Cancel SID maintain runway heading (or track).

[Icarus2001]

Very common to hear...

"Cancel SID maintain runway heading" or

"Cancel SID maintain runway track"

I have listened to many pilots who ALL had an OPINION on what was meant by each expression.

I would like to hear from ATCOs on their version.

eg There is a crosswind of 18 knots. Do you mean HEADING so airborne it becomes a vector, or TRACK to follow the extended centreline?

NOW IS TIME FOR PILOTS TO LISTEN. I HAVE ENOUGH PILOT OPINIONS THANKS.

[Wing Root]

As I'm a pilot I'll refrain from offering an opinion and just include some information to help the discussion.

ENR 1.1 - 4.8.1 (http://www.airservices.gov.au/publications/current/aip/enr/1_1_1-116.pdf)

** Note: A pilot assigned a heading (including runway heading) must not compensate for wind effect.

[ejet3]

lol who cares just get the job done and forget about flying :ok:

[John Citizen]

maintain runway heading and maintain runway track are two different things,track is adjust for wind, heading is not

[avnut]

What if by the time you get told to maintain runway heading you have already established a heading to allow for drift - do you then turn back onto runway heading or continue as you are?

[Icarus53]

I always wondered this too - acknowledging that being issued a heading means not to compensate for wind, someone once told me "Runways don't have headings" [they have a QDM].

Based on that logic, I consider the instruction to mean "fly a heading that will have you track on the extended runway centreline". That balances out with the idea of an aircraft that is already airborne and tracking on the centreline.

If you've got a specific reference or some more sensible logic, I'm all ears!

[404 Titan]

This is pretty straight forward stuff people. I work for a major Asian carrier and this is what our Ops manual states:

Departure and Climb

Departure Tracking

If a SID or Departure Clearance specifies ‘Maintain Runway Heading’ it is implied that a drift correction will be applied in order to maintain the runway track.

Exceptions - USA, Canada and Australia require that “Runway Heading” be maintained without drift correction.

In other words in Australia, USA and Canada you fly a heading that corresponds to the runway track derived from the relevant Jepp or Dap chart. All the other countries you fly a heading that gives you the required runway track, i.e. allowing for drift.

[Icarus2001]

maintain runway heading and maintain runway track are two different things,track is adjust for wind, heading is not

Yes, I know. That is why I made the distinction. Geez.

This is pretty straight forward stuff people. My regular study of world wide aircraft crashes shows that "straight forward stuff" kills people EVERY MONTH!

So, IF when used in Australia, "maintain runway heading" or "maintain runway track" MEAN the same thing (not yet established by the way). Then WHY do some tower units use either phrase, they are VERY different and in our world of standard calls I would think the INTENTION is different. (whoops, my OPINION). I do not have an up to date MATS/MOS so I really need ATCO input. Tower rated guys or girls preferably.

[Capt Fathom]

The only place I have been given a 'maintain runway track' was Perth! But Perth is somewhat different to the rest of Australia! :E

[Skynews]

The only place I have been given a 'maintain runway track' was Perth! But Perth is somewhat different to the rest of Australia

NO, the rest of the world!! :E

[404 Titan]

Icarus2001

In 25 years of flying I can’t remember ever getting a clearance “maintain runway track”.

The point is if your SID is cancelled and you are instructed to “maintain runway heading” in Australia, the USA and Canada you maintain a heading that is the same as the runway track on your Jepp plate, ie no drift allowance.

[cac_sabre]

Runway heading is used for VFR or IFR on a visual departure.

All the references are spread around in AIP.. I dont have a current copy at hand but my saved electronic copy that was valid at the beginning of this year has this:
Phraseology GEN 3.4 - 51:
when a VFR aircraft, or an IFR aircraft cleared for a visual departure is issued radar heading instructions
Sl. (instructions) MAINTAIN RUNWAY HEADING [TURN LEFT (or RIGHT) HEADING (degrees)] VISUAL, CLEARED FOR TAKE--OFF

ENR 1.1 -11
para 4-8-1 Departure instructions may contain the following as required:

b. heading instructions;**

** Note: A pilot assigned a heading (including runway heading)
must not compensate for wind effect.

ENR 1.5 -36
10.4.4 In a radar environment,when aProcedural SID is cancelled before
take-off, ATC may:
a. require the pilot in command to depart in accordance with a
radar SID; or
b. issue alternative instructions that require the aircraft to depart on runway track using the climb gradient specified in the cancelled SID. In this case, ATC will use the phrase“CANCELSID, MAINTAIN RUNWAY TRACK (three digits) DEGREES”. Note: For the application of this procedure, the runway and radar SID tracks must be coincident up to the MVA.

