Narrative:

On departure on the LOOP9 SID cleared to 15000 ft, we were turned east direct to the VOR climbing through 3800 ft. 5 mi west of the VOR climbing through 8000 ft at 2000 FPM, we were given a vector heading of 090 degrees. No reason for the vector was given. However, we had traffic 5 NM north within 300 ft on TCASII. Abeam the lax VOR (south side) we were given a vector to intercept the lax 041 degree radial. We were then asked what our rate of climb was. We replied 2000 FPM. The controller then cautioned us that if we couldn't make the restrs, we were to inform him of that fact. At no time were we in a situation where we couldn't comply with restrs. Also, once taken off a routing or SID on a vector, it is my understanding that all restrs are deleted unless informed that restrs still apply. The controller then switched us to ZLA (110.55) and accused us of not making a restr, but didn't specify which one. We did not question him on this as we didn't want to interfere with other traffic. All remaining restrs were complied with (keggs and coopp) even though they were not reapplied by the controller. Note! The lax restr of 10000 ft at the VOR would have been complied with if we hadn't been taken off the SID on the 090 degree vector. Also, this controller was very confrontational in his comments and instructions which is very uncharacteristic of lax departure which I consider to be 1 of the most competent and professional in the business. To my knowledge, no conflicts occurred and we made all required restrs. Also, no TCASII TA's or RA's occurred. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated he was surprised in several respects by the event. First, the profile he flew to the lax 10000 ft altitude restr was normal. He had 2000 FPM rate of climb and was still 5 mi west of lax and with 250 KTS, he could trade 10 KTS for an extra boost of climb if he needed it to make the restr. No question that he would have made the restr. The second surprise was the controller seemed to confrontational which in his around 20 yrs experience working with lax controllers seemed so uncharacteristic. He recently had had controllers occasionally give vectors just prior to the lax 10000 ft crossing restr which just did not used to happen. He wondered if the design of the traffic flow had changed or the new equipment in the aircraft which can allow a pilot to make an altitude restr more precisely had caused the controllers to be less comfortable with the existing restr. If so, in either case, perhaps the procedure should call for the departure to be at 10000 ft 5 mi west of lax. Then the controllers would be more comfortable and the pilots would feel they were maximizing the performance and economy for their company in conforming to the restr. That restr is being looked at by the pilots from the time the left turn is assigned back to lax from the wbound heading and the turn is shallowed or steepened (controversial technique) depending on how early the turn was given, how heavy the aircraft is, and how much altitude had to be gained and how much westerly wind there seemed to be. Pilots are usually very conscious of that particular restr, but do not attempt to make it 1 ft early.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: THE RPTR'S PROFILE DID NOT APPEAR TO CONFORM WITH ALT RESTR ON SID SUCH THAT THE CTLR RISKED HAVING LTSS WITH ANOTHER ACFT.

Narrative: ON DEP ON THE LOOP9 SID CLRED TO 15000 FT, WE WERE TURNED E DIRECT TO THE VOR CLBING THROUGH 3800 FT. 5 MI W OF THE VOR CLBING THROUGH 8000 FT AT 2000 FPM, WE WERE GIVEN A VECTOR HDG OF 090 DEGS. NO REASON FOR THE VECTOR WAS GIVEN. HOWEVER, WE HAD TFC 5 NM N WITHIN 300 FT ON TCASII. ABEAM THE LAX VOR (S SIDE) WE WERE GIVEN A VECTOR TO INTERCEPT THE LAX 041 DEG RADIAL. WE WERE THEN ASKED WHAT OUR RATE OF CLB WAS. WE REPLIED 2000 FPM. THE CTLR THEN CAUTIONED US THAT IF WE COULDN'T MAKE THE RESTRS, WE WERE TO INFORM HIM OF THAT FACT. AT NO TIME WERE WE IN A SIT WHERE WE COULDN'T COMPLY WITH RESTRS. ALSO, ONCE TAKEN OFF A RTING OR SID ON A VECTOR, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT ALL RESTRS ARE DELETED UNLESS INFORMED THAT RESTRS STILL APPLY. THE CTLR THEN SWITCHED US TO ZLA (110.55) AND ACCUSED US OF NOT MAKING A RESTR, BUT DIDN'T SPECIFY WHICH ONE. WE DID NOT QUESTION HIM ON THIS AS WE DIDN'T WANT TO INTERFERE WITH OTHER TFC. ALL REMAINING RESTRS WERE COMPLIED WITH (KEGGS AND COOPP) EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE NOT REAPPLIED BY THE CTLR. NOTE! THE LAX RESTR OF 10000 FT AT THE VOR WOULD HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH IF WE HADN'T BEEN TAKEN OFF THE SID ON THE 090 DEG VECTOR. ALSO, THIS CTLR WAS VERY CONFRONTATIONAL IN HIS COMMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS WHICH IS VERY UNCHARACTERISTIC OF LAX DEP WHICH I CONSIDER TO BE 1 OF THE MOST COMPETENT AND PROFESSIONAL IN THE BUSINESS. TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO CONFLICTS OCCURRED AND WE MADE ALL REQUIRED RESTRS. ALSO, NO TCASII TA'S OR RA'S OCCURRED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED HE WAS SURPRISED IN SEVERAL RESPECTS BY THE EVENT. FIRST, THE PROFILE HE FLEW TO THE LAX 10000 FT ALT RESTR WAS NORMAL. HE HAD 2000 FPM RATE OF CLB AND WAS STILL 5 MI W OF LAX AND WITH 250 KTS, HE COULD TRADE 10 KTS FOR AN EXTRA BOOST OF CLB IF HE NEEDED IT TO MAKE THE RESTR. NO QUESTION THAT HE WOULD HAVE MADE THE RESTR. THE SECOND SURPRISE WAS THE CTLR SEEMED TO CONFRONTATIONAL WHICH IN HIS AROUND 20 YRS EXPERIENCE WORKING WITH LAX CTLRS SEEMED SO UNCHARACTERISTIC. HE RECENTLY HAD HAD CTLRS OCCASIONALLY GIVE VECTORS JUST PRIOR TO THE LAX 10000 FT XING RESTR WHICH JUST DID NOT USED TO HAPPEN. HE WONDERED IF THE DESIGN OF THE TFC FLOW HAD CHANGED OR THE NEW EQUIP IN THE ACFT WHICH CAN ALLOW A PLT TO MAKE AN ALT RESTR MORE PRECISELY HAD CAUSED THE CTLRS TO BE LESS COMFORTABLE WITH THE EXISTING RESTR. IF SO, IN EITHER CASE, PERHAPS THE PROC SHOULD CALL FOR THE DEP TO BE AT 10000 FT 5 MI W OF LAX. THEN THE CTLRS WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE AND THE PLTS WOULD FEEL THEY WERE MAXIMIZING THE PERFORMANCE AND ECONOMY FOR THEIR COMPANY IN CONFORMING TO THE RESTR. THAT RESTR IS BEING LOOKED AT BY THE PLTS FROM THE TIME THE L TURN IS ASSIGNED BACK TO LAX FROM THE WBOUND HDG AND THE TURN IS SHALLOWED OR STEEPENED (CONTROVERSIAL TECHNIQUE) DEPENDING ON HOW EARLY THE TURN WAS GIVEN, HOW HVY THE ACFT IS, AND HOW MUCH ALT HAD TO BE GAINED AND HOW MUCH WESTERLY WIND THERE SEEMED TO BE. PLTS ARE USUALLY VERY CONSCIOUS OF THAT PARTICULAR RESTR, BUT DO NOT ATTEMPT TO MAKE IT 1 FT EARLY.

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.