Your experiences show that IFR traffic departing PAO is handled on
tactical basis, which would render a charted SID ineffective.

To put it another way PAO is a "stepchild" to operations at SFO, OAK, and
SJC.

jharper aaatttt cisco dddooottt com wrote:

I've often wondered the same thing (as a PAO pilot).
But flying north (e.g. to Santa Rosa) I generally get
a different clearance. Can't remember offhand, it's
something like, runway heading, vectors Sausalito.
Generally ends up going directly overhead SFO at about 5000'.
I've also had something different when flying to
Napa, which took me up towards Oakland.

And an interesting one the other day, IFR to San Luis.
I got the standard clearance but while I was still turning
to 060 I got heading 160, which took me just to
the south of the airport and then I was basically
direct Salinas.

John

Dave Jacobowitz wrote:
I fly out of Palo Alto, CA, and I have never heard an IFR clearance
read over ground whose route section did not start "when able, right
turn to 060 with 1 mi of the airport, radar vectors san jose, v334
sunol ..." My clearance starts out this way whether I file a flight
plan to the east, north, or south. (I haven't flown to Hawaii yet, so
can't say what I'd get going west. ) It also does not matter if I
file /G or /A.

This is pretty much what you get out of PAO if you fly a spamcam.
(It's possible that more capable aircraft get something else.)

In any case it seems that if a certain departure clearance is
frequently used, that would be the circumstances under whch someone
would say "let's publish a DP!"

So, why wouldn't someone publish a DP? Does it cost the gov't extra
money? Does a published DP have to meet higher requirements than a
hand-rolled departure clearance?

Just curious.

If they do create one, I want to name it. "Stinky Garbage one, San
Jose transition" (STINK.SJC)


-- dave j
-- jacobowitz73 --at-- yahoo --dot-- com