Narrative:

Air carrier X was departing north out of slc on the ensign RNAV departure. This departure has the aircraft depart at 230 KTS. The speed assignment is two fold: one is for in trail spacing on successive departures and the other is so when the aircraft reaches 10;000 ft they won't push the nose down and try to gain speed. If they do try to gain speed; and slow or stop their rate of climb; then terrain becomes a factor. They need to maintain a positive rate of climb to clear the mountains prior to turning. So; with that said; I observed air carrier X's ground speed picking up at about 100. I asked him his speed and he replied 250. I reminded him that his assigned speed was 230 and now to maintain 250 KTS. I did not need him to slow but more importantly I did not want him to speed up and clear the terrain. I then shipped him to the center. We have had these RNAV departures for three years or so. We are constantly asked by departing aircraft about the climbs and speeds. When we say 'climb and maintain...' many of the pilots ask if that is an unrestricted climb; or if they have to comply with the crossing restrictions etc. We still spend a lot of time answering these types of questions. The union was not brought in on the design phase of these departures and it shows. These were drawn up and implemented by others not active controllers who work the airspace and know the ins and outs of the sectors. These really need to be fixed. We have pilots climbing out to the wrong altitudes often as well. They need cleaned up and standardized. Safety is the issue. Recommendation; we need to cleanup the RNAV departures at slc. The departures have too many crossings; instructions; etc. We; the FAA; are just confusing the flying public and have created a safety issue.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: S56 Controller expressed concern regarding the new RNAV SID procedures claiming the design was flawed and prompting frequent questions from flight crews as well as speed violations as noted in this report.

Narrative: Air Carrier X was departing north out of SLC on the ENSIGN RNAV Departure. This departure has the aircraft depart at 230 KTS. The speed assignment is two fold: one is for in trail spacing on successive departures and the other is so when the aircraft reaches 10;000 FT they won't push the nose down and try to gain speed. If they do try to gain speed; and slow or stop their rate of climb; then terrain becomes a factor. They need to maintain a positive rate of climb to clear the mountains prior to turning. So; with that said; I observed Air Carrier X's ground speed picking up at about 100. I asked him his speed and he replied 250. I reminded him that his assigned speed was 230 and now to maintain 250 KTS. I did not need him to slow but more importantly I did not want him to speed up and clear the terrain. I then shipped him to the Center. We have had these RNAV departures for three years or so. We are constantly asked by departing aircraft about the climbs and speeds. When we say 'Climb and maintain...' Many of the pilots ask if that is an unrestricted climb; or if they have to comply with the crossing restrictions etc. We still spend a lot of time answering these types of questions. The union was not brought in on the design phase of these departures and it shows. These were drawn up and implemented by others not active controllers who work the airspace and know the ins and outs of the sectors. These really need to be fixed. We have pilots climbing out to the wrong altitudes often as well. They need cleaned up and standardized. Safety is the issue. Recommendation; we need to cleanup the RNAV departures at SLC. The departures have too many crossings; instructions; etc. We; the FAA; are just confusing the flying public and have created a safety issue.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.