Craig Moulton Posted June 8, 2005 at 03:37 PM Posted June 8, 2005 at 03:37 PM So what is the deal with all the very nice RNAV procedures out of DFW? I tried to file one for a flight to Boston and was given the old vector departure instead. Can someone from ZFW explain to me what is going on with these? It seems to me that they would be the prefered departures, which would relieve the load on ATC. Just curious. Fly Safe! Have Fun! Craig Moulton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom van der elst Posted June 8, 2005 at 11:33 PM Posted June 8, 2005 at 11:33 PM maybe the controller was a control-freak i think if it is busy controllers rather have folks on vectors as somebody might cause havoc otherwise (imagine me flying there...controller said:"UPS113 turn left"....and mastermind me turned right.... i'm a real good pilot,aren't i ) cheers Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Moulton Posted June 10, 2005 at 03:10 PM Author Posted June 10, 2005 at 03:10 PM Come on ZFW...your silence is hurting my ears. Fly Safe! Have Fun! Craig Moulton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Lee 855721 Posted June 10, 2005 at 05:47 PM Posted June 10, 2005 at 05:47 PM I'm not in ZFW but I know when ATL got their new RNAV procdures they didn't come fully online for at least two months. Maybe there is some reason for a delay here too? Mark Lee Senior Controller VATeir - Irish Region Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Wilcox 882814 Posted June 13, 2005 at 01:56 PM Posted June 13, 2005 at 01:56 PM Mark could be right. The real world might be delaying it for some reason like they did at ATL. However I don't know; I would also like to hear what someone from ZFW has to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Moulton Posted June 13, 2005 at 02:16 PM Author Posted June 13, 2005 at 02:16 PM I've heard that Real World Pilots are using these procedures. Still waiting on ZFW. Hello? Fly Safe! Have Fun! Craig Moulton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiel McGowan 813486 Posted June 13, 2005 at 03:05 PM Posted June 13, 2005 at 03:05 PM Well real world it looks like they started these procedures on November 2nd. Heres the release they issued: Updated November 1, 2004 Dallas Ft Worth International Airport (DFW) will implement the use of RNAV SID's on November 2, 2004 at 1100 UTC. The RNAV SID's are for turbojet aircraft only that file as slant E, F G R equipped. Aircraft departing on Runways 35L/C on the NOBLY 1, TRISS 1, SOLDO 1, CLARE 1, DARTZ 1, ARDIA 1, JASPA 1, NELYN 1 SIDs will be [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned a 360 degree heading by the tower controller. Aircraft departing on Runways 36L/R on the NOBLY 1, TRISS 1, SOLDO 1, CLARE 1 SID's will be [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned a 010 degree heading by the tower controller. When the tower controller does [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ign an initial departure heading, the pilot is expected to continue on the [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned heading and not fly the RNAV procedure. The DFW departure controller will vector the aircraft and subsequently clear the aircraft to join the RNAV SID. In most cases, this will involve receiving a clearance direct to a waypoint that is at least 10 miles or more ahead of the position of the aircraft. A NOTAM will be issued that cancels the crossing restrictions of 4300' at MECHL and 7300' at MAVVS. NBAA will make the NOTAM available on its web site as soon as a final draft is released. As is the case with current conventional procedures, if a pilot discovers that a crossing restriction cannot be made, advise ATC as soon as possible. Pilots should advise Ground Control of their departure SID on initial contact. Turbojet aircraft that do not file slant E, F, G, R will be [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned one of the current SID's (DALL7, JPOOL9, TEX7, WORTH3) For more information, contact Greg Juro, DFW Tower/TRACON Traffic Management at (972) 615-2550 or Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Hjemvick 811983 Posted June 13, 2005 at 11:44 PM Posted June 13, 2005 at 11:44 PM Glad you did this CM, I would have been hung at the neck if I brought this one up. CMEL.CSEL.IA.AGI.CFI.CFII.MEI.CRJ2.FO.Furloughed Part of the Acey 80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Harris 877712 Posted June 14, 2005 at 02:04 AM Posted June 14, 2005 at 02:04 AM I've heard that Real World Pilots