Cleared to takeoff, Proceed on course.

Justin M

Justin M

Line Up and Wait
PoA Supporter
Joined
Oct 23, 2016
Messages
877
Display Name
Display name:
JM
Hi,

Recently at my class D aerodrome, I was taking off on runway 23, but then received a puzzled question from the Tower when I turned left (following the noise abatement procedures) instead of right which would have been the more direct route to my destination.

Not knowing any local procedures, what turn would you have made?

Given the implied question, would you answer the tower or treat it as rhetorical?

Here are some details:

* I announced Cessna 1234 holding short 23 at Alpha ready to depart to the north.
* I had been given instruction: Runway 23, Cleared for takeoff, proceed on course.
* Runway 23 is left traffic
* The noise abatement sign at the start of the runway says to turn left heading 220 at 500 feet.
* The question was roughly phrased "It was unusual that you made a left turn to the North, proceed on course."
* Usually they specify right or left turn. I have not yet discerned why they choose left or right.
 
If you're staying in the pattern, than I'd follow the correct direction of traffic. Given the 'proceed on course' instruction would just be to turn onto your course heading as soon as practicable after takeoff. There's no need to fly a pattern and then depart toward your destination. They're giving you an instruction to just do so once airborne.
 
I've had some issues with "proceed on course" as well. KFRG I took off southbound and got the "cleared for takeoff, proceed on course". After turning "on course", controlled yelled at me (she is known to yell there...) that I turned towards oncoming traffic, fly heading x immediately, etc.
I don't like that instruction.
 
Even though controlled tower runways still have L or R patterns, the controller instructions can and do trump that default pattern.

Your "course" to the destination was a departure the right...he instructed you to proceeded on course, you should have turned right...or queried him if unsure as to what he was expecting.
 
Tower is at some fault here. "On course" gets abused sometimes. They were making an assumption that your planned 'course' was to fly direct to your destination. You could have been planning to go fly over your your girlfriends house, wag your wings and then head up yonder and look at something and then turn towards your destination. "On course" is a phraseology that is used in certain IFR departure procedures at non towered airports. It's also used when doing Radar Approaches. It is not in the "bag of phraseolgies" for "Airport Traffic Control."
 
Last edited:
Personally, if ATC would have just said "cleared for takeoff" i would have followed the noise abatement procedure until hearing the "proceed on course". But in my opinion, the "proceed on course" is a clearance to deviate from it and to do exactly that, proceed on course.

Now, what exactly does "proceed on course" mean? I've been yelled at in the past for intercepting my course from the airport to the first fix. Some controllers think that phrase means you're supposed to proceed direct to the first fix in your clearance. I've also heard "Proceed direct on course", and I've proceeded direct to the first fix and been yelled at in the past for doing just that.

I really think they should come up with a different phrase for it as I've experienced different controllers mean different things
 
I would have made the turn to the right on my course heading. Taking into consideration of traffic or traffic flow into the pattern. I might have climbed to a higher altitude before making the turn. I will say that noise abatement procedures are very rarely followed at my airport. I a lot of airports just have them to appease the nimby's and very rare enforce them.
 
Cleared for take off on course, I'll take off, get to 500' or so and turn the shortest direction to a on course heading.
 
JC150 said:
Personally, if ATC would have just said "cleared for takeoff" i would have followed the noise abatement procedure until hearing the "proceed on course". But in my opinion, the "proceed on course" is a clearance to deviate from it and to do exactly that, proceed on course.

Now, what exactly does "proceed on course" mean? I've been yelled at in the past for intercepting my course from the airport to the first fix. Some controllers think that phrase means you're supposed to proceed direct to the first fix in your clearance. I've also heard "Proceed direct on course", and I've proceeded direct to the first fix and been yelled at in the past for doing just that.

