RWY heading/RWY track/straight ahead
 

:confused: I know that this is an old one, but could any Air Trafffic Controller clarify the meaning of clearances such as, "fly runway heading" or "fly straight ahead?"

Recently, I was taking off from an airport and the controller issued a "fly runway heading after departure" clearance.
I elected to fly the clearance using the "TRACK SEL" mode on my MCP and this caused a bit of an argument with the check pilot on board.

My understanding is that ATC issues this clearance when it wants me to fly in a straight line from the runway to avoid conflict with other traffics nearby. If I use the "HEADING SEL" mode, I could end up left or right of that straight line and violating some aispace.

Therefore, when ATC issues runway heading clearances, does it want me to fly on the runway heading regardless of drift, or to fly a straight line on the runway track?

Thanks

Personally if I say runway heading I want you to fly that heading,any drift either side of the extended centreline is my problem, as the traffic you are given the heading against maybe on the same heading and you tracking may lead to you converging. So always fly the heading, if there is a problem with the wind you will told to fly a track. Hope this helps.

In the UK, if you are instructed to fly 'Runway Heading', and do so, you have correctly complied with your clearance, irrespective of any drift. The trouble is, IMHO, that some ATCOs use the term rather loosely, and in reality expect you to track the extended runway centre line! With "After departure climb straight ahead" there should be no ambiguity. Next time you're given "Runway Heading", especially if there's any significant cross-wind, I suggest you query it with ATC.

Spekesoftly has it about right - do precisely what ATC says and you're covered. IMHO there is alot of confusion these days between controllers and crews because many ATC procedures are stubbornly stuck in the 1960's and haven't caught up with the advances in the cockpit. I bet there are a fair few controllers who don't know when or where a modern jet will be flying headings, and when track. We have problems with A320's announcing they will fly an approach using 'track', but SRG insist we say 'heading'. Likewise our approach plates give the SRA glidepath as 2.8 degrees, but we have to tell pilots to descend for a three degree glidepath. Just like the old days of Meteors and Vampires! Modern flight decks enable aircraft to be flown incredibly accurately - it's about time ATC caught up.

Runway heading ....
 

Thank you very much one and all.:D

Summarizing, if I am cleared to fly runway heading and the wind is calm, regardless of what I've selected on my mode control panel, ATC will see my airplane flying on the runway heading, let's say, 152, and on a straight line.

If there is, say, a crosswind of 15 kts, if I am told to fly runway heading, ATC will see my airplane pointing to 152, but drifting left or right if I've selected heading sel on the MCP; if I have selected track mode, ATC will see me fly fly straight, but my heading will be somewhere around 145 or 165 (depending on the crosswind direction, of course), which wouldn't impress some of you.
I've got the idea.

Thanks again

Runway Heading
 

I quite agree there is a lot of confusion on this one.
If you look in the phraseology section of MATS Part 1, there is actually no approved standard phrase 'fly runway heading'
If an ATCO wants you to go straight ahead (which is usually what they are after in these circumstances) then the approved phrase is 'after departure climb straight ahead' or 'track extended centreline'. IMHO you should never hear the phrase 'fly runway heading'. If an ATCO wants you to actually fly the runway heading he should say 'after departure climb heading xxx degrees'
I have often given the instruction 'climb straight ahead' to have it read back as 'fly runway heading' - and have also been caught out when I have expected the aircraft to climb straight ahead and it has gone veering off in all directions!!

Mr Crisis is right; "runway heading" was dumped from the phraseology years ago but many pilots and controllers seem unaware of it. I frequently get my "climb straight ahead" read back as "climb straight ahead on runway heading". Doh! Admittedly, only in a very strong crosswind does it make much difference what the aircraft actually flies, but it is about time that this irritating little source of confusion was eradicated. An ATSIN might be appropriate.

This one should be simple but it comes up time and time again.

It may not be in the UK phraseology book but runway heading is a heading - point the aircraft in that direction.

