Narrative:

Reference is made to the us terminal procedures publication northeast vol 2 of 4; effective date 22 june 2017 to 17 august 2017. The following 2 comments pertain to an IFR departure from central jersey regional airport; 47N. This was my first flight into and out of this airport. The first comment is the easiest. The approach charts for this airport list a ground control outlet (gco) frequency of 121.725. FBO personnel report that the gco has not worked for at least 2 years and has actually been removed from the airport. Canceling IFR on the ground or obtaining an outbound IFR clearance is accomplished by contacting ny approach by phone. That worked fine.suggestion: some thought perhaps should be given to getting the gco operational; given the proximity of the bedminster potus tfrs that are frequent.the second comment concerns my IFR departure from 47N to the northeast. By telcon to ny approach; I was given the following clearance: cleared to ZZZ airport; radar vectors brezy intersection V39 cmk V374 denna direct; climb 2000; expect 6000 10 minutes after departure; contact ny approach on 132.8 and squawk ZZZZ. Clearance was read back without correction by ny approach. The departure procedures in the terminal publications lists a departure procedure for departing from runway 7; none for runway 25. Local traffic and wind conditions made runway 25 desirable for takeoff in the interest of safety. After release and takeoff ny approach was contacted. Frequency was busy; when answered the controller asked why I was not going to solberg VOR/sbj. I advised my clearance began with 'radar vectors brezy' and I read him the routing of my clearance. Controller advised 'everybody goes to solberg'. I was then given vectors in the westerly direction of solberg VOR. Note that neither the clearance I received nor the departure procedure references solberg VOR/sbj. After a clearance to climb to 4000; another 2 vectors to brezy; the controller mentioned to me that 'in the future I should be going to solberg after takeoff; everybody does that'. I replied that I had read him the clearance I had received. The communications were professional; I certainly appreciate the workload ny approach controllers are facing in the sector. Their job is tough. We flew the rest of the flight as planned.suggestion: include some language in the departure procedure which references the solberg VOR for IFR departures from 47N. Especially helpful for first time pilots departing 47N. Establish a runway 25 departure procedure. On my part; advise the controller issuing the clearance what runway I would be departing from.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: General aviation pilot reported the 47N Terminal Procedures Publication still lists a GCO frequency decommissioned years ago; and suggests operation would be useful because of frequent TFRs. Additionally; the 47N IFR Departure Procedure does not list SBJ VOR in the procedure; however ATC stated all flights proceed to SBJ after IFR departure.

Narrative: Reference is made to the U.S. Terminal Procedures Publication NE Vol 2 of 4; Effective Date 22 June 2017 to 17 August 2017. The following 2 comments pertain to an IFR departure from Central Jersey Regional airport; 47N. This was my first flight into and out of this airport. The first comment is the easiest. The approach charts for this airport list a Ground Control Outlet (GCO) frequency of 121.725. FBO personnel report that the GCO has not worked for at least 2 years and has actually been removed from the airport. Canceling IFR on the ground or obtaining an outbound IFR clearance is accomplished by contacting NY Approach by phone. That worked fine.Suggestion: Some thought perhaps should be given to getting the GCO operational; given the proximity of the Bedminster POTUS TFRs that are frequent.The second comment concerns my IFR departure from 47N to the Northeast. By TELCON to NY Approach; I was given the following clearance: Cleared to ZZZ airport; Radar Vectors BREZY Intersection V39 CMK V374 DENNA Direct; climb 2000; expect 6000 10 minutes after departure; contact NY Approach on 132.8 and squawk ZZZZ. Clearance was read back without correction by NY Approach. The Departure Procedures in the Terminal Publications lists a departure procedure for departing from Runway 7; none for Runway 25. Local Traffic and wind conditions made Runway 25 desirable for takeoff in the interest of safety. After release and takeoff NY Approach was contacted. Frequency was busy; when answered the controller asked why I was not going to Solberg VOR/SBJ. I advised my clearance began with 'Radar Vectors BREZY' and I read him the routing of my clearance. Controller advised 'everybody goes to Solberg'. I was then given vectors in the westerly direction of Solberg VOR. Note that neither the clearance I received nor the Departure Procedure references Solberg VOR/SBJ. After a clearance to climb to 4000; another 2 vectors to BREZY; the controller mentioned to me that 'in the future I should be going to Solberg after takeoff; everybody does that'. I replied that I had read him the clearance I had received. The communications were professional; I certainly appreciate the workload NY Approach controllers are facing in the sector. Their job is tough. We flew the rest of the flight as planned.Suggestion: Include some language in the Departure Procedure which references the Solberg VOR for IFR departures from 47N. Especially helpful for first time pilots departing 47N. Establish a Runway 25 Departure Procedure. On my part; advise the controller issuing the clearance what runway I would be departing from.

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.