Full Length Take Off

[flyin' fish]

Lately this topic has been bothering me. When given a clearance to take position onto a runway, and there's a little bit left behind to backtrack, where does it say the pilot must request full length? Prime examples of this would be in YHZ (intersection of 14 and 23, when positioning to 23) and YYT (intersection of 29 and 20, when positioning to 29). Some controllers make a big of this.

[flyinhigh]

Well I am to lazy to look it up, but I do remember from training years back that if you wanna back track you are suppose to ask for it, also if you want to sit static for abit you are suppose to advise of this(That one I have to say I am guilty of, we routinely stop on the runway to do a engine run for the first flight of the day, it only lasts 20 seconds), and recently talking to a controller he mentioned that we're actually not suppose to do this unless we ask.

But I still do it.

[YACdirect]

Here's how I understand it and what I remember of what was taught, if it is of any use:

If you are cleared for takeoff, you are automatically permitted to use the full length of the runway, UNLESS you are cleared for takeoff from "taxiway ..." at which point you are expected to enter the runway and takeoff from the point at which you entered the runway.

From my experience, ATC will usually ask ahead of time if an intersection departure is acceptable and state available runway length remaining. It is up to the pilot to accept the intersection takeoff or request the full length. A request for full length cannot be denied, although takeoff may be delayed for traffic concerns.

"No delay" means you are not expected to come to a stop before commencing takeoff. Pilots are, however, to inform ATC prior to entering the runway if any delay is expected before commencing their takeoff roll. Entering the runway to complete a run-up without requesting approval from ATC prior to entering the runway is contrary to procedures, although I don't know where to find a CAR that might back me up.

[justplanecrazy]

RAC 4.2.8
Upon receipt of the takeoff clearance, the pilot shall acknowledge and take off without delay, or inform ATC if unable to do so. A pilot may request to use the full length of the runway for takeoff at any time. If the runway is to be entered at an intersection so that back tracking is required, the pilot shall indicate his/her intentions and obtain a clearance for the manoeuvre before entering the runway.

The only time ATC is required to ask you if you can depart from the intersection is when there is a taxiway that runs full length and they suggest for you to take an intersection departure. Any time you taxi for an intersection on your own, or come to the end of the taxiway and are not at the threshold, the controller expects, and you are required to take off from the intersection. They won't build any space in for your backtrack with respect to the arrival. If you backtrack on your own, they should make a big of this.

...I do remember from training years back that if you wanna back track you are suppose to ask for it, also if you want to sit static for abit you are suppose to advise of this... and recently talking to a controller he mentioned that we're actually not suppose to do this unless we ask...

But I still do it.

... wow I'm glad you find that funny. The ignorance of some pilots baffles me but you aren't ignorant you were told so I guess that leaves you with the label of stupid. If you continued to do that after I kindly let you know that it is unaceptable, I'd cancel your take off clearance and tell you to taxi off and advise ready for take-off. I'd do that everytime until you got the point or complained at which time I'd send a nice letter off to transport so they could explain it to you.

Let me give you a scenario. It usually takes 1 minute for a light twin to get airborne. If you're in position for 40 seconds, a CRJ which was 5 miles back from the beacon would now be 3 miles final when you're finally rolling. This means he'd be crossing the threshold a few seconds after you're airborne. In other words, if a controller allows you to depart ahead of someone once, he probably won't do it again. Letting him know that you'll be 20 seconds in position lets him prepare for it and if you are really 20 seconds, he'll probably allow you to depart ahead of traffic regularly. As it stands now I imagine you're usually number last whenever possible but don't even realise why.

[flyinhigh]

The ignorance of some pilots baffles me but you aren't ignorant you were told so I guess that leaves you with the label of stupid.

WOW, hit a button. This is why I love this site. Instead of being mature about things you get jackass's like this that right away startin the name callin etc etc.

