Narrative:

New departure SID out of mht. Procedure has built in climb parameters (COTEE1) but procedure has generated nothing but confusion with pilots and controllers. Procedure is unsafe because advanced navigation aircraft are cleared via 1 procedure that has shorter distance -- if aircraft in front (eg; CRJ1) is not advanced RNAV but aircraft in back is (eg; B733) then the second aircraft turns inside of #1 aircraft and potential loss of separation. SID is very very confusing to both controllers and pilots (as pilot complained to me on frequency this am 'whoever designed this doesn't know anything about flying an airplane'). Very very confusing procedure and at briefings to area controllers more questions were asked than were answered. Procedure should be canceled -- no benefit to users or controllers.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZBW CTLR VOICED CONCERN REGARDING NEW RNAV SID OFF MHT; INDICATING THE NEW PROC IS CAUSING CONFUSION WITH BOTH CTLRS AND PLTS.

Narrative: NEW DEP SID OUT OF MHT. PROC HAS BUILT IN CLB PARAMETERS (COTEE1) BUT PROC HAS GENERATED NOTHING BUT CONFUSION WITH PLTS AND CTLRS. PROC IS UNSAFE BECAUSE ADVANCED NAV ACFT ARE CLRED VIA 1 PROC THAT HAS SHORTER DISTANCE -- IF ACFT IN FRONT (EG; CRJ1) IS NOT ADVANCED RNAV BUT ACFT IN BACK IS (EG; B733) THEN THE SECOND ACFT TURNS INSIDE OF #1 ACFT AND POTENTIAL LOSS OF SEPARATION. SID IS VERY VERY CONFUSING TO BOTH CTLRS AND PLTS (AS PLT COMPLAINED TO ME ON FREQ THIS AM 'WHOEVER DESIGNED THIS DOESN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT FLYING AN AIRPLANE'). VERY VERY CONFUSING PROC AND AT BRIEFINGS TO AREA CTLRS MORE QUESTIONS WERE ASKED THAN WERE ANSWERED. PROC SHOULD BE CANCELED -- NO BENEFIT TO USERS OR CTLRS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.