are using these procedures. Still waiting on ZFW. Hello? Do they have their own forums?? Maybe post there if you need an urgent answer Jason Harris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Moulton Posted June 14, 2005 at 03:12 AM Author Posted June 14, 2005 at 03:12 AM I've looked, but see nothing for a run of the mill person looking over their site. Perhaps in the controller section, but one has to log in for that. I refuse to accept that no one from ZFW reads these forums. Are you guys hiding or what? Fly Safe! Have Fun! Craig Moulton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Sisson 868225 Posted June 17, 2005 at 03:43 AM Posted June 17, 2005 at 03:43 AM Sorry for the delay, not many ZFW people watch this forum I take it. I am the events coordinator at ZFW. We have discussed them in the forum. It seems some controllers didn't even know what they were. I agree we should be using them by now, and I will make sure a "superior" see's this post and we will have everyone trained in the new ways very shortly... thx for your concern. God Bless <>< Matthew Sisson ><> ZFW ARTCC's Event Coordinator DVA MD-88 Chief Pilot-DAL1194 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neal Glassett 843825 Posted June 17, 2005 at 03:46 PM Posted June 17, 2005 at 03:46 PM Craig, I guess the USA section is so far down in the forum list I never visit. As for me and the RNAV procedures, I don't like them. Am I forced to accept them? Yes. Why don't I like them? Because I still get pilots trying to fly the Coyote procedure to LAX when it's really only for props. And don't get me started on the STARs. It's hard to trust pilots is what I'm saying. I can give an RNAV, but are they really going to fly it correctly? Have they even read the charts?? If people would READ charts, they'd start seeing that they may be filing the wrong one. Heck, RNAVs make my job easy - until the pilot screws it up and doesn't know what the heck he is doing. If it were me that had been controlling, and I knew it were you, knowing that you are a good pilot, you would've had it from me no problem. I'm not a good person dealing with change so I really don't like having about 30 departure options from DFW now. I find it annoying. But I'll do my best to try to adapt. Neal Gl[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ett ZFW Sr. Controller Neal Gl[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ett UNI725 www.uniair.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Smith Posted June 17, 2005 at 07:16 PM Posted June 17, 2005 at 07:16 PM Neal, I'd give 'em the RNAV departure, if the equipment type allows. At the first sign they've hosed the departure, send them to the transition (or a vector in whatever direction you see fit, allowing for traffic), and let them know politely that they didn't stick to their clearance correctly. Tell them where to get the chart if they haven't got it already. _Most_ pilots (certainly not all) will not make the same mistake twice. That said, there are pilots who make the same mistake 17 times in a row (and counting), but the majority of pilots will respond to your corrections. Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Clemmons 810552 Posted June 17, 2005 at 09:19 PM Posted June 17, 2005 at 09:19 PM Guys, our apologies for the RNAV departures. Simple fact is they hadnt been included in our sector file until this week. This prevented them from showing up in the SID list, and is probably why your're still receiving vector/pilot nav departures. I have posted a beta v6 of our sector file with numerous changes, most predominant are the additions of the RNAV DPs. So I would expect you to see more and more of the RNAVs available. Again, and hopefully you picked up on it, currently the file is in beta but generally available for controllers. I would hope more and more of our controllers will pick it up soon and begin using it and as a result should allow more and more use of the RNAV DPs. Please bear with us as we get em all up to date . Joe Clemmons C3 ZFW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvin Thompson 810254 Posted June 26, 2005 at 05:05 PM Posted June 26, 2005 at 05:05 PM AH HA! Now I know why I had so much trouble trying to get out of Dallas a week or so ago. Nothing ATC said made any sense. I was expecting one thing and received another. The guys at DFW do a great job of making the pilot look bad, I'll be back for more next week. All jokes aside, there a pretty good bunch of guys who do a great job