Straight ahead is a line you can draw on the map ectending the runway centreline - it's a track to make good. As a controller I do not concern myself greatly with how the pilot may fly that track but I am fully aware of TRK mode in modern aircraft and I know that if the runway has an ILS the localiser back-beam may be a bit of a help.

I guess the problem arises because controllers often use the two terms interchangably when it makes little difference (i.e. little wind or when it's just to get the aircraft going in a general direction) - and in these circumstances I'm not going to know whether he instruction was correctly interpreted and implemented or not. But I do use the terms correctly (OK I admit it, I know I'm not supposed to but do sometimes say runway heading), and when it matters I hope and expect that pilots understand what the clearance means.

Of course speke is right, if you are unclear what a clearance requires you should ask, but for me there is nothing ambiguous about the two phrases.

Not for me either, but it seems that there IS in much of the rest of the aviation world!

Does anyone really expect us to use the Localiser back-beam for C/L tracking once airborne??

ComJam, IMHO mehthinks you are just being silly now;)
simplistically - fly runway hdg and / or, fly straight ahead... (when called before Take off) = if you maintain the extended track for the runway the ATCO will be a happy bunny. Maintain heading = maintain heading

KISS, disappearing up one's own bottom is generally to be avoided

Tis the same semantics as affirm Vs affermative, the words change the desired effect remains the same

Not quite. You are not supposed to say affirmative as it has the same ending as negative and can lead to confusion. One of the recommendations to come out of the Tenerife disaster I think.

Stillin1, it was Spitoon that suggested it, not me! ;)

Seem to remember the phrase "Track extended runway centerline", but can't find reference to it in the book.

Arfur :ok:

Not quite. You are not supposed to say affirmative as it has the same ending as negative and can lead to confusion

My point entirely mon brave! = means the same thing, only one is "correct"

Comjam, bugga, soz you are correct. Humble apologies:{

Rwy Hdg
 

Hi everyone,

Regarding a runway heading, I have a question for ATCOs. Is that clearance applicable below MVA and in case where the climb gradient is much higher than normal is. Shoud you specify rate of climb in that case because of high ROC and it is due to obstacles left/right?

Thanks in advance

Nice subject to talk about. I am a controller from Kuwait and I advice you to read FAA document 7110.65,there is a good stuff inside it about the phrase " Runway Heading". take care....:)

:cool:
Pilot/Controller Glossary (P/CG)
Effective 2/16/06
Includes Change 1, effective 8/3/06
Quote .... RUNWAY HEADING- The magnetic direction that corresponds with the runway centerline extended, not the painted runway number. When cleared to "fly or maintain runway heading," pilots are expected to fly or maintain the heading that corresponds with the extended centerline of the departure runway. Drift correction shall not be applied; e.g., Runway 4, actual magnetic heading of the runway centerline 044, fly 044. .... unquote.

Why would ATC ever want a departing aircraft to fly a runway heading, with no regard to the probable drift?

Quite.... it's not in the book so we shouldn't be using it! If a pilot needs to ask the question then the question answers itself. It is confusing so dont use it (although I did last night after a go around)! Wont again though.

Why wouldn't we use runway heading??? It's no different than ANY other heading we would use. If you have two aircraft off of parallels, they are both effected by the wind. We assign our 15 degree divergence for the heading and we have what we need... Runway heading on one, and the 15 degrees on the other one works just splendid...

regards

Scott

heading=vector?
 

Well if you instruct an aircraft to fly runway heading they can understand the instruction as a radar vector, because of the word heading. A better phrase would be: "After departure, continue straight ahead"

From the Oz AIP
 

Whilst this may not be universal, here is the applicable reference to the rules in Oz...

ENR 1.1 - 11 4.8 Departure Instructions

4.8.1 Departure instructions may contain the following as required:
a. aircraft identification;
b. radar heading instructions;**
c. altitude restrictions;
d. direction of turn;
e. tracking points; and
f. any other instructions.
** Note: A pilot assigned a radar heading (including runway heading) must not compensate for wind effect.