As it stands now I imagine you're usually number last whenever possible but are too stupid to realise why.

mmm, nice insult there. what to do

Tell ya what, grow up buddy than we can have a conversation about it. I'm out

[Fizzr]

The only time ATC is required to ask you if you can depart from the intersection is when there is a taxiway that runs full length and they suggest for you to take an intersection departure. Any time you taxi for an intersection on your own, or come to the end of the taxiway and are not at the threshold, the controller expects, and you are required to take off from the intersection.

I don't think this is correct. Can you quote a MANOPs reference?

Here's what I found.

334.3
You may authorize a departure from an intersection provided:
A. the aircraft requests it; or
B. you suggest it and the aircraft accepts it.

And if you suggest it, you must inform the aircraft of the usable length of the runway remaining as per 334.4

It happens all the time. An aircraft calls for takeoff clearance while holding short at an intersection. The controller says "From Alpha, Cleared for takeoff runway XX". If the controller does that he is suggesting an intersection departure. If he just says "Cleared for takeoff runway xx" he's authorizing it, and you can only do that as per the steps in 334.4.

To summarize. The only time an aircraft can take off from an intersection is if the pilot requests it, or if the controller suggests it. If the controller suggests it he must give the runway length remaining. It doesn't matter what the airport layout is, an intersection is an intersection.

Of course, a pilot can never backtrack without specific permission.

[killer84]

Anytime an aircraft takes off from an intersection, whether the pilot has requested it or the controller has suggested it, the phraseology is "from (interesection) cleared takeoff runway #".

When the takeoff clearance is issued, the request or suggestion has already been made, and it has been decided that the a/c will depart from said intersection.

We have a short backtrack at the airport I work at for one of the runways, about 300 feet I think. If I'm pressed for space, and it's a larger aircraft (737), I'll ask if they need full length. If they do, then they hold short. If they don't, then away they go. I ask because some pilots take it on their own, and I'd rather not have to deal with space running out because of anyone's error, be it mine or the pilot's.

[justplanecrazy]

No that is incorrect. Stating that from "C" cleared take-off runway 18 is not suggesting to take off from "C". You are simply telling them that you are only giving them clearance to take off from "C". Telling them to take an intersection departure that is not at the end of a taxiway is a suggestion. To tell them to taxi for the active via a taxi-way that doesn't reach the end of the runway is not a suggestion to take an intersection departure. It is simply the furthest departure point that the airport layout allows and if you require more then that, you have to ask for it as is explicitly laid out in RAC 4.2.8. I usually ask still because I've been burned by too many pilots that either don't know or know and don't care like some people on here who have no problem stating such. Take YQT for example. If you tell an aircraft to taxi runway 25 via "C", then you are suggesting an intersection departure and you have to state the runway length remaining. If you say taxi Rwy 25 and he taxis via "C" on his own, or "B", you didn't suggest the intersection and you don't have to give rwy length remaining and ask if he can depart from there. As RAC 4.2.8 clearly states, "A pilot may request to use the full length of the runway for takeoff at any time. If the runway is to be entered at an intersection so that back tracking is required, the pilot shall indicate his/her intentions and obtain a clearance for the manoeuvre before entering the runway. " If she/he calls ready for take-off without requesting a backtrack, she/he is requesting departure from that intersection, you are not suggesting he depart from that intersection by clearing him for take-off from there. You are simply giving him the clearance he requested.

Flyinhigh if you think that posting on a board that you know a rule stated in the Canadian Aviation Regulations and have also been told by ATC that it is important to abide by that rule, but you still choose to ignore it and attatch a very happy face after stating such, doesn't deserve the label of "stupid", then please tell me what you think does!!! I would have used stronger language but I was saving that for when you came back and after completely ignoring my reasoning as to why it is so important and called me a jackass.

[Fizzr]

[quote="justplanecrazy"]No that is incorrect. Stating that from "C" cleared take-off runway 18 is not suggesting to take off from "C". You are simply telling them that you are only giving them clearance to take off from "C". Telling them to take an intersection departure that is not at the end of a taxiway is a suggestion. To tell them to taxi for the active via a taxi-way that doesn't reach the end of the runway is not a suggestion to take an intersection departure. It is simply the furthest departure point that the airport layout allows and if you require more then that, you have to ask for it as is explicitly laid out in RAC 4.2.8.[/quote

If you clear an aircraft for takeoff from an intersection you are authorizing it. MANOPs clearly says you can't authorize an intersection takeoff without a pilot request or your suggestion.