there. Marv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Trott Posted June 27, 2005 at 04:26 PM Posted June 27, 2005 at 04:26 PM Also, be aware that even if you file for an RNAV departure in the real world you MIGHT still get re-routed to a vector departure. I was listening to Addison Clearance yesterday and aircraft that normally got one of the new RNAV departures were being given the Vector departures because of flow control going on due to turbulence and other issues in ZFW and other downstream centers. Because of the number of deviations being needed, it was impractical to allow the RNAV departures since those are Pilot Nav instead of Controller Nav, so the controller can't do as much with RNAV departures as they can with the vector departures. I heard 3 aircraft going to Las Vegas get 3 different routings because of what was going on up above. I know we at ZFW will be getting the RNAV departures going, but never limit yourself so much that you can't accept re-routing or a different DP (or even a different STAR) in case there is the need by the controller to send you via a different route to help his flows. Chris Trott Westwind Airlines - http://www.flywestwind.org Houston, Texas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Moulton Posted June 27, 2005 at 05:13 PM Author Posted June 27, 2005 at 05:13 PM Except, that on VATSIM, on a typical day, none of those REAL WORLD reasons would interfere with what goes on here. On the day in question, there was only a Tower controller, and NO other traffic within 100 miles. Why would I be given a vector departure when there is no one to vector me? I am lucky enough to be able to carry a full set of charts, to include HI/LO Charts, and enjoy fiddling (see that Chanse? ) with the FMC so I am very flexible when it comes to getting a re-route. Fly Safe! Have Fun! Craig Moulton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Trott Posted June 27, 2005 at 09:48 PM Posted June 27, 2005 at 09:48 PM You mean you only like fiddling and not fondling like Chanse? Also Craig, I was more addressing Marvin in my statement about being prepared for a re-route and not being so set in your planning that getting a re-route is a problem. Chris Trott Westwind Airlines - http://www.flywestwind.org Houston, Texas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Elchitz 810151 Posted June 27, 2005 at 10:10 PM Posted June 27, 2005 at 10:10 PM While I can understand the frustration pilots face when filing an RNAV deparature and being put on vectors, I must communicate the fact that I OFTEN do this while plugged in as Vegas approach. The RNAV departures have in the past muddled my "shortcuts" that I often give pilots. In any event, if I'm swamped - no one is getting any shortcuts and I embrace the RNAVs. If I'm simply really busy - chances are I'm taking you off the RNAV departure/arrival and in 9 cases out of 10 you are going to be the recipient of an operational advantage as a result. Ian Elchitz Just a guy without any fancy titles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Moulton Posted June 27, 2005 at 10:58 PM Author Posted June 27, 2005 at 10:58 PM I agree, and have no problem with getting short cuts. My major complaint, and I don't recall if I made this point with my original post, but I was filed for an RNAV departure, there was ONLY a tower controller, no other traffic within 100 miles. I was cleared for a vector departure, despite the fact that there would be no controller available to VECTOR me on course. Of course it was not a major chore to turn dct XYZ and plod along on my merry way, but it just seemed absurd (still does) at the time. Fly Safe! Have Fun! Craig Moulton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neal Glassett 843825 Posted June 27, 2005 at 11:06 PM Posted June 27, 2005 at 11:06 PM Craig, we've been addressing it at the ARTCC with training so it shouldn't happen again (without good reason). If it does, let us know. Neal Gl[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ett ZFW Sr. Controller Neal Gl[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ett UNI725 www.uniair.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owen Catherwood 903683 Posted June 28, 2005 at 02:41 AM Posted June 28, 2005 at 02:41 AM and now that we've all gotten a word in on RNAV, now it's time for HAR/NRR Look out for a pilot by the callsign of PDX2542 filing FL390 KSEA - KABQ SUMMA6.SUMMA KU72K KD48Q TANER.CURLY2 KZSE C3/Facilities Administrator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts