Manch Tower - Why readback the SID when taxying?

[Mister Geezer]

I thought this might if been asked before so did a search and found..... nothing!!!

Anyway... the title more or less gives the question away but when departing on 24L then why does the controller on 119.4 want to always confirm the SID? If 24L had just been opened then I can appreciate the controller wanting to confirm the right SID was going to be attempted off 24L which might not of been the original clearance?

Otherwise in other situations if the correct SID was not read back then we would have obviously not of got past the stage of being handed off from delivery so why do you tower folks need a second readback?

I was thinking of a (unlikely) situation where delivery and tower might use two different sets of strips? Or is it something easier? :O

[JetSetJ]

Hi Mister Geezer,

I believe the reason for confirming the SID with tower frequency is that the airport has had the occasion where a departing flight has actually flown the incorrect designated SID.

In order to prevent this becoming a regular occurance the airport has employed this technique which i think is a really good idea and from what i've seen seems to work.

Hope this helps

JetSetJ:ok:

[wiccan]

ThE SIDs concerned are HON and LISTO SIDs. The Listo turns SOUTH after departure, to avoid Knutsford...The Hon turns NORTHWEST to avoid Knutsford. A/c of BAE146 and smaller fly Listo, and Larger ones a Hon. It is called a "Confidence Check". But some a/c STILL fly the wrong SID :ugh:
bb

[inbound-dayne]

Indeed... i asked the same question to a controller a few months back, on a quiet morning.
Only HON/LISTO SIDS require readback confirmation... for reasons given above :)

[BAe 146-100]

This is only required with the southbound HON and LISTO departures of the 24s. The check was introduced because pilots who were cleared on a Honiley, a few instead once airborne were turning left on the shorter LISTO which the F50s/146s/ERJs use. To avoid the confliction, the check was put in place.

146

[Mister Geezer]

Cheers... clears that one up. I am all for keeping R/T as short and concise as possible so I was a bit puzzled as to why we needed to re-read the clearance back. Interesting why it is these two SIDS have been mixed up and not another pair?

When aircraft do fly the incorrect SID it must be a case of briefing what you expect to fly rather than what you have been cleared. Perhaps when it does happen then especially if it is a UK based operator then a bit of research as to why crews continue to fly the wrong SID might provide a insight into what might go wrong. Especially if one particular operator is more to blame than another.

In Europe there are often SIDs with ‘transitions’, which take you to a point and then branch off into various routes. Perhaps with the two SIDs looking so similar then some foreign crews might interpret the HON clearance as the same as a transition after LISTO?? Might seem a bit far fetched but I would not be surprised. Or perhaps it is down to just bad planning rather than a misunderstanding!

[Max Angle]

The Hon turns NORTHWEST to avoid Knutsford. Which has always struck me as very strange, surely it would be better to turn South just after take-off (500-100ft) thereby going nowhere near Knutsford in the first place. Flying a large, almost 270 degree turn around the town keeps the aircraft in the vicinty for far longer than turning South straight after take-off would and I would have thought make far more noise. There seems to be plenty of room to turn before you get to the town so why don't we?, any Manch. controllers know the reason?

[chiglet]

Max Angle
Nowt to do with Manch Controllers, was MA PLC [who with the the "noise lobby"] agreed the new SIDs :hmm:
As an aside, the Saudi C130 also flies a Listo SID :ok:
watp,iktch

[Flightman]

Max Angle
Nowt to do with Manch Controllers, was MA PLC [who with the the "noise lobby"] agreed the new SIDs :hmm:
As an aside, the Saudi C130 also flies a Listo SID :ok:
watp,iktch

When you say "agreed" do you mean designed? If so, I though DAP did airspace design, not airports? :confused:

[chiglet]

Flightman,
AFAIK [which ain't a lot] MA PLC "in consultation" with the Local councils ["possibly" affected by "more" noise], agreed the "Southbound SIDs" off 24 L/R.
watp,iktch

[PPRuNe Radar]

If so, I though DAP did airspace design, not airports?

DAP have not done it since about 1998. It's up to the ATS provider or airport operator to provide the design (and do the consultations), which DAP will then 'approve' and publish in the AIP provided you have jumped through all the hoops and obstacles they place in your way. :ok:

[Flightman]

DAP have not done it since about 1998. It's up to the ATS provider or airport operator to provide the design (and do the consultations), which DAP will then 'approve' and publish in the AIP provided you have jumped through all the hoops and obstacles they place in your way. :ok:


Doh, of course! :ugh:

Cheers

[Maude Charlee]

What's a SID?

I just close my eyes and hope for the best.

:}

How's it going then Geezer? In MAN with your shiny new stripes now?

[chiglet]

Standard Instument Departure
watp,iktch