PilotEdge Forums

Pilots,

I flew the BURN30A Tec Route today and was assigned the VNY1 SID from KBUR. No biggie but it took me way out of my way around the west and north and then finally back east to SLI. Being pressed for time, I asked ATC on departure if I could get direct SLI while on HDG 210 off RWY 8 on the VNY1 SID. He obliged -- yeah me! ( Incidentally this shortcut allowed me to land with 2 minutes to spare before I had to dash off to daycare to pick up my 3 yr old (Yeah me x2!) [Never mind the 180kts at the threshold visual approach into KSAN 27 ])

Digging deeper I see that KBUR has another MUCH more appropriate (and oddly named) ELMOO SID (Tickle me SID?) that takes me EAST instead of the looping around WEST. I'd much prefer to go that route next time...

So my question is -- HOW do I merge a TEC ROUTE with a SID that deviates from the TEC Route? In PE and in Real World. I understand that in PE ATC is always going to give you the canned TEC route if they can...Can I circumvent this? What about real world?

I presume that what I would really file wanting to get to KSAN is:
ELMOO6.ELMOO SLI V23 KELPS MZB (follows TEC route but isn't TEC'nically one

I'm pretty sure real world ATC would be fine with that but I couldn't of course call it a TEC route.

WIll PE ATC let me file and fly this or will they shove me back into

VNY1.TWINE V518 KIMMO V459 SLI V23 KELPS MZB

2. SIDS in general: Should you always expect ATC to give you a SID departure with a TEC Route? Is it understood that you will get one real world or PE world?

Thanks!

Todd
N3298S

All very good questions, here is my take on it.

HOW do I merge a TEC ROUTE with a SID that deviates from the TEC Route?

Simply put you can't.

Can I circumvent this? What about real world?

Baring exceptional circumstances, generally no in the real world.

ELMOO6.ELMOO SLI V23 KELPS MZB

Problem with that route is at 9000' you'll directly conflict with the LAX arrival flow while climbing to altitude. The reason for the long looping departure is to get you above the LAX arrivals when you cut down southward. The reason you got a shortcut is that you were above the LAX arrivals.

The prop TEC route actually uses the ELMOO departure but at a lower altitude so they are below the LAX arrivals when they cut south.

Should you always expect ATC to give you a SID departure with a TEC Route? Is it understood that you will get one real world or PE world?

When a SID matches up to the beginning of a TEC route it is generally given. This happens at KBUR, KSAN, and KVNY generally.

I presume that what I would really file wanting to get to KSAN is:
ELMOO6.ELMOO SLI V23 KELPS MZB (follows TEC route but isn't TEC'nically one

I'm pretty sure real world ATC would be fine with that but I couldn't of course call it a TEC route.

Real world ATC will not allow this route for the reasons stated above. Within the SCT area deviations from TEC route are generally not allowed baring some exceptional circumstance.

Outside of SCT there is some allowance to be given a higher altitude then stated in the TEC route but along the same path.

WIll PE ATC let me file and fly this or will they shove me back into

No as the real world will not allow this. Note however if you climb up quickly generally you won't have to go all the way up to TWINE.

2. SIDS in general: Should you always expect ATC to give you a SID departure with a TEC Route? Is it understood that you will get one real world or PE world?

If a SID matches the TEC route yes otherwise no.

Let me know if you have any further questions.

Todd, why are you working so hard to fight the TEC system?

While the route may seem inefficient, it's designed with many, many other flows in mind. Coming up with your own route and assuming ATC would be fine with it seems optimistic.

The TECs are all designed to operate with each other while also making allowances for the flows in and out of the major socal airports. Trying to come up with your own route is like watching a goldfish trying to invest in the stock market.

File TEC....be ready for a SID (as the TEC documentation says), and then once you're in the air, know that ATC will give you a shortcut if they can (in the real world). On PE, you may have to ask for one. Do it in the air, though.

Peter

Thanks for the feedback it's very logical and I appreciate the context.

Keith. I'm not fighting the TEC system just trying to understand it. Well ok I am fighting it a bit I guess but only in the sense that I do not enjoy walking around the block to get next door as the vny1 has me do. I've got to get UFO-ologists to north island before daycare lets out! Also and more seriously if it's ok for planes flying 20 kts slower than me to tickle ELMOO than why "knot" me?

In my world there aren't TEC routes to channel your navigation. If one files IFR one looks at the charts and picks a route. At least I think so (non rated). And as a VFR guy I kinda like deciding where I am going to go with as little federal coerciveness as possible. where there are reasons and it makes sense I'm on board but I don't blindly accept I mean vny1 has me cruising at H210 for a good ways south ... And if shortcuts are common why not let me ask in advance for them. Call it the Elmoo2 and make me climb above Lax traffic if I have to. These things aren't set in stone.

And if shortcuts are common why not let me ask in advance for them

Because in the real world, the person you're asking on the ground hasn't got the authority to make the change. He'd have to coordinate the route with a handful (literally 5-10) of other controllers. That's not going to happen. The process doesn't scale.

Instead, he issues the route the computer spits out (a route that's well understood, expected and accepted by all the facilities along that route) and that's the clearance you get. It's only once you get in the air and climbed to an altitude (ie, you're truly ready for the shortcut, if it's available) that you get the shortcut.

Yes, your final flight path isn't set in stone. However, the variety comes once you're in the air, not when you're talking to clearance delivery (generally speaking).

In sleepier parts of the country, it's a completely different story. File direct...you'll probably get it.

Believe it or not, if you took no action at all, the route you'd get in the air would almost certainly be shorter. Here's a real world example...a turboprop flying BUR-SAN in the real world 2 days ago: http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AMF4 ... /KBUR/KSAN. It was issued BURN30A, but look at his track once he was in the air. Doesn't get much shorter than that.

It's incredibly common to get the canned routing on the ground and something faster in the air particularly when you consider that nearly all the TEC routes are NOT airport specific, they serve a wide area. My favorite is the stuff out of ONT heading NW bound. The canned routing has you turning to PDZ first. It's not going to happen once you're in the air, but there's no need to haggle with ONT clearance to negotiate a better route. Once you build experience with the routes, you realize it's not going to be as bad as it looks.

Keith

Thanks for the additional real world examples. I'm with you completely on not trying to negotiate with the guy lowest on the totem pole (delivery) and I didn't...I waited until I was climbing south at 5k and asked the guy in charge in the air. So far so good.

I guess the point I was trying to make about elmoo2 is that if lots of folks are flying off the charted route why not make one that reflects reality/daily ops and which is shorter. The existence of piston routes lower (which I didn't see as i was a turboprop (m) and my flight route . Com helpfully filters them out would seem to indicate that LAX ops wouldn't preclude such routing.

And stop the presses - can you clarify the bit about not being airport specific ??? I totally missed that. So for example I could file a SAN TEC route even if I was departing from KSEE? I had no idea. And if the initial fix was awkward from the filing airport you would
Keep your fingers crossed that they would amend it in the air?

Todd

The TEC routes from SAN-xxx are the same as SEE-xxx, which are the same as RNM-xxx, etc. They cover an area (with the exception of LAX, which does have its own set of TEC routes).

SAN doesn't have its own TEC routes, but it does have SOP's which override some TEC routes. For example, instead of MZB293 SLI148 SLI to LAX (the TEC route for turboprops and jets), you'll actually get the PEBLE SID with the SLI transition (turns out it's the same radials, btw). The SID adds value with a climb gradient as well as specific instruction on how to join the MZB 293.

As for why there isn't a SID which represents the shortcut, it's because the shortcut might not be the same every time. It's also dependent on traffic and how fast you climb. Worst case scenario, you really DO need to fly the VNY1 to TWINE, etc. So, for lost comms, THAT is your clearance on the ground....period. Then, once you're in the air, your climb performance and real time traffic are looked at closely, then they make the call.

Well great.

