New SID RT Procedures -12 March 09

[MrBenip]

Thank heavens the CAA have withdrawn this totally idiotic proposal. The only thing that that worries me is that the suspension appears to be temporary pending consultation, let's hope common sense really does prevail.

Any conditional clearance is open to ambiguous interpretation. It is up to us pilots to keep the pressure/protests up about this one,I am sure all pilots are 100% in agreement on this one and ATC must have sighed with relief too! No-one needs this increase in workload at a very busy phase of flight.

P.S. What ever happened to the proposal at LHR where once cleared for the approach you may descend with glide? Nothing ever seemed to have changed in practical terms with that one.

[Propellerhead]

But you have to remember, 411a is the reason the ignore list was created, so we do have that to thank him for. I've been ignoring him since 2000, that's nearly 10 years. I find my life a lot better, and my blood pressure a lot lower!

[Aries1]

Yes. There are other places where this procedure is in place e.g Kuala Lumpur. Also, once you are on heading, you are no more on a SID departure and hence height restrictions would not apply.

[A4]

I've heard that after a heated meeting on Jan 30th........ this proposal IS going ahead very shortly with a new FODCOM to be issued by the end of the month.

SO looks like we are all going to have to be very careful out there.

A4

[anotherthing]

A4

I hope your source is wrong. If not, it just goes to prove we really are entering a dangerous time, with aviation being dumbed down for the cerebrally challenged, with potentially dangerous repercussions

[IcePack]

Yes I believe the new rules will have dire repercussions. Even now if you have been given a height restriction and then given a direct to bypassing the restriction point, in theory the restriction is cancelled unless re-stated.

Yesterday "descend Fl 250 be level 10 before Avant" then "cleared direct to MID" (So restriction cancelled ?) BUT "London confirm no restriction now abeam Avant" "XXX restriction still applies be FL250 abeam Avant"

So if we still can not get this right it does not bode well for the new SID restrictions

[PAXboy]

Pax speaking so feel free to descend to the next message level.
Professionals will say my comment is irrelevant but I wish to show that EVERYONE is being treated with the same careless attitude.

In the UK, a particular line of socially important business was issued with a completely new set of official govt forms last October and told that the change over period would start 1st Jan and be for one month.

Two professional bodies protested that the new rules had flaws and that no serious consultation had taken place when it would affect the entire business, right across the country in some 275 major work places and thousands of small companies as well. They also pointed out that tons of preprinted forms would now be sent for pulping at a great cost to the UK citizen, due to lack of warning.

The Justice Department of the UK said, effectively: "Tough. Those are new rules, you WILL implement them or lay yourself open to prosecution."

So ... I know that the airline world gets a bum rap but, everybody is being treated with the same arrogance and disdain. NO ONE is listening to the people at the sharp end of a/c or ATC, nor any other business. This really is serious.

[selfin]

Posts 82 and 83 raise a serious question about which Contracting States have implemented the rule at PANS-ATM 6.3.2.4. The problem is not reduced by the fact that, by virtue of the status of PANS-ATM, there is no obligation for States to notify Differences.

Para. 5.3 of FODCOM 01/09: "Operators flying to destinations outside the UK should ensure that crews are aware of States whose SID/STAR ATC phraseology does not conform to ICAO Doc 4444."

Could someone perhaps post details of any research carried out by their operator to this effect?