How is a pilot supposed to know how much runway is remaining from any intersection? Where is this published? As far as I know ATS is the only source. Again, show me a MANOPs reference which supports your claim.

I know that what you're doing is based on past practice. It's done that way by many controllers. But it isn't supported by MANOPs, and if an airplane has a problem and goes off the end of the runway you're going to have to answer for it. I already know what Kathy Fox would say.

[invertedattitude]

You know what Kathy Fox would say...

I'm not VFR but it was my understanding it is always the pilots responsibility to know how much usable runway he/she has, and instruct if they are unable to depart with that amount.

Think of it like this, as said departing from 14-32 onto 23 in Halifax, if the controller had to ask everytime, "Are you able intersection departure" he'd spend more time talking than giving t/o clearences.

It's the pilots responsbility to advise if he's unable to depart from where he's at... this is following the common sense rule.

[justplanecrazy]

If you clear an aircraft for takeoff from an intersection you are authorizing it. MANOPs clearly says you can't authorize an intersection takeoff without a pilot request or your suggestion.

Exactly my point. I am simply authorizing a request for an intersection departure. If a pilot taxis for an intersection departure and says that they're ready for take-off, then they are requesting an intersection departure and you're not required to ask him if he can depart from the interesection. RAC clearly states that they can ask for full length anytime and are required to do so.

As far as the comment about how much length remains, how about pulling out a CFS and looking where the intersection is and how long the full length of the runway is. A pilot should know where he is on the airfield and approx how many feet remain. If you want the exact distance, ask the controller before saying ready for take-off. If you're that concerned whether there is 3,500' or 4'000, then you shouldn't be using the intersection anyways.

The only time a controller suggests an intersection is when they tell the pilot to taxi to the runway via an intersection rather then full length of the taxiway. ie in YQT "C"

[justplanecrazy]

Prime examples of this would be in YHZ (intersection of 14 and 23, when positioning to 23) and YYT (intersection of 29 and 20, when positioning to 29). Some controllers make a big of this.

These may be minor backtracks but when you're dealing in seconds of seperation, a small 200' backtrack is a big deal when you're not expecting it.

[Fizzr]

So you're saying that if a pilot doesn't ask or say anything about the runway length a "request" for intersection departure is implied? I think that's weak. Show me a MANOPs reference.

As far as the pilot looking at a picture the size of a quarter in the CFS and getting useful information about approximate runway length from an intersection - that's an especially weak argument. You're losing credibility rapidly with that one.

Anyway, I'm not going to be able to convince you. Nobody likes to be told that the way they're doing things is wrong. If you want more argument ask an Instructor at NCTI what they teach.

As far as this procedure being a pain in the ass, yes it can be. Where I work we've trained the local pilots to either ask for the backtrack or the intersection departure. They know the lengths and their aircraft performance. We rarely need to use the phraseology.

[justplanecrazy]

You're right, you and I will never agree on this one. I think I've said this about 5 times now but The MANOPS reference states that you can authorize an intersection departure without question or stating rwy length if the pilot requests it. The request is not simply implied! to say that you're ready for take-off and nothing else, says that you will be taking it from the intersection.

When I flew, it was drilled into me that I had to ask for a backtrack if I wanted one and it is also laid out in CARS and the AIM as such. If I don't require one, then I'd simply state that I'm ready for take-off. Because I'm required to state that I need a backtrack and obtain a clearance prior to entering the runway, then I'm obviously telling the controller I don't need a backtrack and am requesting to take it from the intersection if I only say ready for take-off. To state that I can take it from the intersection that I taxied to is redundant and pointless and nowhere in the AIM or Cars does it say you should do this.

