Narrative:

When departing from klgb with the usual clearance of runway heading to 1500 feet then left turn to 180; maintain 3;000; I switched to the departure clearance frequency. On checking in I was then changed to 127.2. By the time I checked in; I was already turning to 180. From what that controller indicated; it appeared that they had intended to keep me on runway heading because of traffic. That controller then continued my turn to 090. That was highly unusual to vector a jet toward sli at such a low altitude to potentially mix with other traffic. I have departed lgb on that clearance about 20 times and have always been given a climb to the south to at least 5-6;000 feet before being vectored to sli. It is possible that the controller had thought I was not a jet; having departed from 25L. However I always sign in as 'aircraft X to try to be sure they know I am a much faster aircraft with a wider turn radius. We have the option of using sign in but I do not; specifically because I want to alert ATC that they are dealing with a jet. The controller may have been distracted by his primary goal in turning my aircraft away from traffic.I did not feel that there was any undue delay in establishing the assigned heading; which I have confirmed by analyzing the flightaware track. According to the number I was given to call; [their] analysis indicated a track of 078 instead of 090. Shortly thereafter I was issued a climb to 4;000 ft. And then told to level off at about 3200 to 3300 ft.; which I did immediately. I did get a traffic warning on my TCAS that did not get closer than 600 feet vertical separation. I was then given a full clockwise turn around with a climb and then a vector to sli.without knowing all of the details; it seemed to me that it was the decision to turn a jet toward denser traffic at 3;000 feet that initiated the subsequent difficulty in separation. One can readily see why a routine climb to the south before a turn toward areas of greater traffic density is the safer option for all jets. Mr. X; with whom I spoke at TRACON; indicated that the controller had been trying to 'thread' me between two traffic targets. With potential errors in avionics of three (or more) aircraft; and the effects of winds in displacing a desired track; 'threading' does not seem to be the safest way to maintain optimal separation. He may have been placed in an unusual position by having to deal with a jet approaching other traffic.in regard to the issue of my track being calculated as 12 degrees from the assigned heading; I have made a detailed and precise evaluation using the flightaware track and the ability of powerpoint to compare two tracks in 1 degree increments. I used my FMS track from sli to pdz (058) as a reference. By my calculation my track averaged 081-082 during the time in question. During the initial part my track was slightly more to the north followed by slightly more to the south. The aircraft avionics are very sophisticated and redundant and I checked them out in a subsequent flight. Lining up with the runway centerline x 4 and requesting a heading reading from 3 different controllers without a significant crosswind; my avionics heading was within 0-3 degrees. In the aircraft; when the heading bug is turned; the numeric heading jumps out magnified; making it impossible to mistaken; such as could occur when going by the radials on the hmi. I cannot ever recall not being on the assigned heading. I do; however; windsurf and have also sailed below the point in question where the wind whips around the east slope of the palos verdes peninsula toward the north; called by all sailors and windsurfers by the name 'hurricane gulch'). It is the perfect place to do these sports when the wind is poor everywhere else because of the channeling that occurs as wind is blocked by the peninsula. The slope on the east face of the peninsula would be expected to displace the wind up to the level of my aircraft and that wind is localized and falls off toward the east. Displacement of the ATC detected track by wind is routinely observed; hence the common ATC clearance to 'turn __ degrees right or left' when traffic avoidance is the goal. The behavior of the 'hurricane gulch' winds in the vicinity of my aircraft would be expected to displace my track just as observed by ATC.I should also point out that ATC for some reason did not seem to be aware of the clearance I filed and was given. At one point I was asked whether my clearance was to sli and V8 and at another point the controller mentioned V21; which had nothing to do with my clearance. Those conversations and the one when I checked in to 127.2 can only distract both pilot and controller from concentrating on the safest management of their duties.of course I always try to learn all I can from any flying experience. Here I would say if I am ever again given a turn to the east at 3;000 feet; I will slow to 160 kts; assuming the controller does not realize I am flying a jet. I also have decided to routinely depart from runway 30 at lgb; which better separates the initial phase of flight from any conflicting traffic and will orient the departure controller to pick up on the sign-in.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Corporate jet pilot reported being given a turn on the departure from LGB which resulted in reduced separation from another aircraft.