Now for a bit of interpretation, if you are departing in non visual conditions or by night, below MVA, ATC can only vector you if:
1. You are flying a radar SID or
2. You fly the the first part of the SID eg "maintain Runway track" (which is what you do when you fly a SID) until MVA is reached after which any heading can be applied.

hope that helps
Wal in not so different Perth

[AlJassmi]

It's generally a VMC vs IMC thing. Yes, runway heading and runway track are different in Australia.

"Cancel SID maintain runway heading visual". Note the "visual" in there - it's now a visual departure. The pilot(s) are to maintain their own terrain separation up to the minimum vectoring altitude. "Visual" is also a required readback. It can be handy to know the MVA - or just ask. When you maintain runway heading you don't compensate for wind.

"Cancel SID maintain runway track (180 degrees)". In this case as Mr sabre pointed out, you fly the climb gradient on the SID you were initially issued while tracking straight ahead. The SID is providing your terrain separation. You do compensate for wind. Again as per the previous post, the SID must allow you to fly runway track up to the MVA - so not every SID may be cancelled in this manner eg some SIDs for smaller aircraft have an early turn to get them out of the way faster.

You may also be given "leaving 2000 (or whatever the MVA might be), cancel SID turn left heading 180". This one probably most often used for weather avoidance where a pilot can't/won't accept a visual departure eg "Cancel SID turn left heading 180 visual". Another instance where knowing the MVA is useful. A visual departure generally allows you to turn earlier than the MVA. ATC won't (well, shouldn't) issue a visual departure if you can't achieve it.

[Icarus2001]

Thanks for the useful info Al.

I think the gradient and "visual" are perhaps the key here.

However I have been given both instructions in VMC, whilst IFR and certainly hear plenty of examples in VMC of both calls.

[cac_sabre]

Consider taking off with a 30 + kt crosswind, a departing aircraft is going to drift well to one side of the centre-line, ATC may well opt for "runway Track" to ensure this doesnt happen

[Mach E Avelli]

Struth, why not clear all the confusion by dropping the word 'runway' completely from the instruction and substituting the number eg "after takeoff heading 180" or "after takeoff track 190"? When giving a heading one assumes ATC know the runway QDM and roughly what the wind is likely to do to the aeroplane as regards any terrain or traffic separation. When they don't, the track option is presumably the better. It may not be ICAO-speak, but since when did Australia worry about that?

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

"Maintain runway heading"

Seems simple enough to me!

Dr :8

PS: ATC - "Doc, turn left, heading 270". Dr - "Ah, you want me to head 270 or track 270" ? ATC - "Geez Doc, its not rocket science. When I want you to take up a heading, I say "heading", and if I want you to track, I say "track"! :E

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

I always instructed a pilot to fly a heading. Then I knew exactly where he was going...

[Mr.Buzzy]

While we are being picky. Any chance we can forget using the term "QDM"?

[Mach E Avelli]

Heathrow Director, you THOUGHT you knew where he was going! From some of the dull-witted replies in the foregoing, it seems that there are still quite a few pilots who take it upon themselves to fly whatever THEY think will track the centreline despite a "maintain runway heading" instruction. In Australia, anyway.....Hence, let's pitch the instruction at the lowest common denominator, aka neanderthal pilot, and just give them a number in the hope that they can read a compass or CDI and know how to select either heading or track mode.
Even check captains sometimes have difficulty with this concept. A good friend once failed an initial command check because the ATC instruction was "after takeoff maintain heading 195" but the runway QDM (sorry Buzzy, economy of words) happened to be 197. My friend went into heading select mode and correctly dialled in 195. If it had been me failing a check for this, the checkie would have been sued for potential loss of income, and recommended for anal retentive syndrome counselling.

[harrowing]

Mr Buzzy, I agree 100%.
Thread drift I know, but I also believe QDM is being over and misused. From Ralph Kloth's web site.
QTM* What is your MAGNETIC heading? My MAGNETIC heading is ... degrees.
QDM Will you indicate the MAGNETIC heading for me to steer towards you (or ...) with no wind? The MAGNETIC heading for you to steer to reach me (or ...) with no wind was ... degrees (at ... hours).

It has nothing to do with runways at all. It goes back to HF or VHF DF days, or VDF to drop another acronym.
QDM and QTM sound very similar and have related meanings, but neither is correct in this context. In a limited sense QTM is possibly more appropriate.
73s to those who know what that means.

[Mach E Avelli]

While we are on thread drift (as opposed to correcting for drift), thank you Harrowing for the reference to the Q codes. Even an old bloke like me occasionally learns something new. However, it is also interesting to do a Google on QDM and find that even the famous Boeing Company uses it in reference to runway alignment. Seems that it is one of those common-usage things that has passed into aviation-speak. Another one which is more localised: flying in Blighty, QSY (with reference to frequency changes) - hopefully only used on the locals.