I really think they should come up with a different phrase for it as I've experienced different controllers mean different things
Click to expand...
"THEY" already have it covered. The only thing missing is the controllers complying with it. This seems to be happening a lot. I would recommend filing ASRS reports when it does
 
luvflyin said:
Tower is at some fault here. "On course" gets abused sometimes. They were making an assumption that your planned 'course' was to fly direct to your destination. You could have been planning to go fly over your your girlfriends house, wag your wings and then head up yonder and look at something and then turn towards your destination. "On course" is a phraseology that is used in certain IFR departure procedures at non towered airports. It's also used when doing Radar Approaches. It is not in the "bag of phraseolgies" for "Airport Traffic Control."
Click to expand...
In your example you shouldn't have told them your destination, but your first waypoint. Your destination information doesn't help the departure tower one bit in that scenario.
 
Out of KILG Class D

VFR departure procedure, for me, request taxi clearance with ATIS info from wherever I am on the field, advise VFR to destination, ready to taxi. At the hold short after run up and call to the tower I'll typically get cleared to take off runway xx, proceed on course, eventually the freq change approved leaving their airspace.

I take 'proceed on course' as the direct route to your destination.
 
Salty said:
In your example you shouldn't have told them your destination, but your first waypoint. Your destination information doesn't help the departure tower one bit in that scenario.
Click to expand...
Many Class D towers request direction of flight. On a short flight, it might be the destination. On a longer one not even close to a straight line, it might be a first waypoint.

It doesn’t sound like either contributed to @Justin M's question about whether to follow the noise abatement procedure going in a different direction when instructed to proceed on course on departure.

Keep in mind people argue about what "proceed on course" means even in the IFR context. For a VFR noise abatement procedure, I’d be expecting ATC to be expecting me to follow the published procedure. But I know from experience it’s better to make those kinds of things explicit. Direction of flight becomes, "follow noise abatement, then..."
 
"N1234 ready for takeoff runway 27 with Alpha, on course heading 360".

"N1234, cleared for takeoff runway 27, cleared on course."

Now both you and the controller know what is about to happen. Yes it is a few more words, and takes more air time to do it that way. But isn't the clarity worth it?

-Skip
 
Justin M said:
Hi,

Recently at my class D aerodrome, I was taking off on runway 23, but then received a puzzled question from the Tower when I turned left (following the noise abatement procedures) instead of right which would have been the more direct route to my destination.

Not knowing any local procedures, what turn would you have made?

Given the implied question, would you answer the tower or treat it as rhetorical?

Here are some details:

* I announced Cessna 1234 holding short 23 at Alpha ready to depart to the north.
* I had been given instruction: Runway 23, Cleared for takeoff, proceed on course.
* Runway 23 is left traffic
* The noise abatement sign at the start of the runway says to turn left heading 220 at 500 feet.
* The question was roughly phrased "It was unusual that you made a left turn to the North, proceed on course."
* Usually they specify right or left turn. I have not yet discerned why they choose left or right.
Click to expand...

What is the complete noise abatement procedure?
 
luvflyin said:
Tower is at some fault here. "On course" gets abused sometimes. They were making an assumption that your planned 'course' was to fly direct to your destination. You could have been planning to go fly over your your girlfriends house, wag your wings and then head up yonder and look at something and then turn towards your destination. "On course" is a phraseology that is used in certain IFR departure procedures at non towered airports. It's also used when doing Radar Approaches. It is not in the "bag of phraseolgies" for "Airport Traffic Control."
Click to expand...

The tower's assumption that the instruction "proceed on course" would result in a turn to the north was probably based on the pilot's statement, "Cessna 1234 holding short 23 at Alpha ready to depart to the north." I think that a reasonable assumption.
 
JC150 said:
Personally, if ATC would have just said "cleared for takeoff" i would have followed the noise abatement procedure until hearing the "proceed on course". But in my opinion, the "proceed on course" is a clearance to deviate from it and to do exactly that, proceed on course.

Now, what exactly does "proceed on course" mean? I've been yelled at in the past for intercepting my course from the airport to the first fix. Some controllers think that phrase means you're supposed to proceed direct to the first fix in your clearance. I've also heard "Proceed direct on course", and I've proceeded direct to the first fix and been yelled at in the past for doing just that.