Narrative: When departing from KLGB with the usual clearance of runway heading to 1500 feet then left turn to 180; maintain 3;000; I switched to the departure clearance frequency. On checking in I was then changed to 127.2. By the time I checked in; I was already turning to 180. From what that controller indicated; it appeared that they had intended to keep me on runway heading because of traffic. That controller then continued my turn to 090. That was highly unusual to vector a jet toward SLI at such a low altitude to potentially mix with other traffic. I have departed LGB on that clearance about 20 times and have always been given a climb to the south to at least 5-6;000 feet before being vectored to SLI. It is possible that the controller had thought I was not a jet; having departed from 25L. However I always sign in as 'Aircraft X to try to be sure they know I am a much faster aircraft with a wider turn radius. We have the option of using sign in but I do not; specifically because I want to alert ATC that they are dealing with a jet. The controller may have been distracted by his primary goal in turning my aircraft away from traffic.I did not feel that there was any undue delay in establishing the assigned heading; which I have confirmed by analyzing the flightaware track. According to the number I was given to call; [their] analysis indicated a track of 078 instead of 090. Shortly thereafter I was issued a climb to 4;000 ft. and then told to level off at about 3200 to 3300 ft.; which I did immediately. I did get a traffic warning on my TCAS that did not get closer than 600 feet vertical separation. I was then given a full clockwise turn around with a climb and then a vector to SLI.Without knowing all of the details; it seemed to me that it was the decision to turn a jet toward denser traffic at 3;000 feet that initiated the subsequent difficulty in separation. One can readily see why a routine climb to the south before a turn toward areas of greater traffic density is the safer option for all jets. Mr. X; with whom I spoke at TRACON; indicated that the controller had been trying to 'thread' me between two traffic targets. With potential errors in avionics of three (or more) aircraft; and the effects of winds in displacing a desired track; 'threading' does not seem to be the safest way to maintain optimal separation. He may have been placed in an unusual position by having to deal with a jet approaching other traffic.In regard to the issue of my track being calculated as 12 degrees from the assigned heading; I have made a detailed and precise evaluation using the flightaware track and the ability of powerpoint to compare two tracks in 1 degree increments. I used my FMS track from SLI to PDZ (058) as a reference. By my calculation my track averaged 081-082 during the time in question. During the initial part my track was slightly more to the north followed by slightly more to the south. The aircraft avionics are very sophisticated and redundant and I checked them out in a subsequent flight. Lining up with the runway centerline x 4 and requesting a heading reading from 3 different controllers without a significant crosswind; my avionics heading was within 0-3 degrees. In the aircraft; when the heading bug is turned; the numeric heading jumps out magnified; making it impossible to mistaken; such as could occur when going by the radials on the HMI. I cannot ever recall not being on the assigned heading. I do; however; windsurf and have also sailed below the point in question where the wind whips around the east slope of the Palos Verdes peninsula toward the north; called by all sailors and windsurfers by the name 'Hurricane Gulch'). It is the perfect place to do these sports when the wind is poor everywhere else because of the channeling that occurs as wind is blocked by the peninsula. The slope on the east face of the peninsula would be expected to displace the wind up to the level of my aircraft and that wind is localized and falls off toward the east. Displacement of the ATC detected track by wind is routinely observed; hence the common ATC clearance to 'turn __ degrees right or left' when traffic avoidance is the goal. The behavior of the 'hurricane Gulch' winds in the vicinity of my aircraft would be expected to displace my track just as observed by ATC.I should also point out that ATC for some reason did not seem to be aware of the clearance I filed and was given. At one point I was asked whether my clearance was to SLI and V8 and at another point the controller mentioned V21; which had nothing to do with my clearance. Those conversations and the one when I checked in to 127.2 can only distract both pilot and controller from concentrating on the safest management of their duties.Of course I always try to learn all I can from any flying experience. Here I would say if I am ever again given a turn to the east at 3;000 feet; I will slow to 160 kts; assuming the controller does not realize I am flying a jet. I also have decided to routinely depart from runway 30 at LGB; which better separates the initial phase of flight from any conflicting traffic and will orient the departure controller to pick up on the sign-in.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.