"cleared to ... when direct ..."

Got an odd clearance the other day, on climbout from Santa Monica
(IFR but in perfect VMC): "climb and maintain 6000 when direct
Ventura". I took this to mean that someone would later clear
me direct VTU, whereupon I would climb. However I never got
such a clearance, and later an evidently nervous controller called
me, cleared me to 6000', and asked me if I had the terrain in
sight (which I did, but it was getting close for IFR though not
worrying visually).

I wonder what this clearance really meant? Did it mean "when ABLE
direct", i.e. when I could receive the VOR (which I couldn't
initially although I was filed /G anyway)? Or did someone just
forget to give me the subsequent clearance?

John

In article 1076365605.761786@sj-nntpcache-3,
"John Harper" wrote:

Got an odd clearance the other day, on climbout from Santa Monica
(IFR but in perfect VMC): "climb and maintain 6000 when direct
Ventura". I took this to mean that someone would later clear
me direct VTU, whereupon I would climb. However I never got
such a clearance, and later an evidently nervous controller called
me, cleared me to 6000', and asked me if I had the terrain in
sight (which I did, but it was getting close for IFR though not
worrying visually).

I suspect you dropped a word (or he did). It sounds like it should have
been "climb and maintain 6000. When able, direct Ventura".

I would have started a climb to 6000, taken a WAG at the heading to
Ventura, turned to that heading, and begun to tune in the VOR (or hit
direct on the GPS). Once I had a good signal, I would have tracked it
direct.

I'm going to quibble with Roy just a bit. "When able," in my mind, means
"when you can proceed direct without hitting anything." You can get a good
needle and still hit terrain. In this clearance, however, my guess is that
6000 feet was his minimum instrument altitude and you were good to go at
that altitude.

Bob Gardner

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
In article 1076365605.761786@sj-nntpcache-3,
"John Harper" wrote:

Got an odd clearance the other day, on climbout from Santa Monica
(IFR but in perfect VMC): "climb and maintain 6000 when direct
Ventura". I took this to mean that someone would later clear
me direct VTU, whereupon I would climb. However I never got
such a clearance, and later an evidently nervous controller called
me, cleared me to 6000', and asked me if I had the terrain in
sight (which I did, but it was getting close for IFR though not
worrying visually).

I suspect you dropped a word (or he did). It sounds like it should have
been "climb and maintain 6000. When able, direct Ventura".

I would have started a climb to 6000, taken a WAG at the heading to
Ventura, turned to that heading, and begun to tune in the VOR (or hit
direct on the GPS). Once I had a good signal, I would have tracked it
direct.

In article ZLUVb.12036$032.41047@attbi_s53,
"Bob Gardner" wrote:

I'm going to quibble with Roy just a bit. "When able," in my mind, means
"when you can proceed direct without hitting anything." You can get a good
needle and still hit terrain. In this clearance, however, my guess is that
6000 feet was his minimum instrument altitude and you were good to go at
that altitude.

I certainly hope not! If 6000 was the MIA, what was the controller
doing issuing a route clearance? If John was on initial climbout, I
assume he was on a DP. How can the controller take him off the DP below
the MIA?

To get what Bob is talking about, I think the clearance needed to be
worded something like, "climb and maintain 6000, upon reaching 6000,
direct Ventura". On the other hand, if that's what the controller
wanted, it would have been simplier (and less confusing) to just issue
the altitude, and the direct Ventura once he reached it.



Bob Gardner

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
In article 1076365605.761786@sj-nntpcache-3,
"John Harper" wrote:

Got an odd clearance the other day, on climbout from Santa Monica
(IFR but in perfect VMC): "climb and maintain 6000 when direct
Ventura". I took this to mean that someone would later clear
me direct VTU, whereupon I would climb. However I never got
such a clearance, and later an evidently nervous controller called
me, cleared me to 6000', and asked me if I had the terrain in
sight (which I did, but it was getting close for IFR though not
worrying visually).

I suspect you dropped a word (or he did). It sounds like it should have
been "climb and maintain 6000. When able, direct Ventura".

I would have started a climb to 6000, taken a WAG at the heading to
Ventura, turned to that heading, and begun to tune in the VOR (or hit
direct on the GPS). Once I had a good signal, I would have tracked it
direct.

I'm going to quibble with Roy just a bit. "When able," in my mind, means
"when you can proceed direct without hitting anything."


Well, if I"m in the soup, the only way I know I won't hit anything is to trust
the controllers. They aren't supposed to vector me into terrain. Now granted
I need some situational awareness, but not to the extent that I don't need
controllers and the instrument flight rules themselves.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

Were you receiving departure radar vectors?

If so, a word was dropped or missed. The clearance you quote would make
no sense so it should have been promptly questioned. I suspect the
clearance was "cimb and maintain 6,000, when able direct Ventura."

