I thank you, and the previous poster for these regulatory citations, which help
to clarify. I actually did check my AIM before initiating this thread, and did
not find any of this language indicating pilot's perogative to adhere to the
ODP. My AIM is 2008. Has this language appeared or disappeared recently?

I did see this in 5-2-8 :
"As a general rule, ATC will only assign an ODP from a non-towered airport when
compliance with the ODP is necessary for aircraft to aircraft separation.
Pilots may use the ODP to help ensure separation from terrain and obstacles."

It would appear this specific case does not follow the "general rule" as the
ODP published is clearly for terrain and accomplishes nothing for aircraft
separation, which it could actually exacerbate if an aircraft is initiating an
approach at the same fix.

I'm surprised they don't just assign a name or designator to this type of ODP,
the way they do with SID's, that you can just type into the form.





In article ,
says...


VOR-DME wrote:

I'm departing a non-towered field IFR, let's stay East Coast, and say
Bennington (KDDH), departing eastbound. There is a published departure
proceedure, for obstacle (read mountain) clearance. Under Part 91, I
am not required to follow this proceedure, but due to mountain
obscuration I may wish to do so. What do I put in my flight plan, or
in my communication via the local GCO to indicate whether I intend to
return to the Cambridge VORTAC or not? Albany approach may have other
IFR traffic coming into Bennington, so they will want to know if I am
backtracking to CAM or not.


You should file what you intend to fly, DDH..CAM.V490... for example.
Here's a note from the paragraph on Departure Clearances in FAAA 7110.65:

"If a published IFR departure procedure is not included in an ATC clearance,
compliance with such a procedure is the pilot's prerogative."

However you're actually cleared you retain the option to fly the departure
procedure.