Seems pretty clear what you should fly if asked to fly on "Runway Heading"

catocontrol, this is point - runway heading and straight ahead are not the same.

Asked the very question yesterday when cleared to climb staright ahead. He expected us to maintain the runway centreline.

Axis
 

- - - - - Runway Heading - - - - - Straight Ahead - - - - - Center Line - - - - -

..... No No No .....

ICAO says Runway AXIS.

In its A/D documentation ICAO refers to Runway AXIS when talking about the extended runway center line.

"Climb on runway axis _ _ _ " seems logical and easy to understand. maybe ICAO have somethin there.


Next candidate please :)

AXIS
 

I Have heard "Climb on Runway Axis" used many times.

Yep. Logical. Clear. Confusion free. Or not?

Then there is "Cross runway axis"

I'll go for this "Runway Axis" thing :)

Personally I would prefer the RAF requirement which is to fly runway track ie your track must be the same as runway QDM rather than runway heading + crosswind drift; unfortunately I'm lumbered with MATS Pt 1 which say 'straight ahead'.

ICAO Doc 4444 Phraseology says:

[AFTER DEPARTURE]TURN RIGHT (or LEFT) HEADING (three digits)(or CONTINUE RUNWAY HEADING)(or TRACK EXTENDED CENTRE LINE)TO (level or significant point)[(other instructions as required)]

Now you are meant to file differences to ICAO Doc 4444 in the Aeronautical Information Publication GEN 1.7. So, simply, if you have not got a filed difference to change the meaning of the phrase, then "continue runway heading" is a requirement to continue on runway HEADING.

I wonder if the air traffic controller has considered the obstacle environment and minimum climb gradient when giving this instruction? After all, the aerodrome licensing requirements assume you go off on runway TRACK, plus or minus a bit. A badly flown heading, plus crosswind could be interesting in some terrain rich environments with unusual wind patterns. Still, that would be the air traffic control service provider's area for their safety management system to consider.

Discount.

So. can we have a definitive answer then?

"Climb straight ahead" = maintain RUNWAY TRACK

"Maintain Runway Heading" = exactly that!!

Correct? :)

Yup.......that's it!

Well, that was easy.

NEXT! :ok:

Hate to be pedantic peeps...but not quite!!
In the UK anyway.....'climb straight ahead' or 'fly heading xxx'
You should never hear the phrase 'maintain/fly runway heading' - as was stated previously, it was removed from phraseology some years ago
:ok:

HDG
 

Hi everyone,

Just a simple question. How to apply any heading below MVA. Is a RWY HDG something different from other ones? Each acft when airborn is below MVA and we know that there is no hdgs below MVA.

How to apply this "After dep, turn right/left hdg xxx when we know that any acft must not turn on a hdg after dep untill they cross at least 396 ft above elev (Pans Ops).

I want to hear your opinions about this.

Thanks

Well, i've heard "maintain runway heading" all over the UK, so lots of guys obviously still use it..

ComJam

You know how you get gash pilots ..... ? ;)

Well, we get gash controllers as well :ok:

UK differences to phraesology are filed via CAP413, thus it's 'Continue straight ahead' (adjust for drift), or 'continue present heading', or 'fly heading XXX' (just fly the heading and let ATC worry about the drift).

Most UK airfields will also have noise restrictions so the ATCO will normally also take care of that too. (After XX DME, or passing XXXX feet, fly heading XXX).

PS Any UK controller telling you to 'maintain a heading' needs their balls cut off .... it's 'continue' in the Queens English ;)

What if it's a laydee controller?

Gash pilots?! I've never heard such nonsense :)

Not strictly true although I think you'll find that principal differences (i.e. variations from ICAO rather than differences filed by the UK in accordance with the terms of the Chicago Convention) are listed.

Fair point, actual filed differences are in the UK AIP GEN 1-7-37, repeated in the CAP413 as examples of phraseology.