Sunvox

If you read my complete post you would see that his blanket statement "International Law" is what I am poking at. It is not a blanket statement for all the ClassII nav airspace. You will also notice I state how my flights follow those rules along the NAT Track over the Atlantic, we hard set the cleared MACH. Notice I say cleared MACH that is because some may confuse what is in their FP with the clearance.

In the past UAL actually allowed the use of ECON to meet this restriction, as I stated, when I was in the 767 fleet the management actually encouraged it as long as it met the caveat, You couldn't violate the MACH requirements of the track clearance!

So calm your mules and read before you write. You got to realize each airspace has it own rules and to make a blanket statement like the one made isn't correct. Now let me ask you this, have you ever flown through China or Russian airspace? Is this a blanket statement about them also? Each country and airspace have their own unique rules, it is not a blanket International Law!

Whewww

BTW Did you also notice my instruction to FOs whose Captains fail/refuse to follow the FOM guidance? Write them up! Cover your Ass! Of course let them know you are doing it.