Narrative:

Issued an unsafe clearance. Takeoff runway 35. 'Cleared to the missoula airport via the salt lake 8 DME wasatch VOR wasatch 005 degree radial, to 60 DME climb and maintain 10000 ft do not exceed 250 KIAS expect FL370 10 min after takeoff departure frequency 135.5 squawk. This clearance had us heading for the mountain range east of salt lake city at an altitude well below MVA and the mountain tops. We were issued a terrain alert and a heading of 340 degree once gaining radio contact with departure control. Had the clearance read 'salt lake 8 radar vectors wasatch 005/60 DME or salt lake 8 departure wasatch 005/60 DME' this problem would have never arose. Recommendation: salt lake city clearance delivery must become aware of the verbiage in the clearance issued on this departure and the dangerous situation that can arise if issued improperly. Supplemental information from acn 562258: issued an unsafe clearance which resulted in departure control issuing a terrain alert. In the clearance, we were cleared to missoula via salt lake 8 departure, wasatch VOR, wasatch 005/160, direct, climb a maintain 10000 ft etc... We took off from runway 35 and according to the SID, flew heading 340 degrees until reaching the wasacth VOR. Over the VOR we turned right north bound onto the 005 degree radial. This course had us headed for the mountain range north of salt lake city at an altitude approximately 2000 ft AGL below the tops. Once contacting departure control, we were issued a terrain alert and given a heading to fly to avoid the mountain range. Correction/problem: had clearance delivery stated in the clearance a takeoff heading (ie 340 degrees) and then radar vectors to the wasatch 005/60, we would not have turned north bound at the VOR. I have learned that this same type of scenario has happened to other aircrews in the recent past. Please correct the terminology in the issued clearance to include a heading for takeoff and expect radar vectors to the wasatch 005/60 fix. This will alleviate any errors, anomalies, or misunderstandings in the issued clearance. I determine this to be a grave safety concern which requires immediate attention and corrective actions. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter called the S56 supervisor as requested after landing at destination. The supervisor said if the crew had established contact with departure control immediately after takeoff they would have been put on a radar vector.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN LJ35 CREW DEP SLC BELIEVE THE DEP CLRNC THEY WERE ISSUED IS UNSAFE.

Narrative: ISSUED AN UNSAFE CLRNC. TKOF RWY 35. 'CLRED TO THE MISSOULA ARPT VIA THE SALT LAKE 8 DME WASATCH VOR WASATCH 005 DEG RADIAL, TO 60 DME CLB AND MAINTAIN 10000 FT DO NOT EXCEED 250 KIAS EXPECT FL370 10 MIN AFTER TKOF DEP FREQ 135.5 SQUAWK. THIS CLRNC HAD US HEADING FOR THE MOUNTAIN RANGE E OF SALT LAKE CITY AT AN ALT WELL BELOW MVA AND THE MOUNTAIN TOPS. WE WERE ISSUED A TERRAIN ALERT AND A HEADING OF 340 DEG ONCE GAINING RADIO CONTACT WITH DEP CTL. HAD THE CLRNC READ 'SALT LAKE 8 RADAR VECTORS WASATCH 005/60 DME OR SALT LAKE 8 DEP WASATCH 005/60 DME' THIS PROB WOULD HAVE NEVER AROSE. RECOMMENDATION: SALT LAKE CITY CLRNC DELIVERY MUST BECOME AWARE OF THE VERBIAGE IN THE CLRNC ISSUED ON THIS DEP AND THE DANGEROUS SIT THAT CAN ARISE IF ISSUED IMPROPERLY. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 562258: ISSUED AN UNSAFE CLRNC WHICH RESULTED IN DEP CTL ISSUING A TERRAIN ALERT. IN THE CLRNC, WE WERE CLRED TO MISSOULA VIA SALT LAKE 8 DEP, WASATCH VOR, WASATCH 005/160, DIRECT, CLB A MAINTAIN 10000 FT ETC... WE TOOK OFF FROM RWY 35 AND ACCORDING TO THE SID, FLEW HEADING 340 DEGS UNTIL REACHING THE WASACTH VOR. OVER THE VOR WE TURNED RIGHT N BOUND ONTO THE 005 DEG RADIAL. THIS COURSE HAD US HEADED FOR THE MOUNTAIN RANGE N OF SALT LAKE CITY AT AN ALT APPROX 2000 FT AGL BELOW THE TOPS. ONCE CONTACTING DEP CTL, WE WERE ISSUED A TERRAIN ALERT AND GIVEN A HEADING TO FLY TO AVOID THE MOUNTAIN RANGE. CORRECTION/PROBLEM: HAD CLRNC DELIVERY STATED IN THE CLRNC A TKOF HEADING (IE 340 DEGS) AND THEN RADAR VECTORS TO THE WASATCH 005/60, WE WOULD NOT HAVE TURNED N BOUND AT THE VOR. I HAVE LEARNED THAT THIS SAME TYPE OF SCENARIO HAS HAPPENED TO OTHER AIRCREWS IN THE RECENT PAST. PLEASE CORRECT THE TERMINOLOGY IN THE ISSUED CLRNC TO INCLUDE A HEADING FOR TKOF AND EXPECT RADAR VECTORS TO THE WASATCH 005/60 FIX. THIS WILL ALLEVIATE ANY ERRORS, ANOMALIES, OR MISUNDERSTANDINGS IN THE ISSUED CLRNC. I DETERMINE THIS TO BE A GRAVE SAFETY CONCERN WHICH REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR CALLED THE S56 SUPERVISOR AS REQUESTED AFTER LNDG AT DESTINATION. THE SUPERVISOR SAID IF THE CREW HAD ESTABLISHED CONTACT WITH DEP CTL IMMEDIATELY AFTER TKOF THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN PUT ON A RADAR VECTOR.

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.