I'm inspired to probe around more deeply in the TEC routes. Since the names are airport specific I guess I confused myself that they were airport specific - beginning and ending. I guess I will file into KNZY next time I leave KBUR using the aforementioned kbur30a TEC route

Had originally thought a big selling point for the customer - ie me - was that one could pick up a TEC route in the air quickly and I guess from a tower instead of app control (less busy freq? Otherwise I don't see a big difference ).
But that begs the question of what if you are at a midpoint of the TEC route. Say I'm north of MZB VFR check the wx and want to go to KBUR in IMC if I ask for a ksankbur TEC route how do I ask/amend it so that I don't get waypoints that are already south of me?

That sort of was my original point. - how can I file a canned route if I am not at the initial starting airport/area. It seems that that is JUST exactly what the FAA wants you to do with the TEC route system

EDIT: For those that follow along this is a VERY useful and informative document (which I should have read before!):

http://aeronav.faa.gov/afd/08JAN2015/SW ... df#page=65

EDIT2: I think part of how I "forgot" that the TEC routes are regional not airport specific is that I always use myflightroute.com to pick them...and then conveniently download the FMS file into my GPS on X-Plane AND the file name it gives them is based on your selected origination and destination airport and I got used to thinking of them as specific airport to airport routes! What a great discovery and I am so glad I asked the question because that would have haunted me.

As to my mid route question - I guess now I see that the answer is to file a TEC route that is north of where you are at the moment in that scenario -- though being just a bit north of MZB looks like kind of a grey area without having to file:

SANN14 MZB293R SLI148R SLI V23 LAX LAX316R SILEX (M8000) -- and that has me fly unappealingly South out of my way to MZB oops I now see that's a radial out of MZB not MZB - so it's not actually that bad! -- How would you handle that scenario? You are 16 NM north of KCRQ (Palomar) and want to go KBUR using TEC airborne at 4500 in a King Air C90...

(Sorry for the stream of consciousness questions

Gotta be brief here, sorry.

For pop-up IFR, I'd say, "request pop-up IFR to Burbank." This tells the controller that you haven't filed anything (lest he start trying to find your strip). They'll look at the TEC route and take into account your current position. In your case, something like "....radar vectors MZB 293 radial, SLI 148 radial [then the rest of the TEC route]". They'll join it up and make it work.

Since you're airborne and talking to the guy responsible for separating you from aircraft in that sector, he/she is actually in a position to make that call (reference the earlier conversation about the ground controller not being able to do that).

Don't worry about what you'd file, because if you're VFR enroute suddenly looking for IFR to a relatively close airport, it's very unlikely that you're going to file. Worst comes to worst, if ATC asks you to file a flight plan, you swap freqs to Flight Service, and air file an IFR flight plan. I wouldn't consider the routing, just file direct (if you're /G), otherwise, if you have the bandwidth to lookup a preferred route in your AFD or EFB (which isn't likely to have data access), feel free, but I wouldn't do it. You'll be heads down for too long. File direct or pick a few VOR's...knowing it's going to be amended.

I've asked for pop-up IFR maybe 9-10 times. I've had 2 occasions where the controller asked me to file with flight service.

Not sure where you got the idea that TEC routes should be requested with the tower rather than the busy approach controller. If you're airborne and looking for IFR, you'll be doing that with the approach controller. If you're on the ground, you'll be talking to ground or clearance delivery as usual. The "tower" in TEC means something different and is historical in nature when there were no combined TRACONs, everything was a small up/down facility. TEC routes kept you within TRACON airspace (rather than going to the enroute positions) therefore it was 'tower to tower' because you were talking to the approach controllers who, at the time, were co-located in the control towers. It does NOT mean you're talking to tower controllers along the way.

Keith

Wonderful wonderful detailed and informative answers. The scenarios and real world example are just exactly what I wanted to know.

Silly me! I got the "Tower"from the name of the routing "tower enroute control". After reading the doc (p65) buried in the aFD I realized that was a misnomer. Your answer further clarified the etymology . I was also under the impression that TEC was something new (as in post 1990). I guess that is also not necessarily true.

Returning after a 13 yr hiatus and "transitioning" to ifr at the same time is like walking in a dark cave with a flashlight with a weak battery. You can do it but there are pitfalls. Thanks as always for the illumination.

Todd