Runway heading

[abracadabra]

'After departure, fly runway heading'

'After departure, climb straight ahead'

I've heard several interpretations of these instructions, so what do they actually mean, and what does the controller expect to see?

Thanks for your help!

(did a quick search on this, but couldn't find much)

[Vlad the Impaler]

From my point of view unless I have given you a specific heading to fly (lets not degenerate into the heading vs radar heading debate again !!)having uttered the words "Continue runway heading" I would expect you to track something that approximated to the runway centreline and then whatever heading that is, stay on it.

[Scott Voigt]

You fly the runway heading (not track)...

regards

Scott

[abracadabra]

Thanks for your quick responses.

I have always flown the runway track (until told to do something else or reaching the required altitude etc.) after receiving the instruction to 'fly runway heading', but was recently informed that the correct reponse is to do as Scott suggests and (once clear of obstacles!) fly the runway heading and drift accordingly.

Evidently there is some debate out there over this, but I have never yet heard anyone being b*ll*cked for doing one versus the other. Just curious.

What about the specific phrase 'climb straight ahead'?

[letMfly]

Scott's right, Vlad's wrong!

If given climb straight ahead you are expected to do your best to track the extended centreline.

Regards

letMfly

[spekesoftly]

Agree with letMfly and Scott.

Further reading here (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=114203)

[Vlad the Impaler]

LET ME FLY
Did I not say track extended centreline ?????
I accept your unreserved apology !!!!
If told runway heading, that is an instruction to fly a heading and would expect that initial heading to maintain the runway track to be continued......as a heading.........

[bookworm]

After departure, climb straight ahead means "track the extended centreline", and the controller expects you to track the extended centreline.

After departure, fly runway heading means that the controller dates from the days when such phraseology was permitted, and the controller expects you to track the extended centreline.
;)

[DFC]

On a runway 27 (268deg), if told to fly runway heading we will fly a heading of 268..........where this takes us (obstacles, trafficnoise sensitive areas) is up to the controller who assigned that heading. If told to climb straight ahead we will fly a heading that will result in a track of 268.

Eg with the above and a wind of 360/30 and initial climb speed of 180Kt...........for "fly runway heading" we will steer 268...........for "climb straight ahead" we will steer about 278 as an initial guess!

Puting that in terms of track - for the runway heading case we would end up tracking about 258 but for the climb straight ahead we would track 268!..............very interesting if there are some big hills just south of the departure track!

Basically as far as we are concerned, if ATC tell us to fly a heading, they are pointing us where they want us to go and they have allowed for wind etc. Anything else and we point the aircraft where ever to acheive the required track (hopefully).

I was told that the reason for using "runway heading" was that ATC must have both aircraft locked on headings to use radar separation. Thus they put you on runway heading against another joining downwind to the radar pattern that you will climb through............They say that it is called ensuring separation - something that can't do when relying on pilots to get it right :)

Regards,

DFC

[Not Long Now]

And a prize to the controller who could tell the difference with any of the above barring a huge crosswind.

[letMfly]

VLAD,

I reckon you're a bit confused on this one. DFC's pilot's point of view backs up exactly what Scott and I are saying. Your apologies are anticipated when you have had a good think about it. PS re your PM - want to borrow my glasses!

Bookworm is right when he says that "fly runway heading" is not permitted anymore (in the UK anyway). The reason for this is because it was open to misinterpretation and was therefore dangerous.

"Climb straight ahead (initially) or (till advised)" tends to be used by aerodrome controllers who have been issued a departure heading by radar but require an aircraft to track straight ahead for a short time to separate from other local traffic.

Regards

letMfly

[Right Way Up]

Letmfly,
I think you should reread Vlads and Scotts original posts. Vlad's answer is to fly runway track, and Scotts answer covers the US rule of flying heading!

[letMfly]

RWU

I've read them and they illustrate precisely why the term "fly runway heading" has been discontinued in the UK.

If the runway allignment was 360 degrees and there was a cracking Westerly wind, Vlad's departing aircraft would track roughly 360 degrees. However Scott's (and DFC's aircraft) would track East of North and possibly take out an aircraft running downwind right.

At my unit it is not unusual to see slow climbing helicopters track 40 degrees off the centrline when they have been given a radar heading coincident with the runway alignment. So in Vlad's misinterpretation the "runway heading" for RW36 in the above example would be 320 degrees! (Which is patently bo*ll*cks).

Can I go home now?

letMfly

[Right Way Up]

Now i've got a headache!
Did Vlad not say ""Continue runway heading" I would expect you to track something that approximated to the runway centreline and then whatever heading that is, stay on it. I assume the only thing wrong with Vlads post is that "continue runway heading" is now obselete. (but still used)

[brain fade]

What interesting times we live in.:zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz: :zzz:

[nickt]

in canada, "runway heading" means: fly the heading printed on the approach plate, and don't correct for drift. i figure it must be pretty similar in every country...

[Vlad the Impaler]

I stand by my original comments, I too have a headache so am off to lurk in jetblast for some more abuse............

[Jerricho]

For god's sake, don't ask them that there.

Runway head away from the airport don't they? Or towards them.

[DFC]

If the runway allignment was 360 degrees and there was a cracking Westerly wind, Vlad's departing aircraft would track roughly 360 degrees. However Scott's (and DFC's aircraft) would track East of North and possibly take out an aircraft running downwind right

LetMFly,

A controller would hopefully recognise the situation and say "after departure fly heading 350" or another suitable heading that will put the aircraft where the controller wants it i.e. on a heading radar separated from the downwind traffic.

