In most cases the initial SID route is totally dependent on noise preferential routes. At LHR once above 4000ft you can be taken off the SID; trouble is, the point at which you in your shiny A320/737 reaches 4000ft and where the Virgin 340 going to LAX reaches 4000ft are quite far apart:D

Hmmm. Mine is the VS340! However, I know what you're getting at. That said, if the only common portion is the noise preferential route to 4000ft, what's the point of publishing anything beyond that?

The following was posted on a forum of the flight crew website on 02nd Mar by our ATC Liaison Pilot:
Still waiting for 'official' notification from The Management.

The 'tactical reasons' is nice

That means that I will be taking speeds off as and when I want and usually well before the FL100 mark. After all, I am the one who is using my license, and I will dictate my tactics on how to run my sector, not some non controlling management person.
:ok:

I believe the 'official notification' is pinned to the wall in the briefing room above the two PC's.
As for the 'I'm doing it tactically, all the time', I'm led to believe that will be a matter between you and your LCE.

I may have missed the point, but I think nothing has changed. The charts we use state that departing LHR we are limited to 250 kts until reachimg FL100. Up to now, at the discretipon of the controller, we have been allowed to accelerate beyond that restriction below FL100. From March, they will no longer be able to offer any deviation from the speed constraint. So technically nothing has changed and therefore there is nothing to inform the crews about, although it kwould be nice to know if only so you know not to even ask for high speed.

Trial
 

Just had a look at the last 3 months of information that our company churn out and i can not find any mention of this trial going ahead in March, but iam not supprised. TCX
:\

Based Manchester, UK - they have "speed profiling" on southerly SID's with 250kts to FL100 then 280-290kts to FL260
Manchester area then hand you off to London who want you up at FL310 50 before Midhurst - try doing that in a heavy A321!!
They then promptly cancel the Manchester speed restriction because they want you out of the way and would rather you make as high as you can get, regardless of speed, which makes a mockery of the speed profille in the first place.

These ideas are not made up for the fun of it. As I understand it, there was a lengthy discussion process with all the airlines involved in this speed trial, and they all said it would not affect their ability to make existing level restrictions. If you are finding that this is regularly not the case, then you should be feeding that back to your Flight Ops to progress with NATS Ops.

Ipaq

the 250kts on departure from Manchester are to prevent bunching of aircraft - it works in this case because it is a single airfield.

Whether the 250kts in the London TMA will prevent bunching from several different airports remains to be seen.

If you feel there is a safety implication with the Manchester procedure (and tha would include making you feel under pressure) then you should report it.

Most of the time the response from ATC on first contact inbound or outbound is No Speed! Now the company's silly rule is the overriding thing so it is 250/100 anytime anyway! Annoying or what?

Thanks UKATCO - already reported it via the NATS website link

I'm not sure whether it matters if the speed is 250kts(:ok: ) or,say, 280kts. The crucial thing is that the traffic is presented in the same manner in order to reduce bunching at the interfaces,be it to the next sector or unit. I recently watched an incident between 2 a/c on the same SID from the same airport,100 miles north of the departure field,similar types-and no,not an A340 involved, and they had an airmiss. Now if they had been flying the SID and a similar speed there is no way that the in-built airfield separation could have been eroded so much.

It seems that the airlines want a "pile'em high,sell 'em cheap" type of service nowadays and are interested purely in sector throughput and eradication of delays. This will require a major re-education amongst the ATC fraternity and will not be a painless experience. From an en-route point of view it is the bunching which causes the major problems so this has to be worth a try for at least a couple of months and people not giving it a fair chance will not help the validation of such a procedure.

250 below 10
 

250 is not a problem, for A340 ,but why not just use 280 below FL100 and everyone will be happy

ipAQ. The Manchester streaming trial has reduced delays considerably on the airfield at Manchester. It was a regular occurrence for a Minimum Departure Interval to be put on the departures to the south,often at short notice. This led to airfield delays often without notice. This trial has meant that the traffic is presented to Daventry sector in a known and expected manner leading to the lack of need for last minute restrictions and therefore a more regular and consistent service to the operators.