Narrative:

On nov/thu/91, I was departing dtw. When ready for taxi, we were given a new taxi procedure that is called a standard taxi to a given runway, in our case to 3C. I assume this grew out of the accident that happened on dec/xx/1990, and is aimed at preventing another such accident. This procedure outlines the route to be taken, and I applaud this part of the procedure, however, the additional part of this procedure tends to reverse the benefits gained at such a time when they are needed most. On this day, the temperature had fallen, snow had been falling and visibility was down. It wasn't as bad, but it reminded me of the dec/xx. The procedure calls for the pilots to change ground control frequencys at a certain point. This point is not marked by signs, as it is at many other airports, nor is the pilot reminded as they are at other airports. The pilot is just given the standard taxi to the runway. When the pilots are loaded down with preparing the airplane for takeoff and taxiing on a congested ramp, the additional distrs caused by WX or other factors can cause the frequency change to be missed. This is especially dangerous during bad WX when positive and sure contact with the ground controller can prevent another accident like that of dec/xx. This has been compromised farther by the attitude of some controllers. In the days preceding nov/xx, we and other flts experiences arrogance and sarcasm when we changed ground frequency and were told by the controller he was controling both sides. Also, over the past few months several ridiculous infraction charges were filed against 2 of our pilots by dtw ground controllers. I believe unnecessary pressures by bureaucrats and others in the FAA have produced an atmosphere that degrades the necessary communication between pilots and controllers. Returning to our taxi out on nov/xx, because of the additional distrs as noted above, we missed changing frequencys at the prescribed point. I noticed a conflict ahead and asked the first officer to question the controller. We were promptly told we should be on the other ground frequency. With this obvious weakness in communication procedures and a prescribed taxi route, the ground controllers rted an air carrier medium large transport against our taxi route near the frequency changeover point. Automatic frequency changes should not be part of the standard taxi. When communication is most critical, this can easily fail. The clearance limit should perhaps be the changeover point, or the directions to change frequency be given nearing the changeover point. Signs should also be used to remind of frequency change points. Ground controllers can set the tone in communication as well as cooperation by speaking to air crews as though they were humans too. Pilots can also help by speaking in a civil manner but a pilot speaks to 1 controller, the controller speaks to all the pilots. Airplanes taxiing to the ramp should not be directed to taxi against traffic when a 'standard taxi' procedure route is being sued. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: staff specialist at facility stated that the 'standard taxi route' procedure has been in effect since oct/1/91 and only includes 2 airlines. There is a LOA that covers operating procedures and where to change frequency. There is also a sign at these locations to remind pilots. The routing is only for runway 21C and runway 3L. Although it is a new procedure, there hasn't been any problems with it.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR PLT CONFUSED WITH 'STANDARD TAXI RTE' AT DTW AND FAILS TO CHANGE TO DIFFERENT GND FREQ AT PROPER POINT.

