before it could get hairy.

[Randy Tyndall 1087023]

Just an aside here, but something Andreas said reminded me of something I read.

 

Jouka, that's the nice world of books, but those procedures do not cater for all situations.

 

Took me a bit to find it. It is from Ernest K Gann's "Fate is the Hunter" and is actually one of the chapter titles in the book...

 

"Rule Books are paper. They will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal."

 

Back on track. Thanks for the aside.

 

Randy

[Martin Loxbo]

Ok, then make it ALESO for the Heathrow bound flight. I hold at ALESO. And I would hold at PUMAL. But that's just me. Luckily I never had that situation before, because I was always able to push other traffic away on the frequency to get through before it could get hairy.

 

What if the frequency is really blocked, say a stuck mic for example, which could take minutes to sort out. If everyone follows your example you will be holding at PUMAL together with that Speedbird and KLM at the same level. Not a situation I'd want to be in! I'd much prefer going in a straight line nicely separated from other traffic until the situation is sorted out.

 

I wonder if there is any regulatory reference to support either position? The only thing that comes to mind is com fail procedures, which usually state to proceed to the IAF, but it's not always clear whether it's expected to follow a specific STAR.

[Johan Grauers]

Ok, then make it ALESO for the Heathrow bound flight. I hold at ALESO. And I would hold at PUMAL. But that's just me. Luckily I never had that situation before, because I was always able to push other traffic away on the frequency to get through before it could get hairy.

 

What if the frequency is really blocked, say a stuck mic for example, which could take minutes to sort out. If everyone follows your example you will be holding at PUMAL together with that Speedbird and KLM at the same level. Not a situation I'd want to be in! I'd much prefer going in a straight line nicely separated from other traffic until the situation is sorted out.

 

I wonder if there is any regulatory reference to support either position? The only thing that comes to mind is com fail procedures, which usually state to proceed to the IAF, but it's not always clear whether it's expected to follow a specific STAR.

 

I can't think of the rules being very specific either way, which is why I haven't really commented much. However I saw your name in the post history and hoped you'd found something

[Andreas Fuchs]

Hi Martin,

 

unless a STAR charts states that COM-failures should be treated one way or another, I stick to this. Of course, if the runway in use is known, one could think about continuing to the IAF and hold there, I agree with you on this. On the other hand: Bordeaux Control will see that thing at PUMAL and instruct the other pilots to do whatever. And on our second set we have 121.5 and can be contacted there all the time.

[Daniel Churchman 1050104]

I've got a question regarding what you should do in a situation in which you have not got a STAR clearance in time.

 

So, I'm flying along in an airspace were there's a lot of traffic and the ATC is busy, and I come up to my first waypoint of a STAR without a clearance? I'm aware that if there's a published holding you should fly that holding, but what if there is no published holding? Should you hold anyway, or start flying the STAR even though you're not cleared for it?

 

Other than some private training, I'm not a real-world anything. However, I've been on Vatsim for many years, and I've been an enthusiast of IFR flight ffor longer -- reading hundreds of forum posts, watching videos (sim and real world), reading articles, NTSB reports, TV shows....

 

Here's what all that tells me:

 

Rule 1. Fly your plane. That means keep control of it, and see to its safety. YOU are the first authority where the safety of your aircraft is concerned. Your first priority, therefore, is to keep your aircraft (and everyone in it) safe.

 

Rule 2. Follow ATC instructions. If, and only if, Rule 1 is being satisfied, follow any and all ATC instructions to the best of your (and your aircraft's) ability.

 

Rule 3. Follow the paper rules. If, and only if, Rule 1 and Rule 2 are being satisfied, follow any and all published instructions, or rules, to the best of your (and your aircraft's) ability.

 

And there, my friend, is the concise answer to your question.

 

People can, and probably will, come up with exceptions. "What if you are about to fly into a closed canyon you can't climb out of and don't have room to turn, and ATC tells you to make a turn before you go too far". Cases like this really invoke rule 1 after all; you should be aware that you might make a mistake. You have to judge this sort of thing. Again, what about, "ATC gives you an instruction that breaks the rules". Once more, common sense. What is logical? Question the instruction. ATC will probably "oops" and change the instruction, or repeat the instruction at which time you realize you misheard it, or maybe explain a reason for the odd instruction. Common sense.

 

But in general:

 

Fly safely, then do what you're told, then follow the published rules.