I really think they should come up with a different phrase for it as I've experienced different controllers mean different things
Click to expand...

"Proceed on course" as phraseology appears just once in the ATC order, it's under intercept procedures. It doesn't appear at all in the AIM.

As a tower controller, I would treat an applicable noise abatement procedure the same as an IFR departure procedure, it's the pilot's prerogative. The ATC order and the AIM contain language that says an unassigned departure procedure is the pilot's prerogative, neither contains similar language for noise abatement procedures.
 
mtuomi said:
I've had some issues with "proceed on course" as well. KFRG I took off southbound and got the "cleared for takeoff, proceed on course". After turning "on course", controlled yelled at me (she is known to yell there...) that I turned towards oncoming traffic, fly heading x immediately, etc.
I don't like that instruction.
Click to expand...
There are local procedures like not turning until the parkway, wait until the expressway to turn on course, etc. I think they are posted on the FRG website. Not positive though.
 
roncachamp said:
The tower's assumption that the instruction "proceed on course" would result in a turn to the north was probably based on the pilot's statement, "Cessna 1234 holding short 23 at Alpha ready to depart to the north." I think that a reasonable assumption.
Click to expand...
I agree.
 
roncachamp said:
"Proceed on course" as phraseology appears just once in the ATC order, it's under intercept procedures. It doesn't appear at all in the AIM.

As a tower controller, I would treat an applicable noise abatement procedure the same as an IFR departure procedure, it's the pilot's prerogative. The ATC order and the AIM contain language that says an unassigned departure procedure is the pilot's prerogative, neither contains similar language for noise abatement procedures.
Click to expand...
Intercept procedures ?????
 
Having worked a few towers, I would expect the pilot to proceed directly on course if that's what I issued. If pilot is unsure, query the controller, "do you want me to fly the noise abatement procedure first", something along those lines. Pilots who are unsure of what a controller means should speak up.

Unfortunately controllers often do and mean different things at different facilities, even within the same facility. If you're unsure what the controller means, ask. If they get testy, so what. You can always complain to the tower chief if a controller is out of line. Make sure you're right though, tapes don't lie.
 
Salty said:
In your example you shouldn't have told them your destination, but your first waypoint. Your destination information doesn't help the departure tower one bit in that scenario.
Click to expand...
See post 17 and 18. @Justin M did say "ready to depart north" in the OP. I'm the one who made the assumptions that it was based on 'destination airport.' My bad.
 
luvflyin said:
Intercept procedures ?????
Click to expand...

Yes, from paragraph 9−2−10. WASHINGTON, DC, SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA (DC SFRA)/ATC SECURITY SERVICES:

a. When the assigned code is observed, advise the
aircraft to proceed on course/as requested but to
remain outside of Class B, C, and/or D airspace as
appropriate.

PHRASEOLOGY−
(ACID) TRANSPONDER OBSERVED PROCEED ON
COURSE/AS REQUESTED; REMAIN OUTSIDE (class)
AIRSPACE.

 
mscard88 said:
Having worked a few towers, I would expect the pilot to proceed directly on course if that's what I issued. If pilot is unsure, query the controller, "do you want me to fly the noise abatement procedure first", something along those lines. Pilots who are unsure of what a controller means should speak up.

Unfortunately controllers often do and mean different things at different facilities, even within the same facility. If you're unsure what the controller means, ask. If they get testy, so what. You can always complain to the tower chief if a controller is out of line. Make sure you're right though, tapes don't lie.
Click to expand...
Yeah. Only thing I could add to that is you might request the Noise Abatement Procedure or even say I'll be doing it rather than asking them if they want you to do it. Being a good neighbor and not pizzin off the neighbors can be a good thing. Especially if it's a neighborhood with lots of money and can exert some influence. Kinda nice not to rattle the peons windows to.
 
luvflyin said:
Yeah. Only thing I could add to that is you might request the Noise Abatement Procedure or even say I'll be doing it rather than asking them if they want you to do it. Being a good neighbor and not pizzin off the neighbors can be a good thing. Especially if it's a neighborhood with lots of money and can exert some influence. Kinda nice not to rattle the peons windows to.
Click to expand...

