Narrative:

After checking in with dca departure we were cleared to 17000 ft. We were beginning to accelerate at 3000 ft AGL per the special noise procedure. The controller told us to abandon the 'noise abatement procedure and expedite climb.' we stopped our acceleration and continued to climb at flaps 1 degree and about 160 KIAS. Several more instructions were given to expedite the climb. At about 9000 ft MSL we were asked to go fast and accelerate again with the expedite climb instructions. It seems that the controller did not understand that the plane either accelerates or climbs. Thrust was even moved back to mct thrust to increase climb. At 10000 ft MSL we had accelerated to 240 KTS and were accelerating towards about 300 KIAS when ATC asked us our speed. The first officer replied '240 KTS.' we were given an immediate left 360 degree turn then join the course. It seemed that ATC thought that we were not complying with their instructions. ATC was not effective in communicating what they wanted us to do other than ignore FAA special noise abatement procedures and expedite climb. Since we were finished with the northwest noise procedure we complied with ATC instructions by climbing at the best rate the plane would allow. It is questionable that had we 'abandoned the noise abatement procedure' (which was na) if that would subject us or company to a fine just as landing beyond curfew (non-A320/A319 planes). Secondly, it seemed that the controller was not aware of the need to leveloff to accelerate the plane. While we flew to comply with the ATC instructions, it still seemed, that the controller wanted us to fly outside most planes flying capabilities. Instructions should have been given to accelerate or climb per his spacing needs to avoid a conflict or 360 degree turn.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A320 FLT CREW IS CONCERNED WITH DEP SPD PROCS DEPARTING FROM DCA.

Narrative: AFTER CHKING IN WITH DCA DEP WE WERE CLRED TO 17000 FT. WE WERE BEGINNING TO ACCELERATE AT 3000 FT AGL PER THE SPECIAL NOISE PROC. THE CTLR TOLD US TO ABANDON THE 'NOISE ABATEMENT PROC AND EXPEDITE CLB.' WE STOPPED OUR ACCELERATION AND CONTINUED TO CLB AT FLAPS 1 DEG AND ABOUT 160 KIAS. SEVERAL MORE INSTRUCTIONS WERE GIVEN TO EXPEDITE THE CLB. AT ABOUT 9000 FT MSL WE WERE ASKED TO GO FAST AND ACCELERATE AGAIN WITH THE EXPEDITE CLB INSTRUCTIONS. IT SEEMS THAT THE CTLR DID NOT UNDERSTAND THAT THE PLANE EITHER ACCELERATES OR CLBS. THRUST WAS EVEN MOVED BACK TO MCT THRUST TO INCREASE CLB. AT 10000 FT MSL WE HAD ACCELERATED TO 240 KTS AND WERE ACCELERATING TOWARDS ABOUT 300 KIAS WHEN ATC ASKED US OUR SPD. THE FO REPLIED '240 KTS.' WE WERE GIVEN AN IMMEDIATE L 360 DEG TURN THEN JOIN THE COURSE. IT SEEMED THAT ATC THOUGHT THAT WE WERE NOT COMPLYING WITH THEIR INSTRUCTIONS. ATC WAS NOT EFFECTIVE IN COMMUNICATING WHAT THEY WANTED US TO DO OTHER THAN IGNORE FAA SPECIAL NOISE ABATEMENT PROCS AND EXPEDITE CLB. SINCE WE WERE FINISHED WITH THE NW NOISE PROC WE COMPLIED WITH ATC INSTRUCTIONS BY CLBING AT THE BEST RATE THE PLANE WOULD ALLOW. IT IS QUESTIONABLE THAT HAD WE 'ABANDONED THE NOISE ABATEMENT PROC' (WHICH WAS NA) IF THAT WOULD SUBJECT US OR COMPANY TO A FINE JUST AS LNDG BEYOND CURFEW (NON-A320/A319 PLANES). SECONDLY, IT SEEMED THAT THE CTLR WAS NOT AWARE OF THE NEED TO LEVELOFF TO ACCELERATE THE PLANE. WHILE WE FLEW TO COMPLY WITH THE ATC INSTRUCTIONS, IT STILL SEEMED, THAT THE CTLR WANTED US TO FLY OUTSIDE MOST PLANES FLYING CAPABILITIES. INSTRUCTIONS SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO ACCELERATE OR CLB PER HIS SPACING NEEDS TO AVOID A CONFLICT OR 360 DEG TURN.

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.