From the sounds of it you work at a fairly slow training airport with a majority of local pilots. Try working an airport where the majority of your movements are itinerants who are new to the field. It is impossible to train the pilots to do a procedure the way you want it as they are constantly changing and pilots flying jets don't take lecturing well, especially for things stated contrary in the CARS. Show me where it says you have to request an intersection. I imagine why your local phraseology has required the question is because your dealing with new pilots and would get burned regularly by students backtracking on their own. To not expect the pilots to know better at an international airport is ridiculous.

Like I said a CFS gives you an accurate picture that can determine runway length to well within 1000', if they're unhappy departing with that, then they can ask the controller. If you're worried about 500' of runway, then you shouldn't be using the intersection. Depending on what you're flying it's not uncommon to take another 1,000-4,000' of runway and you're stupid if you want to use the minimum with more available. I can't wait until we get to the point of being blamed for not telling a pilot to flair. When did they choose to wipe their hands of being able to make any logical thought processes on their own?

As far as your comment on NCTI instructors, there's a reason why they work simulated traffic. Ask someone in the real world how well their procedures worked when they still had their licence.

[flyinhigh]

Think of backtracking, or your 20 second unexpected delay during an unannounced static departure from a controller's point of view: The tower controller's role is to ensure the safe operation of the airport's taxiways/runways and the airspace immediately surrounding that surface...They are sequencing traffic and authorizing departures based on the expected usual operation and performance of the various types involved. So if you're going to do something unusual, they need to know about it in order to work their traffic.

ATC is not power-tripping if they say they want to be advised of a static departure, or because they get a charge out of saying "approved". They want that information because it may factor into how they control the traffic that they are responsible for.

Any controller's interest is in creating the most efficient plan for all involved, within the scope of the regulations. Better information will normally lead to a better plan, which, I might add, works in your favour.

Now this is a mature response that I will respond to as well. Justplanecrazy in my opinion is just lookin for a pissing match, and could take a page or to out of your book CPL.

Now that you did respond in a good way I will elaborate on my post.

It's more common sense, if there is alot of traffic in the pattern than no way will I nor any of my coworkers go to position and sit there for the 20 seconds as stated that would be well yeah absolutely retarded.
However when it is say 9 am, and we know that there is nobody around than yes we will do our thing sitting there, if it is busy than we will do it holding short prior to takeoff or on the taxi while going to position.

I have never held up anyone doing this nor made it tight for any aircraft on final.

cheers

[justplanecrazy]

Don't you think it'd be wiser to tell the controller that you need 20 seconds in position and let him judge whether or not the traffic allows it. After all that is what you're paying him for. The only thing more dangerous than a pilot not paying attention is a pilot that thinks he knows the whole picture from his limited cockpit view and trys to do our job for us.

How do you know there is no-one around? Do you monitor the frequency for 5 minutes at the hold line before calling ready? If a controller told you that you're not supposed to do this, you obviously caused someone a problem at some time. Wouldn't it be a lot easier to just pull up to the hold line, call tower stating your ready and need 20 seconds in position? I have airlines flying old equipment that do this on half of their take off calls. That way I can easily build in another 20 seconds by slowing the guy on final and still get him into position in front. I also have cessna pilots that cause me a ton of problems by pulling onto the runway and then dropping flaps and applying full power to check the RPM before releasing the brakes in front of an airliner 2 miles final. I don't get upset at them because they are new and weren't taught properly, but I generally make them number last when things are tight, to avoid a dangerous situation. If they have an instructor or a CPL, then they do get told that they cannot do that as were you!

Your original post didn't deserve a mature response, nor did your second one where you called me a jackass for stating that your actions are obviously stupid. No I didn't want to get into a pissing match, but when I see someone stating that they know a rule, have been told to follow it, and then proudly state that they don't bother anyways followed by a smiley face, it does get me a little hot under the collar. I can tell you that there are a lot harsher things being said in the tower when you do this and they know your ident and don't ever rely on you taking off with no delays... hence number last. CPL_ATC I believe is an IFR controller. If he had numerous pilots doing this to him every week, he probably wouldn't have responded so politely. Either that or he's already on his valium perscription.

