Narrative:

Flying SID (standard instrument departure) on the track and had weather radar displayed. Asked first officer (first officer) to tell ZZZ departure control we would like a turn to the northeast; heading 055 degrees for weather. First officer made request. Departure said 'turn right heading 090'. We complied. Looking at the weather radar this was a poor choice. There was more solid green weather and magenta turbulence indications on this 090 course. We encountered continuous moderate turbulence in the climb from 12;000' to 23;000'. This controller was directive and terse. He put us unnecessarily into a very uncomfortable ride. We; as pilots; do our best to comply with ATC (air traffic control) and find the best rides possible to ensure passenger comfort. This can only be achieved if the ATC controller is willing to team up with us. If the controller is acting autonomously it won't work because they are not considering what the pilots see. In our case; our aircraft had over 60 years of combined aviation experience looking at what we saw ahead on the weather radar and through the windshield. The controller had neither that experience nor that view. And because this controller discounted our needs (with safety and comfort for our passengers as our objective) this controller provided substandard service. This seems to be an endemic problem at some facilities. Perhaps it is a philosophy taught when these inexperienced controllers are trained. Nevertheless one thing certain is the operational philosophy in ZZZ isn't a good one. They need to be reminded that although their job title says 'controller' they are actually performing a public service. And this service is to cooperate and communicate with the actual decision-makers who are also ultimately responsible for the comfort and safety of the public. They need to worry about more than just protecting themselves from potential criticism from their immediate supervisor. They should try to be helpful; collegial; and to do the right thing. The only way this works is if they understand it is the pilots who have their hands on the aircraft controls who must be listened to and not just broadcasted to.memo to all controllers. It's ok to be confident and plan a good course of action for a given situation. But not taking feedback is arrogance. If an aircraft crew is uncomfortable with an ATC directive; the controller should be open; not closed. The crew has a different view. Try to find a mutually acceptable outcome. Acting alone may be acceptable to them but not the crew. Bring the pilots; who are actually there; into the loop. They are the ones who are in a potentially hazardous or uncomfortable situation.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737 flight crew reported controller denial of heading request to avoid weather.

Narrative: Flying SID (Standard Instrument Departure) on the track and had weather radar displayed. Asked FO (First Officer) to tell ZZZ Departure Control we would like a turn to the northeast; heading 055 degrees for weather. FO made request. Departure said 'turn right heading 090'. We complied. Looking at the weather radar this was a poor choice. There was more solid green weather and magenta turbulence indications on this 090 course. We encountered continuous moderate turbulence in the climb from 12;000' to 23;000'. This Controller was directive and terse. He put us unnecessarily into a very uncomfortable ride. We; as Pilots; do our best to comply with ATC (Air Traffic Control) and find the best rides possible to ensure passenger comfort. This can only be achieved if the ATC Controller is willing to team up with us. If the Controller is acting autonomously it won't work because they are not considering what the Pilots see. In our case; our aircraft had over 60 years of combined aviation experience looking at what we saw ahead on the weather radar and through the windshield. The Controller had neither that experience nor that view. And because this Controller discounted our needs (with Safety and comfort for our Passengers as our objective) this Controller provided substandard service. This seems to be an endemic problem at some facilities. Perhaps it is a philosophy taught when these inexperienced Controllers are trained. Nevertheless one thing certain is the operational philosophy in ZZZ isn't a good one. They need to be reminded that although their job title says 'Controller' they are actually performing a public service. And this service is to cooperate and communicate with the actual decision-makers who are also ultimately responsible for the comfort and safety of the public. They need to worry about more than just protecting themselves from potential criticism from their immediate Supervisor. They should try to be helpful; collegial; and to do the right thing. The only way this works is if they understand it is the Pilots who have their hands on the aircraft controls who must be listened to and not just broadcasted to.Memo to all Controllers. It's OK to be confident and plan a good course of action for a given situation. But not taking feedback is arrogance. If an aircraft crew is uncomfortable with an ATC directive; the Controller should be open; not closed. The Crew has a different view. Try to find a mutually acceptable outcome. Acting alone may be acceptable to them but not the Crew. Bring the Pilots; who are actually there; into the loop. They are the ones who are in a potentially hazardous or uncomfortable situation.

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.