Meh

"Tell" ATC?? Only if you've declared a emergency and/or have 7700/7500 in the box

"Ask" ATC, that's more inline with the mentioned noise abatement.


I don't care who the neghibors are.
 
roncachamp said:
Yes, from paragraph 9−2−10. WASHINGTON, DC, SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA (DC SFRA)/ATC SECURITY SERVICES:

a. When the assigned code is observed, advise the
aircraft to proceed on course/as requested but to
remain outside of Class B, C, and/or D airspace as
appropriate.

PHRASEOLOGY−
(ACID) TRANSPONDER OBSERVED PROCEED ON
COURSE/AS REQUESTED; REMAIN OUTSIDE (class)
AIRSPACE.
Click to expand...
Ah. "before proceeding on course" also is in 4-3-2 c. 4. This is the one that causes the arguments @midlifeflyer mentioned in post #12
 
luvflyin said:
Yeah. Only thing I could add to that is you might request the Noise Abatement Procedure or even say I'll be doing it rather than asking them if they want you to do it. Being a good neighbor and not pizzin off the neighbors can be a good thing. Especially if it's a neighborhood with lots of money and can exert some influence. Kinda nice not to rattle the peons windows to.
Click to expand...

True, that's a good point, and I said that. IF there is a procedure like noise abatement in this case and it's determined by airport management that it must be complied with all the time, then tower should issue the procedure and then additional instructions.

"comply with noise abatement procedure then proceed on course"

When I was at Quonset Point tower during the controller strike we could not work the ANG C-130s based there in the traffic pattern due to adjacent neighborhoods. We were permitted to work GA and the Army Guard Hueys based there in the pattern though.
 
James331 said:
I don't care who the neghibors are.
Click to expand...


What do you mean by that James? Are you saying if there's a noise procedure at an airport, controlled or uncontrolled, you'd choose to ignore it?
 
mscard88 said:
True, that's a good point, and I said that. IF there is a procedure like noise abatement in this case and it's determined by airport management that it must be complied with all the time, then tower should issue the procedure and then additional instructions.

"comply with noise abatement procedure then proceed on course"

When I was at Quonset Point tower during the controller strike we could not work the ANG C-130s based there in the traffic pattern due to adjacent neighborhoods. We were permitted to work GA and the Army Guard Hueys based there in the pattern though.
Click to expand...
Yeah. The point I was getting at was to make it known that you want to do it. Just asking them if they 'want' you to do it doesn't necessarily accomplish anything. They maybe could give a ratz azz about it. Like @James331 said above, 'telling' them you are going to do it may not be best. I'd never do that after getting cleared for takeoff, but I might say it when ready to go. They can say no before saying cleared for takeoff
 
If IFR then the instruction is clear as you fly your files course--either first fix or joining an airway. If VFR then yes it can be ambiguous although they should have asked for a direction of flight before takeoff.
 
jordane93 said:
There are local procedures like not turning until the parkway, wait until the expressway to turn on course, etc. I think they are posted on the FRG website. Not positive though.
Click to expand...
Yep, here's the way I was trained at FRG:
Taking off from 01, fly runway heading till you hit the LIE, then proceed on course.
Taking off from 32, get to 500 feet, and fly 010 till you hit the LIE, then proceed on course.
Taking off from 19, fly runway heading till Sunrise Highway, then proceed on course.
Taking off from 14, get to 500 feet, and fly 190 till Sunrise Highway, then proceed on course.
 
We're making this far too difficult.

The controller gave a non-specific instruction. "Proceed on course" but no specifics on how to do so. That leaves a lot of flexibility for the pilot. If the controller needed something more specific than he should have given more specific instructions.

