Narrative:

We were departing lax and were cleared via the loop 7. We anticipated a departure from the north side of the airport (24L) since our departure route was to the northeast. However; we thought it was possible that we could be assigned [runway] 25R since our gate was on the south side of the terminal. We set up runway 24L in the FMS but briefed both runways. I put the smo 160 degree radial in the fix page since the departure references that radial for both runways. We were assigned [runway] 25R when we called for taxi clearance. During the taxi; we selected the new runway and checked our performance numbers and flap setting. We also re-briefed the departure procedure noting that we were to fly runway heading (or 250) (I am filling out this entire report from memory) followed by a left turn to 235 crossing the smo 160 (again this is from memory). We were given line up and wait followed by the clearance 'fly heading 250; cleared for takeoff' which we did. The controller switched us to departure followed by normal turns to the south and east around long beach. I think that it would drastically reduce pilot errors if a runway assignment was provided with the pre departure clearance rather when the airplane is beginning to taxi. This frequently requires a change to the briefed taxi route; SID; performance; taxi time (reference single engine taxi versus two engine taxi; engine out procedure; etc.) the result is that many changes have to be made to the FMS; performance; flap setting and briefings while taxiing. This is an invitation to a runway incursion or non-compliance with a SID. Additionally; sids and stars are becoming increasingly complex. The constant 'fly the SID clearance except...' such as they do in slc is very detrimental to safety. Additionally; it becomes very cumbersome to make change to the FMS to change a speed but not an altitude or vice-versa. We recently received a multi-page memo regarding ATC nomenclature on sids and stars. It has become complex to the point that a pilot often needs to reference the memo in real time to be sure what the controller means. Alternatively; the controller can be questioned which I heard nearly every airplane do today while on the arrival to iah. The procedures are asking for deviations or worse. The event in lax was a very simple SID and I believe we did what we were cleared to do.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EMB170 Captain laments last minute changes to clearances; whether it is taxiing out or on arrival. Communication and FMC programing errors are more likely to occur when done in haste.

Narrative: We were departing LAX and were cleared via the LOOP 7. We anticipated a departure from the north side of the airport (24L) since our departure route was to the northeast. However; we thought it was possible that we could be assigned [Runway] 25R since our gate was on the south side of the terminal. We set up Runway 24L in the FMS but briefed both runways. I put the SMO 160 degree radial in the fix page since the departure references that radial for both runways. We were assigned [Runway] 25R when we called for taxi clearance. During the taxi; we selected the new runway and checked our performance numbers and flap setting. We also re-briefed the departure procedure noting that we were to fly runway heading (or 250) (I am filling out this entire report from memory) followed by a left turn to 235 crossing the SMO 160 (again this is from memory). We were given line up and wait followed by the clearance 'fly heading 250; cleared for takeoff' which we did. The Controller switched us to Departure followed by normal turns to the south and east around Long Beach. I think that it would drastically reduce pilot errors if a runway assignment was provided with the PDC rather when the airplane is beginning to taxi. This frequently requires a change to the briefed taxi route; SID; performance; taxi time (reference single engine taxi versus two engine taxi; engine out procedure; etc.) The result is that many changes have to be made to the FMS; performance; flap setting and briefings while taxiing. This is an invitation to a runway incursion or non-compliance with a SID. Additionally; SIDs and STARs are becoming increasingly complex. The constant 'fly the SID clearance except...' such as they do in SLC is very detrimental to safety. Additionally; it becomes very cumbersome to make change to the FMS to change a speed but not an altitude or vice-versa. We recently received a multi-page memo regarding ATC nomenclature on SIDs and STARs. It has become complex to the point that a pilot often needs to reference the memo in real time to be sure what the controller means. Alternatively; the controller can be questioned which I heard nearly every airplane do today while on the arrival to IAH. The procedures are asking for deviations or worse. The event in LAX was a very simple SID and I believe we did what we were cleared to do.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.