|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||1201 To 1800|
|Locale Reference||airport : hpn|
|Altitude||msl bound lower : 3500|
msl bound upper : 3500
|Controlling Facilities||tracon : n90|
|Operator||common carrier : air taxi|
|Make Model Name||Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Recip Eng|
|Flight Phase||climbout : intermediate altitude|
|Route In Use||departure sid : sid|
enroute : on vectors
|Affiliation||company : air taxi|
|Function||flight crew : single pilot|
|Qualification||pilot : atp|
pilot : cfi
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 100|
flight time total : 4000
flight time type : 600
|Function||controller : departure|
|Qualification||controller : radar|
|Anomaly||non adherence : clearance|
other spatial deviation
|Independent Detector||other controllera|
|Resolutory Action||controller : issued new clearance|
|Primary Problem||Flight Crew Human Performance|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
|ATC Facility||procedure or policy : unspecified|
Departing westchester county via the westchester 8 departure, I was assigned 7000' upon initial contact with departure control. No mention was made of the published 320 degree heading I was on. The takeoff portion of the SID (runway 16) states 'turn right to a 320 degree heading, maintain 3000' thence.' after passing through 3000' I began a further right turn to carmel VOR (cmk) having been cleared 'as filed,' and that being my flight planned route. I was immediately reprimanded by ATC and returned to a newly assigned heading of 340 degrees. After being handed off to the second controller I began to fly my flight planned route after crossing cmk VOR. When queried by that controller, he came to realize that I had been cleared 'as filed, ' when in fact ATC wanted me on an entirely different routing. He reclred me and I complied, however all of this resulted in much maneuvering. Having been handed off to the third controller (bradley approach), he queried my transponder code and then assigned an entirely different code. In reviewing all of this after the flight I have come to the following conclusions. A) the FAA is issuing more and more SID charts, seemingly one for every airport with a control tower in the northeast. I feel that a SID imposes a heavy workload on the flight crew, but particularly on the single pilot. Having reviewed the westchester 8 departure I find that I did not see the small departure instruction at the very bottom of the page. I attempted to fly what I thought was the proper procedure to my flight planned fix when in fact the printed procedure was for radar vectors. This was never verbalized, it was only assumed I had read and comprehended it. This is a very busy chart and the opportunity for misreading or misinterpreting the chart is great. I feel that the written directions on the SID should be backed up by verbal instructions, i.e., 'maintain 320 degrees.' the length of time spent on this is minimal, but the benefit is maximal in keeping order within the system. B) it seems that at times there is great difficulty in local controllers getting clrncs from en route control. The result is 'cleared as filed,' just to get the aircraft going. The end result is at best a change in clearance en route at worst, lost communications and a flight proceeding along a route ATC is not expecting. My instance was in the middle since radio communications were maintained throughout, however if communications had failed, it really seemed that ATC was not expecting me to be following my flight planned route. I feel that local controllers should be given a much better clearance to give to the pilot prior to departure so that there are fewer errors. C) I think that on 'busy' charts like the westchester 8 departure SID the FAA should issue separate charts for each runway, thereby making more room on the chart for the actual depiction, rather than trying to see how much information can be put on one chart and then see if the pilot can find all the information he needs for his particular runway/route of flight.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: SMT BEGAN TO FLY 'FLT PLANNED ROUTE' RATHER THAN THE VECTOR IN THE SID.
