IFR TEC Route Clearance - Question

[Rick Stratman]

Hello everyone,

I hope this finds all well and for those in the states hopefully the holiday was nice to send off summer and say hello to fall

Any how I have a question on TEC Clearances. This is not a complaint, but a query to understand what has changed if anything.

Over the week end I was doing my normal FSE flying and did a couple of TEC routes, of which I have been doing for a couple of months.

This weekend how ever when I called up for clearance the controller issued what I considered a full route clearance. I had been getting just the initial VOR and then as filed.

So my question is it normal to get full route clearance for TEC routes and to verify in these cases am I expected to read back the full clearance as well? Asking as it was busy over the week end and don't want to tie up the radio reading back something I don't need to read back.

Thanks

[HRutila]

Great question. From time to time we'll see TEC routes filed that are designed for when LAX or SAN are landing east. 90% of the time, both SAN and LAX are landing west. When we see a TEC route filed that doesn't match the current configuration, we'll issue a full route clearance. Any time you hear a full-route clearance, you should read it back in full. If ATC predicts your readback will interfere with other tasks, they'll ask you to "Standby on your readback" or something to that effect.

An alternative is to issue you an abbreviated route clearance, which may include a heading to fly plus the first waypoint, followed by "then via the SBAN39 TEC route," which would require you to go look the route up. I usually don't do that when I'm controlling, but if I am really pressed for time, I'll use that option as a last resort.

[Keith Smith]

Was the route that you were issued as a full route clearance the same as what you filed, or was it a different route?

If the route was different, that would explain the FRC. If the route was the same as what you filed, then it might have been an oversight.