The applicable regulation is 14 CFR 91.129(g)(1)
(g) Departures. No person may operate an aircraft departing from an airport except in compliance with the following:
(1) Each pilot must comply with any departure procedures established for that airport by the FAA.​

With a published noise abatement procedure it is reasonable for a pilot to fly the procedure in accordance with 91.129(g)(1). If the controller did not want the pilot to fly the procedure than the takeoff instructions should have been more specific. Similarly, if the controller wanted to ensure that the pilot flew the procedure than that should have been specified as well.

So, a couple of points from the discussion.

1. What would I do? I'd follow the noise abatement procedure to it's end then turn on course. If it was just, "turn left heading 220 at 500 feet" then I'd fly runway heading to 500', then 220deg until pattern altitude (since no ending altitude is specified), then turn right on course (north).

2. If the tower asked what I was doing I'd tell them I was flying the published noise abatement procedure.

3. Runways at airports with operating control towers do not have established traffic patterns (left/right). Per 14 CFR 91.129(f)(1) pilots of airplanes approaching to land will circle the airport to the left unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC. The only requirement for departing airplanes is 91.129(g)(1) quoted above.

4. If a direction of turn is not specified, a turn in the shortest direction is assumed. Taking off on Rwy 23, then turning to 220deg at 500', would still suggest a right turn to the North, not a left turn. If a left turn was desired it should be requested.
 
Last edited:
James331 said:
Meh

"Tell" ATC?? Only if you've declared a emergency and/or have 7700/7500 in the box

"Ask" ATC, that's more inline with the mentioned noise abatement.
Click to expand...
I often read back instructions by "telling" ATC what i think it means and how I plan to comply rather than asking. It has always worked for me and usually saves an extra communication.
 
mscard88 said:
What do you mean by that James? Are you saying if there's a noise procedure at an airport, controlled or uncontrolled, you'd choose to ignore it?
Click to expand...

Ignore? Re read what I wrote and what I quoted.

If ATC tells me to turn to a heading, shy of something that puts the saftey/outcome of the flight in question, I will ASK them "do you want me to turn XYZ instead for noise abatement?"

TELLING ATC, well if I loose pressure at altitude, I will TELL ATC, after declaring, that I am descending to XYZ, of if I have a engine failure I will TELL them where I am landing, etc.

TELLING ATC what you're going to do = 7700

Questioning or asking for clarification is not the same.
 
My understanding as a controller/pilot is that ATC can (and will at times) give you an instruction contrary to the noise abatement procedure. If they do, then the ATC instruction trumps the noise abatement procedure.

As others have said, if there is a question, just ask ATC. That said, when I've given a clearance that didn't comply with noise abatement, I've never been questioned but wouldn't mind if I was.

We routinely disregard noise abatement if needed to expedite the flow of traffic. I could quote our local order that authorizes this but it's local so would have little impact to the OP and isn't published for the pilots as it's ATC's responsibility if they choose to disregard it.
 
Everyone else has already covered it but the title of this thread reminds me of ATC tech school. If any student ever said "cleared to take off" the instructors would sigh, stand up, loosen their ties and start unbuttoning their shirts.
 
James331 said:
TELLING ATC what you're going to do = 7700

Questioning or asking for clarification is not the same.
Click to expand...
Telling ATC what you're going to do doesn't constitute an emergency if you're not doing something contrary to a clearance or instruction.
 
Timbeck2 said:
Everyone else has already covered it but the title of this thread reminds me of ATC tech school. If any student ever said "cleared to take off" the instructors would sigh, stand up, loosen their ties and start unbuttoning their shirts.
Click to expand...
I used to say that all the time. The instructor would sigh and do all that until she figured out I was settin her up.
 
jordane93 said:
There are local procedures like not turning until the parkway, wait until the expressway to turn on course, etc. I think they are posted on the FRG website. Not positive though.
Click to expand...

They say it themselves: "Noise abatement measures in no way take precedence over air traffic control instructions." So if an instruction is "proceed on course", you should not be expected to fly a noise abatement procedure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top