Narrative:

Rno ATCT personnel are required to assign the rno 3 departure to all jet aircraft (due to internal rno ATCT/TRACON operating procedures). To facilitate usage of pre departure clearance; we request that you file the rno 3 departure. Narrative: re: reno 3.fmg. Reno three departure (RENO3.fmg). 1) except for lost communications and only (during IMC) will an aircraft actually go to fmg. This is a poorly labeled STAR containing a holdover fix from a bygone era. Until recently; ATC has been issuing 'RENO3; as filed.' then it is changed to 'reno 3; fly runway heading.' currently the clearance is 'reno 3; fly the localizer sbound until advised.' only the last two are correct according to the chart. 2) reno 3.fmg is not in the FMC database; never has been. 3) flight plan page 1. The line with the flight plan routing has traditionally been used to program the FMC by pilots. The line 'fp' is the filed flight plan. A filed flight plan is not a guarantee of routing. If the flight plan routing line and the fp (filed flight plan) line are considered to be the same; leaving the pilot to figure out the true routing; eliminate one and save printer ink. If the flight plan routing line is used to indicate the filed plan; then list it as (RENO3.fmg) in parenthesis to indicate a STAR/SID and not flight plan routing. 4) flight plan page 2. Routing clearly shows required flight to fmg. That will never happen in normal circumstances. Routing calls for flight over genne which is on J7 but will only occur if the flight is over fmg first or ATC directed. Will not happen either. ATC does not/has not cleared flts to fmg or genne during reno 3 operations over the last 3 and a half yrs. Does not happen. Intersection rebrg omitted from routing. Rebrg is between fra and derbb and has been on routing page previously. 5) dispatch response. Dispatcher on duty (DOD) stated that as of a couple of weeks ago dispatch was directed to list the flight path as issued. DOD further stated that the reno 3 was the required STAR. DOD was unaware of the problem and did not offer meaningful assistance. DOD was not conversant with the STAR. I tried to explain the relative location of fmg and details of the chart indicating that we would not be taking off south; flying back to the north to fmg and then reverse course again back to the south. He did not grasp the concept. I further explained that genne was not on the STAR and that rebrg was missing on the flight plan page 2 routing. He was unfamiliar with any of the details of the STAR or any of the aforementioned fixes. I suggested that he refile the flight plan indicating reno 3 direct fra as had been the procedure for the last 3 yrs. DOD was unsure that he could accomplish this. Other than contacting 'support;' DOD stated he could do little else to help. After contacting 'support;' DOD stated that the flight plan as filed is all that was available. He also stated he could not find the fixes I had mentioned earlier and that they were not in the database. I asked that the flight plan be modified and faxed to the gate as soon as possible. It never arrived: we obtained a normal clearance; 'reno.3; fly localizer south until advised.' I accepted the rerouting as final and departed on time. 6) routinely filing a flight plan that is never actually flown serves no purpose. It demonstrates the enormous disconnect between dispatch knowledge and operational reality. Further; it opens many opportunities for FMC input mistakes; missed clrncs and incorrectly flown flight paths. Worst case scenario involves a midair collision while crews are heads down at low altitude in high traffic areas trying to figure out a remedy to the never-flown route during a rerouted departure clearance. If safety is a consideration in flight plan design; this unsafe practice should end. Administrative elements should reflect reality. The general apathetic attitude; unprofessional approach; lack of basic knowledge borders on negligence.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737 PILOT DESCRIBES CLEARANCE ANOMALIES ON THE RNO 3 DEPARTURE INCLUDING ROUTING NEVER ISSUED BY ATC.