John Harper wrote:

Got an odd clearance the other day, on climbout from Santa Monica
(IFR but in perfect VMC): "climb and maintain 6000 when direct
Ventura". I took this to mean that someone would later clear
me direct VTU, whereupon I would climb. However I never got
such a clearance, and later an evidently nervous controller called
me, cleared me to 6000', and asked me if I had the terrain in
sight (which I did, but it was getting close for IFR though not
worrying visually).

I wonder what this clearance really meant? Did it mean "when ABLE
direct", i.e. when I could receive the VOR (which I couldn't
initially although I was filed /G anyway)? Or did someone just
forget to give me the subsequent clearance?

John

"John Harper" wrote in message
news:1076365605.761786@sj-nntpcache-3...
Got an odd clearance the other day, on climbout from Santa Monica
(IFR but in perfect VMC): "climb and maintain 6000 when direct
Ventura". I took this to mean that someone would later clear
me direct VTU, whereupon I would climb. However I never got
such a clearance, and later an evidently nervous controller called
me, cleared me to 6000', and asked me if I had the terrain in
sight (which I did, but it was getting close for IFR though not
worrying visually).

I wonder what this clearance really meant? Did it mean "when ABLE
direct", i.e. when I could receive the VOR (which I couldn't
initially although I was filed /G anyway)? Or did someone just
forget to give me the subsequent clearance?

John


Which runway off of SMO?

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 18:07:49 -0500, Roy Smith wrote:

In article 1076365605.761786@sj-nntpcache-3,
"John Harper" wrote:

Got an odd clearance the other day, on climbout from Santa Monica
(IFR but in perfect VMC): "climb and maintain 6000 when direct
Ventura". I took this to mean that someone would later clear
me direct VTU, whereupon I would climb. However I never got
such a clearance, and later an evidently nervous controller called
me, cleared me to 6000', and asked me if I had the terrain in
sight (which I did, but it was getting close for IFR though not
worrying visually).

I suspect you dropped a word (or he did). It sounds like it should have
been "climb and maintain 6000. When able, direct Ventura".

Or it might have been, "climb and maintain 6000, THEN direct Ventura" which
would require him to get to 6000 before turning. No way to tell -- either
is plausible.


I would have started a climb to 6000, taken a WAG at the heading to
Ventura, turned to that heading, and begun to tune in the VOR (or hit
direct on the GPS). Once I had a good signal, I would have tracked it
direct.

Thanks for all the answers. This was runway 21 at SMO, heading
out over to the ocean. No DP, but standard procedure is RH
to intercept LAX315 (the coastline), then 270, vecs to VTU.

I don't THINK I misheard (although memory is a fickle thing) because
I heard him say exactly the same thing to the following departure as well.

The idea that I should climb to 6000 THEN Direct VTU would make
sense except that turning Direct would actually vector me slightly
AWAY from the terrain.

I was at 3000 which is high enough to not bump into any terrain locally
but certainly not IFR en-route clearance (the highest peak in the
ridge is about 2700 from memory).

Guess next time I'll ask.

Thanks again,

John

"John Harper" wrote in message
news:1076365605.761786@sj-nntpcache-3...
Got an odd clearance the other day, on climbout from Santa Monica
(IFR but in perfect VMC): "climb and maintain 6000 when direct
Ventura". I took this to mean that someone would later clear
me direct VTU, whereupon I would climb. However I never got
such a clearance, and later an evidently nervous controller called
me, cleared me to 6000', and asked me if I had the terrain in
sight (which I did, but it was getting close for IFR though not
worrying visually).

I wonder what this clearance really meant? Did it mean "when ABLE
direct", i.e. when I could receive the VOR (which I couldn't
initially although I was filed /G anyway)? Or did someone just
forget to give me the subsequent clearance?

John

(Teacherjh) wrote in message ...

Well, if I"m in the soup, the only way I know I won't hit anything is to trust
the controllers. They aren't supposed to vector me into terrain. Now granted
I need some situational awareness, but not to the extent that I don't need
controllers and the instrument flight rules themselves.

I know you're making a point, but I seriously, seriously hope you're
not saying that you need controllers, and don't need situational
awareness, to avoid terrain.

In the soup, traffic should be your only variable. Even so, no matter
how much you "trust" controllers, you don't "know" you won't hit
traffic. Controllers make mistakes every single day. You still have
the responsibility to see and avoid traffic.

For terrain and obstacles, you ABSOLUTELY DO need situational
awareness to (and beyond) the extent that you shouldn't need
controllers. Anyone who finds that he doesn't have this level of
situational awareness should either make a big change to his flight
planning methods, or should revise his personal minimums to exclude
actual IMC.