Narrative: ON NOV/THU/91, I WAS DEPARTING DTW. WHEN READY FOR TAXI, WE WERE GIVEN A NEW TAXI PROC THAT IS CALLED A STANDARD TAXI TO A GIVEN RWY, IN OUR CASE TO 3C. I ASSUME THIS GREW OUT OF THE ACCIDENT THAT HAPPENED ON DEC/XX/1990, AND IS AIMED AT PREVENTING ANOTHER SUCH ACCIDENT. THIS PROC OUTLINES THE RTE TO BE TAKEN, AND I APPLAUD THIS PART OF THE PROC, HOWEVER, THE ADDITIONAL PART OF THIS PROC TENDS TO REVERSE THE BENEFITS GAINED AT SUCH A TIME WHEN THEY ARE NEEDED MOST. ON THIS DAY, THE TEMP HAD FALLEN, SNOW HAD BEEN FALLING AND VISIBILITY WAS DOWN. IT WASN'T AS BAD, BUT IT REMINDED ME OF THE DEC/XX. THE PROC CALLS FOR THE PLTS TO CHANGE GND CTL FREQS AT A CERTAIN POINT. THIS POINT IS NOT MARKED BY SIGNS, AS IT IS AT MANY OTHER ARPTS, NOR IS THE PLT REMINDED AS THEY ARE AT OTHER ARPTS. THE PLT IS JUST GIVEN THE STANDARD TAXI TO THE RWY. WHEN THE PLTS ARE LOADED DOWN WITH PREPARING THE AIRPLANE FOR TKOF AND TAXIING ON A CONGESTED RAMP, THE ADDITIONAL DISTRS CAUSED BY WX OR OTHER FACTORS CAN CAUSE THE FREQ CHANGE TO BE MISSED. THIS IS ESPECIALLY DANGEROUS DURING BAD WX WHEN POSITIVE AND SURE CONTACT WITH THE GND CTLR CAN PREVENT ANOTHER ACCIDENT LIKE THAT OF DEC/XX. THIS HAS BEEN COMPROMISED FARTHER BY THE ATTITUDE OF SOME CTLRS. IN THE DAYS PRECEDING NOV/XX, WE AND OTHER FLTS EXPERIENCES ARROGANCE AND SARCASM WHEN WE CHANGED GND FREQ AND WERE TOLD BY THE CTLR HE WAS CTLING BOTH SIDES. ALSO, OVER THE PAST FEW MONTHS SEVERAL RIDICULOUS INFRACTION CHARGES WERE FILED AGAINST 2 OF OUR PLTS BY DTW GND CTLRS. I BELIEVE UNNECESSARY PRESSURES BY BUREAUCRATS AND OTHERS IN THE FAA HAVE PRODUCED AN ATMOSPHERE THAT DEGRADES THE NECESSARY COM BTWN PLTS AND CTLRS. RETURNING TO OUR TAXI OUT ON NOV/XX, BECAUSE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRS AS NOTED ABOVE, WE MISSED CHANGING FREQS AT THE PRESCRIBED POINT. I NOTICED A CONFLICT AHEAD AND ASKED THE FO TO QUESTION THE CTLR. WE WERE PROMPTLY TOLD WE SHOULD BE ON THE OTHER GND FREQ. WITH THIS OBVIOUS WEAKNESS IN COM PROCS AND A PRESCRIBED TAXI RTE, THE GND CTLRS RTED AN ACR MLG AGAINST OUR TAXI RTE NEAR THE FREQ CHANGEOVER POINT. AUTOMATIC FREQ CHANGES SHOULD NOT BE PART OF THE STANDARD TAXI. WHEN COM IS MOST CRITICAL, THIS CAN EASILY FAIL. THE CLRNC LIMIT SHOULD PERHAPS BE THE CHANGEOVER POINT, OR THE DIRECTIONS TO CHANGE FREQ BE GIVEN NEARING THE CHANGEOVER POINT. SIGNS SHOULD ALSO BE USED TO REMIND OF FREQ CHANGE POINTS. GND CTLRS CAN SET THE TONE IN COM AS WELL AS COOPERATION BY SPEAKING TO AIR CREWS AS THOUGH THEY WERE HUMANS TOO. PLTS CAN ALSO HELP BY SPEAKING IN A CIVIL MANNER BUT A PLT SPEAKS TO 1 CTLR, THE CTLR SPEAKS TO ALL THE PLTS. AIRPLANES TAXIING TO THE RAMP SHOULD NOT BE DIRECTED TO TAXI AGAINST TFC WHEN A 'STANDARD TAXI' PROC RTE IS BEING SUED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: STAFF SPECIALIST AT FACILITY STATED THAT THE 'STANDARD TAXI RTE' PROC HAS BEEN IN EFFECT SINCE OCT/1/91 AND ONLY INCLUDES 2 AIRLINES. THERE IS A LOA THAT COVERS OPERATING PROCS AND WHERE TO CHANGE FREQ. THERE IS ALSO A SIGN AT THESE LOCATIONS TO REMIND PLTS. THE RTING IS ONLY FOR RWY 21C AND RWY 3L. ALTHOUGH IT IS A NEW PROC, THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY PROBLEMS WITH IT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.