[601]

This was sorted out 20 years ago at the regular CASA - Industry meetings we used to have at AF. Obviously today's CASA don't think there is any value in these regular meetings.

"Maintain runway heading"

means exactly that. Fly a heading with no drift compensation.

In 30 years I never heard the phase " maintain runway track".

How would you do it unless a navaid was located on the extended runway centreline or you back-tracked an ILS?

[glekichi]

In 30 years I never heard the phase " maintain runway track".

How would you do it unless a navaid was located on the extended runway centreline or you back-tracked an ILS?

I've heard it quite a few times. Even pre-PPL students seem to be able to pick a reference point before takeoff and allow drift to track on the extended centreline.

[boocs]

(yawn smilie time 5 as no such one exists)

Please folks, aren't there more interesting/stimulating topics???

b.

[Icarus2001]

How would you do it unless a navaid was located on the extended runway centreline or you back-tracked an ILS? Well our modern aircraft with FMS/GNSS/INS have a function enabling them to track upwind on an extended centreline until given some other input such as heading, direct to a waypoint etc. The other method is using a tracking diamond or some such once airborne, the diamond or other shape shows the TMG so one simply heads to keep the shape on the required track.

Please folks, aren't there more interesting/stimulating topics???
Obviously you thought it worth lobbing a grenade when you could have moved on.:ooh:

From some of the dull-witted replies in the foregoing,
Seems simple enough to me!

These two posts are very telling. I think flying an RNAV approach is pretty simple, but it killed 15 people a little while ago. I think loading enough fuel is pretty simple but we had splash down near Norfolk Island a little while ago.

You guys are making my point for me. YOU THINK you KNOW what the correct answer is, or what the ATCO intends but what if you don't? Is it even possible you may be wrong in your assumption?

I started this thread after seeing the confusion at my company among VERY experienced pilots. So please refrain from telling me how SIMPLE this is.

In 30 years I never heard the phase " maintain runway track". The way you have phrased that sentence makes me believe you no longer fly, is that correct? I can assure you I hear it at least twice a week but it does seem to be a recent addition, as in say the last 2-3 years.

[Capn Bloggs]

QDM and QTM sound very similar and have related meanings, but neither is correct in this context. In a limited sense QTM is possibly more appropriate.

The correct Q code for runway track is QFU. :ok:

the confusion at my company among VERY experienced pilots.
Tell 'em to use their experience to read AIP. All will be revealed. :ok:

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

In 30 years I never heard the phase " maintain runway track".


In 30 years I never heard the phase " maintain runway track".
The way you have phrased that sentence makes me believe you no longer fly, is that correct? I can assure you I hear it at least twice a week but it does seem to be a recent addition, as in say the last 2-3 years.

Hmmm! Been flying for 37 years in two countries including 800 hrs in the last 5 yrs over a big chunk of Oz.

Can't recall EVER hearing, "Maintain runway track".


I think flying an RNAV approach is pretty simple, but it killed 15 people a little while ago.


It weren't the RNV approach that killed those people! That was just one hole in a very holey swiss cheese!

Dr :8

[601]

In 30 years I never heard the phase " maintain runway track".

Not in the right place at the right time.

But I did hear the phase "you can't land that here" from the tower after I had cleared the grass runway in a Citation.

The phase "maintain runway track" by itself is incorrect. The correct phase is "Cancel SID, maintain runway track ### degrees"

Well our modern aircraft with FMS/GNSS/INS have a function enabling them to track upwind on an extended centreline until given some other input such as heading, direct to a waypoint etc.

Not every aircraft has this capability.


I think flying an RNAV approach is pretty simple, but it killed 15 people a little while ago.

The dangers associated with this type of approach were conveyed to CASA at meetings held to discuss GPS and its application to aviation and the design of GPS (RNAV) approaches.

In those days RNAV referred to a different method of navigation that did not make it to OZ.


The way you have phrased that sentence makes me believe you no longer fly, is that correct? I can assure you I hear it at least twice a week but it does seem to be a recent addition, as in say the last 2-3 years.

CASA FOIs don't fly much either.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<Heathrow Director, you THOUGHT you knew where he was going! From some of the dull-witted replies in the foregoing, it seems that there are still quite a few pilots who take it upon themselves to fly whatever THEY think will track the centreline >>

But I DID know where they were going because I never mentioned anything about runways or centrelines. I simply instructed them to fly a particular heading... and they did so.

[Icarus2001]

The phase "maintain runway track" by itself is incorrect. The correct phase is "Cancel SID, maintain runway track ### degrees"


Quite right...my omission. So the heading is left hanging, taken as known, but the track gets defined.:uhoh:

Not every aircraft has this capability Yes, I thought that was obvious, but 601 you did ask...
How would you do it unless a navaid was located on the extended runway centreline or you back-tracked an ILS? I gave you a way that I do it along with many others.

