Scoop

This is exactly the problem - too much chance for confusion, partially blocked radio calls, or just plain Pilot or Controller error.

It should be either:

1. Fly the SID as published
or
2. Radar vectors.

The whole purpose of the SID is to reduce radio transmissions, standardize departures, reduce the chance of errors and probably a few other reasons but it seems that whole process just adds to the confusion requiring more radio calls and a greater chance of error.

What good is a STANDARD Instrument departure if it is not standard???

Obviously controllers need the capability to flex, but if you are modifying the "standard" procedure 90+ % of the time something aint right.


Just my 2 cents.

Scoop

Scoop

Yeah - but you don't want it. It departs from the main entrance to the corporate headquarters (Across the street) and first goes to the TOC and then the airport. The whole thing can take 20-25 minutes.

Now I just back to the hotel and transfer to the airport shuttle or even better get a ride with a cool instructor. A lot of instructors will offer a ride if they know you are catching a flight. Never expected - but always appreciated.

Scoop

forgot to bid

My airplane has a monkey wee-wee on the left side of the FOs control yoke. The faster you go the more excited it gets.

I agree with Bar, copy and paste would've died for sure. I think 98% of the Internet is copyrighted and not to be reproduced or shared without the expressed written consent of major league baseball or the pornographer who took the pics.

Rather B Fishin

You sir deserve the noble peace prize. If that one post doesn't change the hearts and minds of radical Islamist's, I don't know what will.

forgot to bid

That nonrev parking lot is pretty fast. But by the time you walk there it'll take you 20-25 min to get to the airport. Of course, walking back to the hotel takes time. Basically, by law no bus can go to or from the airport and your car in less than 25 minutes.

capncrunch

So glad the real APC is back. More bacon please...or maybe less bacon.

capncrunch

I'm trying to figure how the above pic took place:

Guy: so I'm thinking that you and your friend lay naked on my bed and I put breakfast food on your unmentionables. You two in?

Ladies: sounds good. Don't forget your camera.

Guy: hallelujah.

tsquare

I think your "hallelujah" is now stronger.

gloopy

Yep. I'm sure there is a 3000 page version of it with even more power for the corporatists that is already written and just waiting on the next "crisis" that won't "go to waste". Maybe they'll even call it the "Patriot SOPA" or the "Saving Women and Orphaned Baby Bunnies From Starvation Act".

Supposedly a lot of this was aimed at stopping the massive piracy from China. They are truly stealing everything and don't care who knows and are double dog daring anyone to do anything about it. But acts like this are not the answer. If we want to stop Chinese piracy we need to stop buying from them as a consumer driven choice. The government is out of its league trying to regulate something of this magnitude. The consumer is the ultimate force.

I wonder how much a 150 seater Chinese "RJ" will cost our "code share partners".

gloopy

I agree. The whole point of contention with SLC center is despite what the AIM or PCG says about it, the fact remains that there are massive inconsistencies at the ATC level regarding this. Even if we "don't have to ask them" when we do ask them we get different answers all of the time.

"Resume normal speed" is another grossly misunderstood one especially from a controller perspective. Many, many controllers use "resume normal speed" synonymously with "delete speed restrictions" and to add even more confustion, often they use it to answer a pilot's question regarding relief for a charted speed restriction when the controller's intent is to delete it.

From our perspective it doesn't really matter who is technically right or if we don't really "need" to clarify to somehow prove our awesome knowledge. The fact is there is a LOT of confusion at the ATC level over both "climb and maintain" and "resume normal speed" and even if you technically do the right thing, if you and the controller are not on the same page because either one of you doesn't fully understand what the other is doing, regardless of who is right, it could be a bad situation for all involved.

So why would anyone be hesitant to call? To prove to themselves that they know so much about the AIM? What are we paying by the transmission now? The right answer is: its a free call, get clarification. That goes for if you have any doubt as to what you should do as well as if you have any doubt as to what you think the controller thinks you should do even if you know you are right.

About 1 or 2 times out of 10, if you ask (even though you "don't have to") the controller will contradict your expectations. IMO until that stops completely, at least for a couple of years, I'm getting clarification and that's all there is to it.

The 1 or 2 times out of 10 times it gets everyone on the same page, I'll bust out a Nelson - YouTube on guard for all those wrapped around the axel thinking the AIM is the Alpha and Omega of all things. It may be the textbook Alpha, but that does no good when a (semi-common) misunderstanding causes a real world bad Omega.