[flyin' fish]

Wow, I didn't think that this would cause such a stir.

JPC, I can see your point of view as a controller how you're trying to fit everything together at an airport with something in mind. But you say that pilots should or probably are monitoring the tower frequency 5 mins or so prior to take off. The examples I gave are not the case. In YHZ, you hold short of rwy 14, switch to tower then get a clearance to position or hold short of rwy 23. This usually means 2 mins tops by the time you take off. MOST times you hardly hear from other aircraft that already on approach. Aircraft that are heavily loaded need that extra 200ft to safely and legally take off. The pet peve I have is that the controller doesn't give the pilot the full picture and waits until it's too late to yell and scream to cancel the take off clearance, AND order the aircraft off the runway despite being ready for take off. The AIM is not clear on this matter.
Some good points from both sides on this thread.
My 2 cents again

[justplanecrazy]

flyin' fish, you're making the same point that I was.
Flying high stated this:

It's more common sense, if there is alot of traffic in the pattern than no way will I nor any of my coworkers go to position and sit there for the 20 seconds as stated that would be well yeah absolutely retarded.
However when it is say 9 am, and we know that there is nobody around than yes we will do our thing sitting there, if it is busy than we will do it holding short prior to takeoff or on the taxi while going to position.

I was asking flying high if he sits at the hold line and monitors the frequency for 5 minutes in order to ensure that there is nobody around before calling for take-off or how does he know there is nobody around. I know this is ludicris and no pilot does it. Even if they did, there still is no way for a pilot to know if there is nobody around before he requests takeoff. Who knows, we may have numbered someone on the visual at 20 miles and 10min's out, or we could even have a nordo on final. It doesn't take alot of traffic in the pattern to be an issue, it only takes one aircraft on final. My point was that it would be much wiser to tell the controller that you need 20 seconds in position and let the guy that's been monitoring the frequency and radar for the past hour, make the decision whether or not that will work.

As far as not keeping you in the picture, we are not an advisory service telling you about everything that is going on so that you can keep your own planes seperate. There is a reason why that service is provided in unsaturated airspace. We know how long it takes you to do a certain manouver and whether we have room to allow it or not. We try to keep you in the picture when able and neccessary but when you call ready with lots of space to get you out, there is no need for us to tell you about the guy 3 minutes back. You are required to tell us if you need a delay prior to accepting the take off clearance and entering the runway. If you start to backtrack without authorization, then yes we get a little uptight. What should have been a 1 min. departure will now take 3 and we have to scramble to work something out. You were given a take off clearance from the intersection, which would have worked, and you backtracked without authorization. It has nothing to do with keeping you in the picture, it is simply that you disobeyed a clearance and screwed up our timing.

Sure our MANOPS isn't cut and dry about when we have to ask you if you can depart from an intersection and how much length reminds but on the other hand, I don't know how much clearer the AIM could be:
RAC 4.2.8
Upon receipt of the takeoff clearance, the pilot shall acknowledge and take off without delay, or inform ATC if unable to do so. A pilot may request to use the full length of the runway for takeoff at any time. If the runway is to be entered at an intersection so that back tracking is required, the pilot shall indicate his/her intentions and obtain a clearance for the manoeuvre before entering the runway.

Despite whether or not we have to ask you if you can depart from an intersection, you as a pilot, CANNOT DELAY ON THE RUNWAY OR BACKTRACK WITHOUT OBTAINING A CLEARANCE FOR THE MANOUVRE BEFORE ENTERING THE RUNWAY.
I don't know, I tried bold, italic and underline this time. Hopefully it'll make sense to someone else now.

[Wasn't Me]

I learned a phrase in ATC school back when smoke singals were used to coordinate.

"It ain't no parking lot once on the runway keep moving forward or advise ATC"

The same person who backtracks the extra 50 feet without advising is the same guy who complains when he has to overshoot.