BloggsTell 'em to use their experience to read AIP. All will be revealed A unified and cohesive answer in the AIP, any chance of a clue as to the location?

Any more ATCO suggestions?

[601]

A unified and cohesive answer in the AIP, any chance of a clue as to the location?

ENR 1.5.10.4.4 (page 1.5 - 36)

Even pre-PPL students seem to be able to pick a reference point before takeoff and allow drift to track on the extended centreline.

This is a direction given to an aircraft operating under the IFR. Visual reference points do not come into it.

[glekichi]

You did say you had 'never' heard it.

I have heard it given to both VFR aircraft and IFR aircraft on visual departures (procedural airspace).
There are also plenty of SIDs that require a certain track to be maintained that is not coincident with any navaid whatsoever.

The phrases 'maintain runway track' and 'maintain runway heading' consist of nothing but standard phraseology so I cannot see why one or the other could not be issued to any aircraft regardless of the flight rules, flight conditions, or the licence held by the pilot in command.

[bagchucka]

Not uncommon on the Gurak departure off 03 at PH most mornings before Pearce opens for business. Some mornings you get runway track, others runway heading. Seems to depend on the wind strength I find.

[Capn Bloggs]

Bagchucka,
Some mornings you get runway track, others runway heading. Seems to depend on the wind strength I find.
Related to whether the PIC can maintain terrain clearance visually. If s/he can't ie before first light, s/he'll get "Maintain runway Track 016°". After first light, "Maintain runway heading". In a strong easterly after sunup, that's why I appear to "track" off to Hillarys. :eek:

[NO LAND 3]

If you read back through all the posts the point that arises is the meaning depends on which country you are in. The problem is compounded because of different pilots and controllers interpretation of what is 'obvious'. Once you've flown around the world a few times you find it quite astounding how unstandardised the rules of the air are. A common example is if altitude restrictions on SIDs and STARs are cancelled when cleared to a higher or lower altitude. CPDLC log on, Oceanic clearance procedures, etc etc etc.
Perhaps the guys that write the regional rules just don't know what each other are doing.
The Rwy Heading / Track discussion may sound trivial but it is another hole in the cheese that can cause real problems.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

meaning depends on which country you are in

....... and the title of this thread is?

DG&P General Aviation & Questions, where D = Dunnunda!

Dr :8

[Icarus2001]

The Rwy Heading / Track discussion may sound trivial but it is another hole in the cheese that can cause real problems. That is what I thought when I started the thread. The most trivial and obvious things can really spoil your day.

I was confining the discussion to Australia in my mind but regional differences are of interest.

In a strong easterly after sunup, that's why I appear to "track" off to Hillarys Do you appear to track off towards Hillarys, or do you in fact track off towards Hillarys?

Which begs the question why not just use "maintain rwy track 016 degrees" even in day vmc? Much tidier one would think. The aircraft will then be on a known path until departures muck it up, I mean give further instructions. Whereas each aircraft HEADING 016 degrees will give a different TMG due speed and climb rate through the wind levels.

[adc123]

Interesting topic. Could cause problems at somewhere like sydney with parallel rwys.........my understanding, rwy track maintains centerline (accounts for wind), while a heading does not account for wind.

[Angle of Attack]

my understanding, rwy track maintains centerline (accounts for wind), while a heading does not account for wind.

Exactly, why there is so much discussion on this topic evades me haha!
It is not rocket science!

[NO LAND 3]

OK, this happened to me in Europe but I think it's relevant: taking off with parallel runway ops in process. ATC: "cancel SID, after takeoff maintain rwy hdg, cleared for takeoff". At 400' engaging HDG mode on rwy hdg resulted in a turn towards a 757 that had also just departed on the downwind adjacent parallel runway. This was due to the 25 kt crosswind. Presumably the controller had intended me to maintain rwy track but his phrasology was careless. So in spite of what the AIP says or what might be bleedin' obvious professionals still make mistakes in interpretation and execution.
I hope a wider perspective is useful to the discussion, after all alot of guys reading this will end up working in The Rest Of The World too!

[das Uber Soldat]

Just to muddy the waters for you even more.

At bankstown, if you are given an assigned heading in a significant crosswind, but you maintain that heading within the zone and drift across the runways, you get yelled at :)

[Ted D Bear]

At bankstown, if you are given an assigned heading in a significant crosswind, but you maintain that heading within the zone and drift across the runways, you get yelled at
Maybe that's why the SID was changed (after Class D introduction) to include a track requirement (rather than assigned headings) :confused:

On second thought, that sounds much too logical :ugh:

Ted