In fact, I've often thought the function of this rule was to facilitate separation more predictably in high-density areas. i.e. to place less burden on controllers having a divergent range of airspeeds to contend with together with the other headaches they have.
I have to laugh at the idea that it's related to the US Air flight...which was totally an accident, and virtually unpreventable from any perspective. A more common-sense solution would be to require Canadian Geese to have a clearance when operating in controlled airspace.
Airspeed Limitations, CAR 602.32 amended 2010/11/10
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
Re: Airspeed Limitations, CAR 602.32 amended 2010/11/10
With most control zones at a 5nm radius doesn't this become a little too restrictive?
Re: Airspeed Limitations, CAR 602.32 amended 2010/11/10
Note also the wording change from 'controlled airport' to 'controlled aerodrome'. Is there an operational effect of this?
Re: Airspeed Limitations, CAR 602.32 amended 2010/11/10
Wow guys this is alot of discussion over something that is really not that big of a deal. The 200kts below 3 within 10 has been around for a long time.. On arrival flying faster than that just isn't worth it... Approaching faster (say 250) has in the past caused a few accidents due to unstable approaches and in the end it will save you about 1min.... On departure, most planes that climb out faster than 200kts are above 3000 ft in about 2 min or less so whats the rush to accelerate?
As for the 250 below 10.. Most airlines have been doing that for years regardless of what the CARS said.. Again most planes that climb out above 250 are through 10000 in about 3-4 mins so whats the rush?
As for the 250 below 10.. Most airlines have been doing that for years regardless of what the CARS said.. Again most planes that climb out above 250 are through 10000 in about 3-4 mins so whats the rush?