[bezerker]

As usual, there are more annoying ways than one to interpret RAC 4.2.8

"A pilot may request, or the controller may suggest, takeoff using only part of a runway. A pilot’s request will be approved provided noise abatement procedures, traffic and other conditions permit. If suggested by the controller, the available length of the runway will be stated. It is the pilot’s responsibility to ensure that the portion of the runway to be used will be adequate for the takeoff run."

So, if the runway (like many) has either a displaced threshold, or if the last taxiway to the runway is a few hundred feet from the end, and the pilot is cleared for takeoff without the controller stating the length remaining, wouldn't it be safe to assume that the controller isn't suggesting an intesection takeoff, and since the pilot didn't request it either, a full length takeoff would be assumed.

Also the term "the pilot shall acknowledge and take off without delay" can be taken many different ways. What is a delay to one, may not be a delay to another. If a taxi to the button of the runway and a full static power before brake release takeoff is required, the it is not really a delay for a plane to immediately do that. If an immediate rolling takeoff is required, then it should be stated.

I'll add another small comment for those with a limited view from the tower as to what the big picture in the cockpit is .Takeoff distances are calculated down to the foot. If the chart or FMS says I need 3710', then I legally and safely need 3710'. If a controller tells me to take off from A4 and expects me to pull open the CFS and a protractor to figure out if I am legal and safe, well.........lets get back to reality. And for him to tell me that if I am concerned about whether it is 3500' or 4000' remaining, I shouldn't be going, ............no snide remark required.

Pilot/controller jabs aside, it is pretty simple.

Should pilots say they are backtracking every time them do, in order to ensure everyone knows whats going on? Of course.

Should ATC assume that a plane will use the full length unless otherwise discussed, preferably determined while taxiing? Of course.

[justplanecrazy]

Won't this thing ever die???

As usual, there are more annoying ways than one to interpret RAC 4.2.8

So, if the runway (like many) has either a displaced threshold, or if the last taxiway to the runway is a few hundred feet from the end, and the pilot is cleared for takeoff without the controller stating the length remaining, wouldn't it be safe to assume that the controller isn't suggesting an intesection takeoff, and since the pilot didn't request it either, a full length takeoff would be assumed.

NOOOOO!!!!

RAC 4.2.8 "If the RWY is to be entered at an intersection so that back tracking is required, the pilot shall indicate his/her inentions and obtain a clearance for the manouvre before entering the runway."

A clearance to backtrack is not from "J" cleared take-off rwy 16. A clearance to backtrack is, "backtrack to position!!!"

Asking for taxi to the active is not an assumption that you are asking for a backtrack!!!

Also the term "the pilot shall acknowledge and take off without delay" can be taken many different ways. What is a delay to one, may not be a delay to another. If a taxi to the button of the runway and a full static power before brake release takeoff is required, the it is not really a delay for a plane to immediately do that. If an immediate rolling takeoff is required, then it should be stated.

An immediate take-off is an immediate take-off. We have specific phraseology and scenarios in which to use it. This reference does not in any way refer to an immediate take off. It refers to the standard take-off clearance. A take-off without delay would involve a stadard take-off not requiring anything outside of the normal operations of an aircraft.

A C150 with 10,000' of runway sitting at the threshold while they drop the flaps, hold the brakes, check the RPM, etc. in order to do a shortfield take-off, is a delay. It is an operation outside of the standard take-off procedure and as such requires notification prior to entering the runway. The same thing can be said for a DC-9 during cold operations when it needs to power up for 30 seconds before starting the roll, or a 737 waiting on the back-end, or someone concerned about wake turbulence and wanting to add some extra room.

If during any take-off roll you are delaying to do anything outside of the standard take-off procedures, you are required to inform ATC prior to entering the runway. How else are we supposed to judge our spacing without giving everyone an immediate with traffic 10 miles final?

I'll add another small comment for those with a limited view from the tower as to what the big picture in the cockpit is .Takeoff distances are calculated down to the foot. If the chart or FMS says I need 3710', then I legally and safely need 3710'.