If the ATC clear the guy "straight ahead" then you are relying on the pilot to judge the correct heading required at the first attempt............despite the fact that the ATCO may have had several attempts that day to get it right!

Should the pilot get it wrong (old aircraft wrong wind info, DR track), then the ATCO is still responsible for separation (procedural in that case I guess!!!).......or the loss of it cause the pilot can't work out the heading required in time!!!

Regards,

DFC

[Spitoon]

What is so difficult about this?

Runway heading is a heading - the pilot points the aircraft in the direction of the runway centreline and lets ATC worry about where the drift will take the aircraft.

Straight ahead is a track - the pilot makes an assessment of the drift that the aircraft will experience and points the thing in a direction that will compensate for the drift and keep the aircraft going along the extended centreline.

Many controllers use the two phrases interchangeably. Does it matter if the pilot does the wrong thing - usually not, but occasionally it will, particularly if the controller used one term specifically and for a purpose.

Will the controller spot that the pilot does the wrong thing - probably not unless, as has been pointed out, there is a stonking crosswind.

Why has the UK done away with one procedure - presumably because some people will use up two pages on Pprune to misunderstand what the instruction means.

Bottom line - if the controller says fly runway heading - fly that heading. If the controller says go straight ahead - pick a heading that will compensate for the drift. If the controller is being lax with his or her phraseology it's not likely to make much difference - if the instruction has been issued with full understanding of what it means, you'll be complying with the clearance.

If there is terrain that may cause difficulty if you fly runway heading, query the clearance.

What's so difficult about all this?

[woodpecker]

Long long ago the "overshoot" procedure from 27L or 28L(whatever it was at the time) at LHR was Straight ahead to 3000 then turn to EPM .

A Viscount did just that, flying straight ahead (runway heading) from a CAT 1 overshoot. Alas the wind above 1000 feet was southerley at over fifty knots.

The Viscount drifted across the extended CL of the right runway, passing over the top of a departing B707. On reaching 3000 feet he then turned left and passed under the same B707 now at about 3500 feet turning for Woodley!

A good friend of mine (departure controller) had just "accepted" the B707 but without secondary radar (shows how long ago it was) found he had two blips. He was then informed of the Viscounts overshoot but was not able to identify which blip was which. The Viscount was not on his frequency and so vertical seperation was not an option. Should he assume the northerly of the two blips was the B707 and turn him North? If the B707 was the southerley of the two blips he could have caused a collision by turning it right.

He could only sit and watch the two blips merged and then seperated!

The "overshoot" procedure was very quickly changed by notam to Track 278 degrees to 3000 feet" .

Here we are many years later still not sure what basic ATC commands actually mean. Thankfully retired, I am on the outside looking in!

What did it say on the briefing room wall at Hamble? ..Learn from the mistakes of others, you wont live long enough to make them all yourself!

Aviation at times fails to learn from its mistakes, or perhaps just has a very poor memory.

[404 Titan]

This is a quote straight from our ops manual. For those that think that the instruction to "Maintain Runway Heading" means runway heading, think again, for in most parts of the world you are dead wrong.
DEPARTURE TRACKING
Where a SID or departure clearance specifies ‘maintain runway heading’ it is implicit that a drift correction
will be applied in order that runway track is maintained.

The exceptions are USA and Canada, where the requirement is that runway heading be flown without
drift correction.

[Scott Voigt]

We don't even have straight ahead in our vocabulary. If we want an aircraft to fly a track, we then assign a radial to fly or build a procedure for the RNAV equipment to use... Keep it simple <G>...

regards

Scott

[abracadabra]

Cheers for the link to the tech log thread from spekesoftly. Lot's of interesting info there as well. Much more contention than I realised.

I suppose the strangest thing is not only that there IS contention, but that there should be different standards for different parts of the world. A bit worrying this. Although as someone pointed out it would take some pretty stiff x-winds to make much of a difference.

CAP413 answers all. Cheers.

[Dan Winterland]

This was done to death in a similar thread about a year ago. It's down to whether the country you are flying in uses PANSOPS or TERPS. PANSOPS specifies 'maintain runway track' after departure or go around, TERPS specifies 'maintain runway heading', i.e. no drift correction! This does sound strange, especially somewhere like Taipei where you are noticably drifting toards the mountains on a cross wind departure, it is correct.

The countries which use TERPS are North, Central and South American countries (inc Canada), Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and military airfields in the Phillipines. The rest of the world uses PANSOPS, although the Asian countries which use TERPS are planning to swap to PANSOPS in the future. If you're unsure, check the margins of your Jepp plates (if you use them). They will tell you.

Glass Boeings (don't know about Airbus) know where you are in the world and apply the correct standard on departure. If you happen to fly them in both areas, have a look at what it does in the case of a cross wind take off. In the US, it won't drift correct, but it will in Europe.

[spekesoftly]

This was done to death in a similar thread about a year ago.

Yep, and given the continued confusion, my suggestion back then, still stands:-Why don't we just bin phrases like 'Runway heading' and 'Climb straight ahead' and use, for example, "After departure fly heading 240 degrees". No ambiguity, even if the heading is aligned with the Runway. ATC allow for drift (or should do so) at all other times when issuing heading instructions, so why not on departure?

[2 sheds]

Speke...

Couldn't agree more. What a farcical - and potentially hazardous - overall situation is described in the posts above! Particularly if the intention were to separate a departure (or missed approach) from another aircraft about to position downwind with minimal radar separation, we ought to all get our act together worldwide with the terminology and common practice.

Personally, I have always thought that a runway ought not to have a heading (this is basically a navigation term relating to where an aircraft is pointing with its longitudinal axis) - a runway direction, yes - although I recognise that this term has found its way into some authoritative documents.