ATC question: Denying a clearance because of DP req's

[Immelman]

A question for pilots and ATC out there:

Is it legal for ATC to deny an IFR clearance because the aircraft is not equipped for the locally publised departure procedure? This is not a SID, but rather an "Obstacle DP" on my jepp chart, published on the airport info page.

Why I ask: Today I booked some time with a local CFII to shoot some approaches and do an instrument competancy check as I am not current. WX was so/so in the area, 08 OVC so we did need to depart IFR. The controller issuing our clearance (the local approach control has a ground station at our airport for obtaining local IFR clearances) was pretty busy handling traffic at ours and surrounding airports.

We waited for about 15 minutes in the runup area before we could get his attention, and during the call-up told him that our airplane not have an ADF, required for the departure procedure at our airport. He was obviously busy and/or didn't get what we were saying -- he thought we didn't have the published DP and proceeded to read it to us. When we called back & said we had the DP, but could not fly it because of no ADF, he had us wait another 10 minutes, before finally telling us that without the ADF there was little chance of obtaining a clearance at all.

I can understand how busy this guy was, but feel a bit like he kept us on the ground because of our intentions (multiple approaches at local airports), meaning more workload for him. He was already handling ~2 other aircraft in the area doing just that, but was readily accomodating people who wanted clearance to VFR on top, or just to on top to cancel... I have a feeling if we were getting out of his hair he'd have found a clearance for us. The CFII mentioned that he frequently obtains this sort of clearance in aircraft without an ADF and receives a simple vector on departure to a fix (which is basically what the departure procedure says, but to track an NDB bearing).

SO my question is -- is what this controller was doing legit? I can fully understand and respect his workload and we kept our mouth shut for quite a while waiting for him. Further, I am wondering if what he was telling us was legal... there is no requirement to have an ADF for IFR last time I checked. This sucked too, as we had to scrub the ICC as there was someone who had the airplane after us. We put .5 on the hobbs and never left the ground! Thankfully the rental outfit was cool about it and did not charge me, but I feel bad that my & the CFII's time were wasted.

Edit: I meant SID instead of STAR

 

[urflyingme?!]

That sounds fishy on his part....

 

[KigAir]

How did you expect to fly the procedure without required equipment(for the procedure)?

 

[Immelman]

Kig: That's just it, I didn't expect to fly it.. We basically told him we could not accept the DP. We were requesting an alternative.

Side note: I cannot find anything in my AIM or in the section of the NOS book of terminal procedures, section on takeoff minima & DPs, that states that a DP must be accepted.

 

[vclean]

Would there be a terrain conflict? Without an ADF, if you lost comm, there would be no way for him to vector you.

 

[urflyingme?!]

Was it a radar airport? What about the obstacle DP? Is there a VOR on the field or nearby?

 

[Immelman]

Thanks for the replies. There is no radar or VOR on the field but I do know that they have adequate radar coverage there... have heard controllers tell people their beacons are on when a/c is on the ground.

I am trying to make this a learning experience. I understand the lost-comm issues, but this is making the whole DP thing a bit foggy for me (in terms of required procedures for IFR), since I cannot find anything that says a DP, if published, must be flown. Since this is the only published DP for the field, if what the controller was leading me to believe was true, it effectlively shuts down IFR departures for aircraft without an ADF or IFR GPS.... not a lot of spam cans out there these days have a working ADF... in fact I can't remember flying any rental airplane with one that wasn't inoperative.

I have read other terrain DPs that are substantially more complex, but which do not require any navaids for the initial climb out.... I have seen them describe a departure in terms of course to fly until an altitude is reached, then a turn, then a climb, before going to a VOR.

 

[slowto250]

If required for the DP, you must have a functional ADF to depart. Go to the back of the first approach chart (Jepps). It will list non std. takeoff minimums if they apply, for the runway in use, as well as any equipment requirements.

 

[ksu_aviator]

I guess you have to ask yourself this, could you fly a GPS approach with out a GPS?

 

[Clutch_Cargo]

Hey Im,

Hard for us to say what the controller's motive for holding you on the ground may have been at the time but if, as you say, he was busy and you were going to be increasing his workload with practice approaches, he may not have felt compelled to launch you. I can remember as an instructor (teaching in a non-radar environment, btw) being told that they just couldn't accept anymore. When we knew there were others out there doing the same thing, we would make a call to the controlling facility and ask if they could take us. Saves a lot of wasted time and, potentially, a bill for nothing. Another thing is that you can put "unable DP" or something to the effect in the remarks of your flight plan to give ATC the heads up. Having said all that, yes, he could have given you a vector departure if you have adequate radar coverage.

This may help shed more light on the subject... it's an excerpt from an FAA legal interpretation:

"In your letter, you ask whether a pilot must adhere to an IFR departure procedure when cleared for takeoff at an airport with a published IFR departure procedure. You specifically ask whether a pilot is required to adhere to such a procedure under various operating conditions.

Under Section 91.113(b), when weather conditions permit, a pilot must operate his aircraft so as to see and avoid other aircraft regardless of whether the flight is conducted under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) or under IFR. However, under Part 91, a pilot generally is not required to adhere to a published IFR departure procedure. Under Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC), a pilot should, but is not required to, follow an IFR departure procedure. When outside of radar coverage, however, a pilot remains responsible for terrain and obstacle clearance.

Furthermore, Section 91.123 provides that a pilot may not deviate from an Air Traffic Control (ATC) clearance except in an emergency or unless an amended clearance has been obtained. Accordingly, a pilot operating under Part 91 must follow an IFR departure procedure when it is part of the applicable ATC clearance.

Under Part 121 or Part 135, a pilot is required to follow any published IFR departure procedure regardless of whether the flight is conducted under VMC or under IMC."

BTW, I think it's great that you're trying to take something from this instead of just bitching about ATC or the hobbs meter... great attitude that more pilots should adopt! Anyway, hope this helps.

cc