No SID in clearance, fly it anyway?

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)

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...
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.

That assumes there is a problem. The way it has been explained to me is
that the rules that apply for departing IFR at a non-towered field apply in
this case, and that operating under the understanding that terrain
separation services are available when departing a towered field (especially
a VFR-only one as in my case) is just a bad one.

So from that perspective, that looks to be the way the system works, not a
system problem. Now, if the controllers here would like to jump in and
correct me, great, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

Also, I made some inquiries with some people that know, and I wrote it up
for NASA.

I will also recommend to anyone to plan the departure according to the ODP
and make sure it is requested. Flying the ODP without telling ATC about it
can create separation issues. In this case, the ODP goes right into the
arrival corridor for the field.

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 19:30:38 -0500, "Robert Henry"
wrote:

That assumes there is a problem. The way it has been explained to me is
that the rules that apply for departing IFR at a non-towered field apply in
this case, and that operating under the understanding that terrain
separation services are available when departing a towered field (especially
a VFR-only one as in my case) is just a bad one.

I have read and reread this paragraph, and I must confess I don't
understand what you are saying, at least in the context of ATC and ODP's.

If you fly an ODP, you will have terrain separation. It doesn't matter
what field you are departing from.



So from that perspective, that looks to be the way the system works, not a
system problem. Now, if the controllers here would like to jump in and
correct me, great, but that doesn't seem to be happening.

Again, I'm not understanding what you are saying here. At least, I don't
understand how you are saying "the system works".


Also, I made some inquiries with some people that know, and I wrote it up
for NASA.

I will also recommend to anyone to plan the departure according to the ODP
and make sure it is requested. Flying the ODP without telling ATC about it
can create separation issues. In this case, the ODP goes right into the
arrival corridor for the field.

If flying the ODP without telling ATC can create separation issues, then
that is NOT how the system should work. If ATC is neither giving you an
alternate TERPs checked procedure to fly, nor keeping the ODP route clear,
then they are flat out doing it wrong, and there most certainly IS a
problem.


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

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...


If flying the ODP without telling ATC can create separation issues, then
that is NOT how the system should work. If ATC is neither giving you an
alternate TERPs checked procedure to fly, nor keeping the ODP route clear,
then they are flat out doing it wrong, and there most certainly IS a
problem.

Conditions were clear, night vmc in the mountains with no moonlight. The
ODP was not issued.

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 23:39:57 -0500, "Robert Henry"
wrote:


"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
.. .


If flying the ODP without telling ATC can create separation issues, then
that is NOT how the system should work. If ATC is neither giving you an
alternate TERPs checked procedure to fly, nor keeping the ODP route clear,
then they are flat out doing it wrong, and there most certainly IS a
problem.

Conditions were clear, night vmc in the mountains with no moonlight. The
ODP was not issued.


Weather conditions don't make any difference. Whether they protect the ODP
or not depends on the flight rules under which you are flying. VFR or IFR.

If you were IFR they should have been protecting the ODP, regardless of the
weather conditions. Or they should have given you alternate departure
instructions. If they are not doing this, they need training.




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

"Robert Henry" wrote in message
news:u4Gpb.565$0d2.102@lakeread06...

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...


If flying the ODP without telling ATC can create separation issues, then
that is NOT how the system should work. If ATC is neither giving you an
alternate TERPs checked procedure to fly, nor keeping the ODP route
clear,
then they are flat out doing it wrong, and there most certainly IS a
problem.

Conditions were clear, night vmc in the mountains with no moonlight. The
ODP was not issued.


When would an ODP ever be specifically issued unless more than one procedure
was available and traffic separation depended on which one you flew? Is the
assignment of an ODP something that if they don't specifically issue it as
part of your IFR clearance, then you can't fly it?

The way it works in my airspace is that I issue you an IFR departure
clearance *after* I deconflict you from other IFR traffic. You fly any
pertinent ODP at your discretion unless I assign something else. You do an
ODP and get with traffic, and I am the guy who screwed up.

