No SID in clearance, fly it anyway?

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)

"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)

Now I already know you don't have any idea what you're talking
about

Funny, but I was thinking the same thing about you.

what you, as a pilot, think the difference is between a heading and
a vector.

The ability to provide obstacle clearance.

And what do you think the difference is to the controller?

Depends on the controller, obviously. ;-)

They don't need to. A heading is a vector.

So you keep saying, but you offer no evidence.

Because that's what it means to everybody except you.

No, airperson said "If the tower controller can't see you on
radar he cannot vector you. He can only assign a heading."

To add some controller input for the position that a heading is not a
vector, here is a post from a controller in another online aviation
forum:

-----------------snip-------------------------------
From a radar controllers' perspective, there is no such thing as a
radar vector when in a non radar environemnt, this mean if you don't
hear radar contact first, then any assigned heading prior to those
words does not constitute a vector. A radar vector is course guidance
predicated on radar. Simply by launching from the surface on a
assigned heading must not be construed as a radar vector.

We assign an initial heading to fly from all our towered fields, and
that is all they are, until you hear radar contact and then receive a
subsequent heading. Then and only then is a radar vector in play.
....
my concern here is that many pilots assume that when a heading is
assigned off the ground by a tower controller where there is a surface
area, that it is automatically controller assuming terrain and
obstacle clearance, it is not. The pilot assumes this responsibility
until reaching a minimum IFR altitude or the controller provides a
subsequent heading once airborne whether at or below the Minimum IFR
altitude. The rationale for this is that the 40:1 is reviewed or
there is a ODP for the pilot to fly at his/her perogotive.
-----------------snip-------------------------------

Greg Esres wrote:


They don't need to. A heading is a vector.

So you keep saying, but you offer no evidence.

In two different posts by KP he showed the relavant parts of the .65.



Because that's what it means to everybody except you.

No, airperson said "If the tower controller can't see you on
radar he cannot vector you. He can only assign a heading."

That doesn't even make sense.

Would you have been happier if I had used the words "radar contact
isn't required to issue the initial heading issued to an aircraft to
provide navigational guidance by radar."?

No, because you changed the wording. If it actually said that, you'd
have a better argument, but it says "heading issued FOR THE PURPOSE OF
providing navigational guidance".

This convoluted wording can easily be interpreted to mean that the
heading is to put an aircraft in a position to receive radar vectors,
which requires radar contact. This, in fact, is what I think it
means.

A purpose for the heading is not necessary, since pilots operating
in a radar environment associate assigned headings with vectors to
their planned route of flight.

Yes, it says pilots ASSOCIATE headings with the vectors which will
come once the aircraft has been radar identified and subsequently
issued a heading. It doesn't say that a heading IS a vector. Big
difference.

Please give an example of a heading issued by ATC in a radar
environment that *is not* "issued for the purpose of providing
navigational guidance by radar" and therefore *is not* a vector.

If a controller has established radar contact with an aircraft and
then offers a heading, that is a vector.

Until radar contact has been established and a heading issued, the
aircraft is effectively "non-radar". (I don't care much about
aircraft separation....that's your problem.)

"Avoid the use?" You mean like when they say "...is to be
vectored

Yes, IS TO BE. This is future tense, as in indicated that the
aircraft is not currently being vectored but will be once certain
conditions are met.

TURN LEFT/RIGHT HEADING (degrees)" and not "TURN LEFT/RIGHT VECTOR
(degrees)

A vector requires radar contact and a heading assignment, so the use
of the word "heading" in a vector is entirely appropriate, because
he's already been informed of "radar contact."

However, the use of the word heading in 5-8-2 is outside radar contact
and doesn't fall into the defintion of vector.

find a distinction where none exists the proper application of these
procedures might make more sense to you :-/

The distinction that I have described is made by others who have
considerable air traffic experience, both in the field and at a higher
level.

I posted elsewhere a comment from an active controller, and I'll post
a portion of it again he

---------------------snip-------------------------
....if you don't hear radar contact first, then any assigned heading
prior to those words does not constitute a vector. A radar vector is
course guidance predicated on radar. Simply by launching from the
surface on a assigned heading must not be construed as a radar vector.

We assign an initial heading to fly from all our towered fields, and
that is all they are, until you hear radar contact and then receive a
subsequent heading. Then and only then is a radar vector in play.
....
---------------------snip-------------------------

So your accusation that our difference of opinion is due to your
knowledge and my lack of it is in error. If there is at least one
controller that stated what I quoted, there are likely many more. And
I think that what he expressed is more in accordance with the .65 and
other noted authorities than what you posted.

Wally Roberts stated in one of his articles that
---------------------snip-------------------------
The controller is permitted to assign a departure heading without it
being for purposes of a vector, or even for a vector where radar
contact won't be established for greater than the typical distance
from the departure runway...It's clear its appplication isn't clearly
understood by anyone, neither controllers nor pilots.
---------------------snip-------------------------

The point behind that quote is that even if YOU intend your heading to
be a vector, not every controller will, and therefore the pilot can't
depend on the fact that he's being provided terrain clearance.

"Newps" wrote in message
news:0Ydpb.87662$Tr4.226083@attbi_s03...


Robert Henry wrote:
"Newps" wrote in message
news:UTcpb.88415$e01.290862@attbi_s02...

In order to get a vector off the ground you have to be seen by the
radar
facility within a half mile of the airport. So you can't wander into
anything.



Is "proceed on course, contact departure" a vector?

No. That's a VFR tower instruction. A vector is an actual heading to
fly.

Huh!!! And all this time I thought a heading was a "heading", and a heading
and altitude instruction was a "vector".

Tom
"We have vectors, Victor!!".

I thought that VFR towers (with a DBRITE) could *suggest* headings if you're having a hard time finding the airport or about to collide with traffic but could not assign headings unless, as posted by others, it is a relayed departure vector from the TRACON.

They'd say "suggest 20 degree left turn" or "suggest a right turn to 230."

So what is a non-vector heading anyway? Who gives them? And how do you know when you've gotten one? Do you have examples?

Greg Esres wrote:


Now I already know you don't have any idea what you're talking
about

Funny, but I was thinking the same thing about you.

what you, as a pilot, think the difference is between a heading and
a vector.

The ability to provide obstacle clearance.

And what do you think the difference is to the controller?

Depends on the controller, obviously. ;-)

They don't need to. A heading is a vector.

So you keep saying, but you offer no evidence.

Because that's what it means to everybody except you.

No, airperson said "If the tower controller can't see you on
radar he cannot vector you. He can only assign a heading."

"Tom S." wrote in message
...


Huh!!! And all this time I thought a heading was a "heading", and a
heading
and altitude instruction was a "vector".

Tom
"We have vectors, Victor!!".


Is that ewe out there, Over?

Chip, ZTL