A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

No SID in clearance, fly it anyway?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 2nd 03, 09:45 PM
Chip Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Greg Esres" wrote in message
...
He/she created their own problem by clearing you into conflicting
traffic unless they can prove you deviated from your IFR clearance.

Do you feel that it's ATC's responsibility to protect the route of the
obstacle departure procedure, even when it's not included in the
pilot's clearance and does not lie in his route of flight?


Yes. It is my point that the ODP *is* included in an IFR departure
clearance unless ATC issues explicit alternate departure instructions as
part of the launch. Should ATC fail to protect for the ODP, the official
statement on the controller's operational error recert package will likely
include the sentance: "Primary cause: Controller A procedurally failed to
maintain vertical separation prior to losing lateral separation."


Even if it is ATC's responsibility do you not think it prudent of the
pilot to keep ATC informed of what he intends to do, as part of the
cooperative spirit?


I agree with you. I believe that it can be clearly prudent for the pilot to
keep ATC informed of what he intends to do, but within reason. I don't know
that it is always reasonable for you to tell ATC that you are going to be
flying the ODP though. The controller responsible for formulating your IFR
clearance is supposed to be a specialist in his/her airspace. He/she should
know if an ODP is an option when you depart. If that procedure is a threat
to another IFR aircraft, then ATC needs to eliminate the traffic threat via
alternate instructions or not clear you. Otherwise, your IFR clearance is
flawed (and ATC's fault).

Chip, ZTL



  #2  
Old November 2nd 03, 09:57 PM
Robert Henry
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Chip Jones" wrote in message
ink.net...

Yes. It is my point that the ODP *is* included in an IFR departure
clearance unless ATC issues explicit alternate departure instructions as
part of the launch. Should ATC fail to protect for the ODP, the official
statement on the controller's operational error recert package will likely
include the sentance: "Primary cause: Controller A procedurally failed to
maintain vertical separation prior to losing lateral separation."


I agree with you. I believe that it can be clearly prudent for the pilot

to
keep ATC informed of what he intends to do, but within reason. I don't

know
that it is always reasonable for you to tell ATC that you are going to be
flying the ODP though. The controller responsible for formulating your

IFR
clearance is supposed to be a specialist in his/her airspace. He/she

should
know if an ODP is an option when you depart. If that procedure is a

threat
to another IFR aircraft, then ATC needs to eliminate the traffic threat

via
alternate instructions or not clear you. Otherwise, your IFR clearance

is
flawed (and ATC's fault).

Chip, ZTL


I spoke with both the tower and the APPCON facility following an issue I
experienced, and both held that an ODP needs to be requested by the pilot if
not issued, and will never be recommended/suggested/alluded to/etc. I think
that is a deathtrap waiting to happen, but who am I.

fwiw.


  #3  
Old November 3rd 03, 03:01 AM
Ron Rosenfeld
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 16:57:54 -0500, "Robert Henry"
wrote:

I spoke with both the tower and the APPCON facility following an issue I
experienced, and both held that an ODP needs to be requested by the pilot if
not issued, and will never be recommended/suggested/alluded to/etc. I think
that is a deathtrap waiting to happen, but who am I.


I agree with you and would like to know which ATC facilities feel this way.
The ATC facilities with which I am familiar do NOT feel this way.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)
  #4  
Old November 3rd 03, 03:05 AM
Robert Henry
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 16:57:54 -0500, "Robert Henry"
wrote:

I spoke with both the tower and the APPCON facility following an issue I
experienced, and both held that an ODP needs to be requested by the pilot

if
not issued, and will never be recommended/suggested/alluded to/etc. I

think
that is a deathtrap waiting to happen, but who am I.


I agree with you and would like to know which ATC facilities feel this

way.
The ATC facilities with which I am familiar do NOT feel this way.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)



  #5  
Old November 3rd 03, 12:23 PM
Ron Rosenfeld
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 22:05:23 -0500, "Robert Henry"
wrote:


"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 16:57:54 -0500, "Robert Henry"
wrote:

I spoke with both the tower and the APPCON facility following an issue I
experienced, and both held that an ODP needs to be requested by the pilot

if
not issued, and will never be recommended/suggested/alluded to/etc. I

think
that is a deathtrap waiting to happen, but who am I.


I agree with you and would like to know which ATC facilities feel this

way.
The ATC facilities with which I am familiar do NOT feel this way.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)




Robert,

Your response was blank. Both on my ISP and on GOOGLE. I think your
response got dropped. Could you "say again"?

Thanks.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)
  #6  
Old November 3rd 03, 01:08 PM
Robert Henry
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 2 Nov 2003 16:57:54 -0500, "Robert Henry"
wrote:




Robert,

Your response was blank. Both on my ISP and on GOOGLE. I think your
response got dropped. Could you "say again"?

Thanks.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)


Yeah, I'd rather not. The APPCON controller involved may have received some
"counseling" subsequent to my discussion with the supervisor about the whole
thing. It was east of the Mississippi River, if that helps.

Bob


  #7  
Old November 3rd 03, 02:08 PM
Ron Rosenfeld
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 08:08:09 -0500, "Robert Henry"
wrote:

Yeah, I'd rather not. The APPCON controller involved may have received some
"counseling" subsequent to my discussion with the supervisor about the whole
thing. It was east of the Mississippi River, if that helps.


If the problem has been taken care of, then fine. However, if the problem
has not been taken care of, then it should be for all of our sakes.

If you don't feel comfortable disclosing it here, please contact someone
who can get the controllers properly trained. Scott Dunham is one such
person. He participates in AVSIG (www.avsig.com) and, if you don't have
it, I can get you an email address for him.

You did say that this was an issue with both tower and TRACON controllers;
and you imply that you are not sure about whether they have been retrained.
Hence my concern about whether this problem will arise in the future to
affect me or someone I care about.




Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)
  #8  
Old November 3rd 03, 12:49 PM
Snowbird
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Robert Henry" wrote in message news:C5fpb.9559$Re.3059@lakeread06...

I spoke with both the tower and the APPCON facility following an issue I
experienced, and both held that an ODP needs to be requested by the pilot if
not issued, and will never be recommended/suggested/alluded to/etc. I think
that is a deathtrap waiting to happen, but who am I.

fwiw.


FWIW Robert, was this in US or Canada?

Sydney
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GPS approaches with Center Dan Luke Instrument Flight Rules 104 October 22nd 03 09:42 PM
IFR Routing Toronto to Windsor (CYTZ - CYQG) Rob Pesan Instrument Flight Rules 5 October 7th 03 01:50 PM
required readback on clearance [email protected] Instrument Flight Rules 15 September 17th 03 04:33 PM
Picking up a Clearance Airborne Brad Z Instrument Flight Rules 30 August 29th 03 01:31 AM
Big John Bites Dicks (Security Clearance) Badwater Bill Home Built 27 August 21st 03 12:40 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.