Chip, ZTL

Chip Jones wrote:


When would an ODP ever be specifically issued unless more than one procedure
was available and traffic separation depended on which one you flew? Is the
assignment of an ODP something that if they don't specifically issue it as
part of your IFR clearance, then you can't fly it?

We have a vector SID here that was created because there are some TV
antennas less than 3 miles SE of the airport that are about 700 feet
above airport elevation. Every IFR aircraft gets the SID even though if
you depart to the west you don't have to have it. If you file NO SID
your take off instructions will be "leaving 4500 fly runway heading(or
some other heading that works for me)." The airport elevation is 3650.


The way it works in my airspace is that I issue you an IFR departure
clearance *after* I deconflict you from other IFR traffic. You fly any
pertinent ODP at your discretion unless I assign something else. You do an
ODP and get with traffic, and I am the guy who screwed up.

The difference at a tower is I can issue you a heading and that vector
will separate you from other traffic.

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


When would an ODP ever be specifically issued unless more than one
procedure
was available and traffic separation depended on which one you flew?

Well, how about if my life depended on flying it?

That's the issue - that it is perfectly fine to depart IFR using visual
terrain avoidance. That ODP's are not specifically
issued/suggested/etc/otherwise to ensure the safest egress from a facility
bordered by mountains; that's just wrong...to me.

The last instruction I received was "proceed on course, contact departure."
That was a left turn to fly the clearance issued routing. The ODP calls for
a right turn. The delta is almost 80 degrees combined - a heading of 140
vice 220.

So, when I contacted the tower later, I asked why a heading of 220 wasn't
mentioned or suggested. Is "proceed on course" really the most appropriate
instruction instead of something like "fly heading 220, contact departure"?
The answer was more or less:

oh no, people make the left turn all the time, maintain there own visual
separation with the terrain, no problem. Why would we suggest a right turn?
Besides, if you turn right according to the ODP and don't tell us, you might
cause an issue with arriving traffic into the pattern (for the VFR tower).
If we're not expecting that by you having made the request, that could be
bad. Oh, but by the way, the military guys always turn right because
they're required to fly the ODP, but we know that and expect it. But the
choice is yours, just tell us, and we'll coordinate that with the APPCON.

Is there a certain percentage of misconception among some pilots that they
might get a bit more help than that when departing IFR from a towered
facility? I think so. I think it might be far safer if the pilot was
required to waive the ODP instead of the other way around. I also think the
instruction to proceed on course is so ambiguous as to be dangerous, but
that's just imho.

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 00:16:54 -0500, "Robert Henry"
wrote:

oh no, people make the left turn all the time, maintain there own visual
separation with the terrain, no problem. Why would we suggest a right turn?
Besides, if you turn right according to the ODP and don't tell us, you might
cause an issue with arriving traffic into the pattern (for the VFR tower).
If we're not expecting that by you having made the request, that could be
bad. Oh, but by the way, the military guys always turn right because
they're required to fly the ODP, but we know that and expect it. But the
choice is yours, just tell us, and we'll coordinate that with the APPCON.

If it's VMC, then it is your responsibility to see and avoid other traffic.
But it is also your perogative to fly the ODP on an IFR departure without
notifying ATC.

As I've said, and which you seem resistant to, that facility needs some
education.


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

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003 19:30:38 -0500, "Robert Henry"
wrote:

That assumes there is a problem. The way it has been explained to me is
that the rules that apply for departing IFR at a non-towered field apply in
this case, and that operating under the understanding that terrain
separation services are available when departing a towered field (especially
a VFR-only one as in my case) is just a bad one.

I have read and reread this paragraph, and I must confess I don't
understand what you are saying, at least in the context of ATC and ODP's.

If you fly an ODP, you will have terrain separation. It doesn't matter
what field you are departing from.

Assuming it's an IFR airport. If not, then the airspace has not been evaluated
for takeoff minimums and 40:1 surfaces.