could be used to clear climbs (or “step descent)” in cruise. Suggested Change: An instruction to assign an altitude constraint to a downstream waypoint does not convey any clearance to maintain this level beyond the constrained waypoint. … Table A5-1 4 JC Comment: R [CSG Webex 14 March]: Agreed Closed – is a request for a report. with the suggested change. Suggested Change: [OPLINKP WG/WHL/4 21 – Move into Table A5-8. Agreed with suggested March]: change. Table A5-1 13 FR Comment: Are these messages really [Editors 21 Both are already Open – UMs 164, conveying a different message? Not sure what and currently used. Political decision! 177, 247 is different between when ready and when able [OPLINKP WG/WHL/4 21 – Suggested Change: Eliminate one or 2 March]: OPLINKP recommends messages to reduce the size of the message set retaining READY” (UM164) “WHEN and deleting UMs 177 and 247. Table A5-1 35 AW 1. The message intent of some message 1 - [Editors 21 March]: Agreed to – elements commences with whilst change to (to “Indication”, “Indicates” “Indication” others commence with It isn’t a be consistent with other type of “Indicates”. huge issue, but let’s standardize it. messages (e.g. instruction to…)) 1 – 2. UM1: Suggest adding the words been 1 - [OPLINKP WG/WHL/4 21 Closed “has – received” to the message intent: March]: Agree with proposed change. that the message has been 2- [Editors 21 March]: Support to “Indication – – received and will be responded to shortly.” change it to that the “Indication
could be used to clear “step climbs (or descent)” in cruise. Suggested Change: An instruction to assign an altitude constraint to a downstream waypoint does not convey any clearance to maintain this level beyond the constrained waypoint. … Table A5-1 4 JC Comment: is a request for a report. Suggested Change: Move into Table A5-8. R [CSG Webex – 14 March]: Agreed with the suggested change. [OPLINKP WG/WHL/4 – 21 March]: Agreed with suggested change. Closed Table A5-1 UMs 164, 177, 247 13 FR Comment: Are these messages really conveying a different message? Not sure what is different between when ready and when able Suggested Change: Eliminate one or 2 messages to reduce the size of the message set [Editors – 21 Both are already and currently used. Political decision! [OPLINKP WG/WHL/4 – 21 March]: OPLINKP recommends retaining “WHEN READY” (UM164) and deleting UMs 177 and 247. Open Table A5-1 35 AW 1. The message intent of some message elements commences with “Indication”, whilst others commence with “Indicates”. It isn’t a huge issue, but let’s standardize it. 2. UM1: Suggest adding the words “has been received” to the message intent: “Indication that the message has been received and will be responded to shortly.” 1 - [Editors – 21 March]: Agreed to change “Indicates” to “Indication” (to be consistent with other type of messages (e.g. instruction to…)) 1 - [OPLINKP WG/WHL/4 – 21 March]: Agree with proposed change. 2- [Editors – 21 March]: – Support to change it to “Indication that the 1 – Closed
OPLINKPWGWHL-4-APR.docx