Narrative: RNO ATCT PERSONNEL ARE REQUIRED TO ASSIGN THE RNO 3 DEP TO ALL JET ACFT (DUE TO INTERNAL RNO ATCT/TRACON OPERATING PROCS). TO FACILITATE USAGE OF PDC; WE REQUEST THAT YOU FILE THE RNO 3 DEP. NARRATIVE: RE: RENO 3.FMG. RENO THREE DEP (RENO3.FMG). 1) EXCEPT FOR LOST COMS AND ONLY (DURING IMC) WILL AN ACFT ACTUALLY GO TO FMG. THIS IS A POORLY LABELED STAR CONTAINING A HOLDOVER FIX FROM A BYGONE ERA. UNTIL RECENTLY; ATC HAS BEEN ISSUING 'RENO3; AS FILED.' THEN IT IS CHANGED TO 'RENO 3; FLY RWY HDG.' CURRENTLY THE CLRNC IS 'RENO 3; FLY THE LOC SBOUND UNTIL ADVISED.' ONLY THE LAST TWO ARE CORRECT ACCORDING TO THE CHART. 2) RENO 3.FMG IS NOT IN THE FMC DATABASE; NEVER HAS BEEN. 3) FLT PLAN PAGE 1. THE LINE WITH THE FLT PLAN ROUTING HAS TRADITIONALLY BEEN USED TO PROGRAM THE FMC BY PLTS. THE LINE 'FP' IS THE FILED FLT PLAN. A FILED FLT PLAN IS NOT A GUARANTEE OF ROUTING. IF THE FLT PLAN ROUTING LINE AND THE FP (FILED FLT PLAN) LINE ARE CONSIDERED TO BE THE SAME; LEAVING THE PLT TO FIGURE OUT THE TRUE ROUTING; ELIMINATE ONE AND SAVE PRINTER INK. IF THE FLT PLAN ROUTING LINE IS USED TO INDICATE THE FILED PLAN; THEN LIST IT AS (RENO3.FMG) IN PARENTHESIS TO INDICATE A STAR/SID AND NOT FLT PLAN ROUTING. 4) FLT PLAN PAGE 2. ROUTING CLRLY SHOWS REQUIRED FLT TO FMG. THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN IN NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES. ROUTING CALLS FOR FLT OVER GENNE WHICH IS ON J7 BUT WILL ONLY OCCUR IF THE FLT IS OVER FMG FIRST OR ATC DIRECTED. WILL NOT HAPPEN EITHER. ATC DOES NOT/HAS NOT CLRED FLTS TO FMG OR GENNE DURING RENO 3 OPS OVER THE LAST 3 AND A HALF YRS. DOES NOT HAPPEN. INTXN REBRG OMITTED FROM ROUTING. REBRG IS BTWN FRA AND DERBB AND HAS BEEN ON ROUTING PAGE PREVIOUSLY. 5) DISPATCH RESPONSE. DISPATCHER ON DUTY (DOD) STATED THAT AS OF A COUPLE OF WKS AGO DISPATCH WAS DIRECTED TO LIST THE FLT PATH AS ISSUED. DOD FURTHER STATED THAT THE RENO 3 WAS THE REQUIRED STAR. DOD WAS UNAWARE OF THE PROB AND DID NOT OFFER MEANINGFUL ASSISTANCE. DOD WAS NOT CONVERSANT WITH THE STAR. I TRIED TO EXPLAIN THE RELATIVE LOCATION OF FMG AND DETAILS OF THE CHART INDICATING THAT WE WOULD NOT BE TAKING OFF S; FLYING BACK TO THE N TO FMG AND THEN REVERSE COURSE AGAIN BACK TO THE S. HE DID NOT GRASP THE CONCEPT. I FURTHER EXPLAINED THAT GENNE WAS NOT ON THE STAR AND THAT REBRG WAS MISSING ON THE FLT PLAN PAGE 2 ROUTING. HE WAS UNFAMILIAR WITH ANY OF THE DETAILS OF THE STAR OR ANY OF THE AFOREMENTIONED FIXES. I SUGGESTED THAT HE REFILE THE FLT PLAN INDICATING RENO 3 DIRECT FRA AS HAD BEEN THE PROC FOR THE LAST 3 YRS. DOD WAS UNSURE THAT HE COULD ACCOMPLISH THIS. OTHER THAN CONTACTING 'SUPPORT;' DOD STATED HE COULD DO LITTLE ELSE TO HELP. AFTER CONTACTING 'SUPPORT;' DOD STATED THAT THE FLT PLAN AS FILED IS ALL THAT WAS AVAILABLE. HE ALSO STATED HE COULD NOT FIND THE FIXES I HAD MENTIONED EARLIER AND THAT THEY WERE NOT IN THE DATABASE. I ASKED THAT THE FLT PLAN BE MODIFIED AND FAXED TO THE GATE ASAP. IT NEVER ARRIVED: WE OBTAINED A NORMAL CLRNC; 'RENO.3; FLY LOC S UNTIL ADVISED.' I ACCEPTED THE REROUTING AS FINAL AND DEPARTED ON TIME. 6) ROUTINELY FILING A FLT PLAN THAT IS NEVER ACTUALLY FLOWN SERVES NO PURPOSE. IT DEMONSTRATES THE ENORMOUS DISCONNECT BTWN DISPATCH KNOWLEDGE AND OPERATIONAL REALITY. FURTHER; IT OPENS MANY OPPORTUNITIES FOR FMC INPUT MISTAKES; MISSED CLRNCS AND INCORRECTLY FLOWN FLT PATHS. WORST CASE SCENARIO INVOLVES A MIDAIR COLLISION WHILE CREWS ARE HEADS DOWN AT LOW ALT IN HIGH TFC AREAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A REMEDY TO THE NEVER-FLOWN RTE DURING A REROUTED DEP CLRNC. IF SAFETY IS A CONSIDERATION IN FLT PLAN DESIGN; THIS UNSAFE PRACTICE SHOULD END. ADMINISTRATIVE ELEMENTS SHOULD REFLECT REALITY. THE GENERAL APATHETIC ATTITUDE; UNPROFESSIONAL APCH; LACK OF BASIC KNOWLEDGE BORDERS ON NEGLIGENCE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.