 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Abq controller described a confused departure route event when unsure if the departing aircraft was issued a RNAV or conventional SID. The reporter suggested a number of procedural changes to reduce future occurrences.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1081781 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201304 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ABQ.Airport |
| State Reference | NM |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | A320 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Climb |
| Route In Use | SID GRIZZ1 RNAV |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Local |
| Qualification | Air Traffic Control Fully Certified |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
Air carrier X was departing runway 8 with the route ABQ2...fti. Assuming that the air carrier would be on the GRIZZ1 RNAV departure; I cleared air carrier X for take off without giving a vector. Air carrier X departed runway heading; towards rapidly increasing mvas. I think the 'RNAV to (point)' phraseology with the take off clearance would be a good idea for all airports; not just ones with parallel runways. I would suspect that a pilot would question a clearance like 'RNAV to tyilr' if they're expecting a radar vector; providing a last minute sanity check. The first fix that shows in the aircraft's tag is different depending on whether the aircraft is on a RNAV or non-RNAV departure. Double checking the field before switching the aircraft to departure would be another last-second chance to fix the problem. Changing local procedures to highlight non-RNAV air carrier or air taxi departures might also help; but it's not necessarily ground control's or clearance delivery's responsibility check every strip for local control.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ABQ Controller described a confused departure route event when unsure if the departing aircraft was issued a RNAV or conventional SID. The reporter suggested a number of procedural changes to reduce future occurrences.
Narrative: Air Carrier X was departing Runway 8 with the route ABQ2...FTI. Assuming that the air carrier would be on the GRIZZ1 RNAV departure; I cleared Air Carrier X for take off without giving a vector. Air Carrier X departed runway heading; towards rapidly increasing MVAs. I think the 'RNAV to (point)' phraseology with the take off clearance would be a good idea for all airports; not just ones with parallel runways. I would suspect that a pilot would question a clearance like 'RNAV to TYILR' if they're expecting a RADAR vector; providing a last minute sanity check. The first fix that shows in the aircraft's tag is different depending on whether the aircraft is on a RNAV or non-RNAV departure. Double checking the field before switching the aircraft to departure would be another last-second chance to fix the problem. Changing local procedures to highlight non-RNAV air carrier or air taxi departures might also help; but it's not necessarily Ground Control's or Clearance Delivery's responsibility check every strip for Local Control.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.