Narrative: DEPARTING WESTCHESTER COUNTY VIA THE WESTCHESTER 8 DEP, I WAS ASSIGNED 7000' UPON INITIAL CONTACT WITH DEP CTL. NO MENTION WAS MADE OF THE PUBLISHED 320 DEG HDG I WAS ON. THE TKOF PORTION OF THE SID (RWY 16) STATES 'TURN RIGHT TO A 320 DEG HDG, MAINTAIN 3000' THENCE.' AFTER PASSING THROUGH 3000' I BEGAN A FURTHER RIGHT TURN TO CARMEL VOR (CMK) HAVING BEEN CLRED 'AS FILED,' AND THAT BEING MY FLT PLANNED ROUTE. I WAS IMMEDIATELY REPRIMANDED BY ATC AND RETURNED TO A NEWLY ASSIGNED HDG OF 340 DEGS. AFTER BEING HANDED OFF TO THE SECOND CTLR I BEGAN TO FLY MY FLT PLANNED ROUTE AFTER XING CMK VOR. WHEN QUERIED BY THAT CTLR, HE CAME TO REALIZE THAT I HAD BEEN CLRED 'AS FILED, ' WHEN IN FACT ATC WANTED ME ON AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ROUTING. HE RECLRED ME AND I COMPLIED, HOWEVER ALL OF THIS RESULTED IN MUCH MANEUVERING. HAVING BEEN HANDED OFF TO THE THIRD CTLR (BRADLEY APCH), HE QUERIED MY TRANSPONDER CODE AND THEN ASSIGNED AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT CODE. IN REVIEWING ALL OF THIS AFTER THE FLT I HAVE COME TO THE FOLLOWING CONCLUSIONS. A) THE FAA IS ISSUING MORE AND MORE SID CHARTS, SEEMINGLY ONE FOR EVERY ARPT WITH A CTL TWR IN THE NE. I FEEL THAT A SID IMPOSES A HEAVY WORKLOAD ON THE FLT CREW, BUT PARTICULARLY ON THE SINGLE PLT. HAVING REVIEWED THE WESTCHESTER 8 DEP I FIND THAT I DID NOT SEE THE SMALL DEP INSTRUCTION AT THE VERY BOTTOM OF THE PAGE. I ATTEMPTED TO FLY WHAT I THOUGHT WAS THE PROPER PROC TO MY FLT PLANNED FIX WHEN IN FACT THE PRINTED PROC WAS FOR RADAR VECTORS. THIS WAS NEVER VERBALIZED, IT WAS ONLY ASSUMED I HAD READ AND COMPREHENDED IT. THIS IS A VERY BUSY CHART AND THE OPPORTUNITY FOR MISREADING OR MISINTERPRETING THE CHART IS GREAT. I FEEL THAT THE WRITTEN DIRECTIONS ON THE SID SHOULD BE BACKED UP BY VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS, I.E., 'MAINTAIN 320 DEGS.' THE LENGTH OF TIME SPENT ON THIS IS MINIMAL, BUT THE BENEFIT IS MAXIMAL IN KEEPING ORDER WITHIN THE SYS. B) IT SEEMS THAT AT TIMES THERE IS GREAT DIFFICULTY IN LCL CTLRS GETTING CLRNCS FROM ENRTE CTL. THE RESULT IS 'CLRED AS FILED,' JUST TO GET THE ACFT GOING. THE END RESULT IS AT BEST A CHANGE IN CLRNC ENRTE AT WORST, LOST COMS AND A FLT PROCEEDING ALONG A ROUTE ATC IS NOT EXPECTING. MY INSTANCE WAS IN THE MIDDLE SINCE RADIO COMS WERE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT, HOWEVER IF COMS HAD FAILED, IT REALLY SEEMED THAT ATC WAS NOT EXPECTING ME TO BE FOLLOWING MY FLT PLANNED ROUTE. I FEEL THAT LCL CTLRS SHOULD BE GIVEN A MUCH BETTER CLRNC TO GIVE TO THE PLT PRIOR TO DEP SO THAT THERE ARE FEWER ERRORS. C) I THINK THAT ON 'BUSY' CHARTS LIKE THE WESTCHESTER 8 DEP SID THE FAA SHOULD ISSUE SEPARATE CHARTS FOR EACH RWY, THEREBY MAKING MORE ROOM ON THE CHART FOR THE ACTUAL DEPICTION, RATHER THAN TRYING TO SEE HOW MUCH INFO CAN BE PUT ON ONE CHART AND THEN SEE IF THE PLT CAN FIND ALL THE INFO HE NEEDS FOR HIS PARTICULAR RWY/RTE OF FLT.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.