I'm sorry I guess my flying experience dissapeared and I can only see things from the side of the tower. I've done both what have you done?? Like I said, for a departure from an intersection the CAP gives you a pretty good idea of what rwy length is remaining. I've never seen an FMS in a C150, PA31, BE76 or most of the planes that we use intersection departures with. When ever I offer an intersection to a plane large or fast enough to have an FMS, I'll give distance remaining. If at anytime you want the exact measurement, its as simple as saying "tower what's the rwy length from "J"?"

Pilot/controller jabs aside, it is pretty simple.

YES IT IS!!!

Should pilots say they are backtracking every time them do, in order to ensure everyone knows whats going on? Of course.

NO THEY SHOULDN'T. THEY SHOULD REQUEST THE BACKTRACK AND WAIT FOR A CLEARANCE TO DO SO, PRIOR TO ENTERING THE RWY as per RAC 4.2.8!!!!!

Should ATC assume that a plane will use the full length unless otherwise discussed, preferably determined while taxiing? Of course.

WITHOUT BEING GIVING A CLEARANCE TO DO SO, THE PILOT IS NOT ALLOWED TO BACKTRACK, AND SHALL NOT DO SO!!!

Should we expect them to still do so despite it being painfully obvious that they are not permitted to??? I think this thread has clearly shown what almost every controller lives by. Some pilots don't seem to understand CAR's, the AIM, or even plain language and that the worst case scenario should always be expected and a plan in place in case it happens.

[bezerker]

As far as posts ever dying, all I can suggest is that you respond in under two weeks to keep topic stagnation to a minimum.

Unfortunately the AIM you love to quote is contradictory. In addition to what you state it also says "A pilot may request, or the controller may suggest, takeoff using only part of a runway". If you don't suggest it and I don't either, what option is left? It seems to me that a full length takeoff is the obvious option.

If you want someone to take off from the intersection, you should state it in a clearance. Preferably do it before you clear them to position. Why is that such a difficult task?

Now there are really two different types of intersections to a runway, the one closest to the end, and the rest. I don't think I have ever held at a mid-runway intersection and NOT had the controller specifically say go to position at X intersection. If this discussion is about pilots cleared to takeoff at a midpoint intersections, and then proceding to taxi one mile back to the button, I don't think there is any arguement with you.

But if what this discussion is all about is that you are too lazy to say "cleared for takeoff from Juliet" when Juliet is 100' from the end, you preferred that the plane did a rolling takeoff from the intersection as opposed to using the entire runway length, well...

An "immediate takeoff" is explained very clearly. "Takeoff without delay" has no explanation or definition and will differ for every operator and for every aircraft. I was unaware that ATC has every companies approved SOP's and aircraft AFM's at hand regarding takeoff procedures. I apologize for that. It doesn't change the fact that some aircraft take longer to get going than others. For future knowledge, very few AFM's permit rolling takeoffs and most turbine engines will require 6-10 seconds to achieve takeoff thrust/power. If you add proper line up checks to an AFM static takeoff, you are looking at about 20 seconds minimum. Any plane that takes off in less than this is usually doing so with disregard to company SOP's because they don't want a delay. If ATC needs an immediate takeoff they should say it. If you are uncertain as to a particular aircrafts time requirements, feel free to ask before clearing them to position.

I don't understand your next argument with regards to takeoff distances required. It is understandable that your aircraft performance knowledge has degraded over time. I have no experience in the tower and I am at a loss as to how ATC experience relates to aircraft takeoff requiements. Anyways, I will attempt to help you remember. 10,000' with a Privately registered C150 is fairly obvious. What about 4,700 and a Hawker 800? 6,300' and a 727? How much fuel do they have on board? Are they planning a de-rated takeoff? What flap setting? Private or 704? The only people that know the distance required are the flight crew. Most flight planning is done using the entire runway length. When immediately cleared for a departure from an unplanned intersection, rulers and estimations from runway diagrams are not really professional cockpit conduct. I hope you will agree with me, ATC should give distances from intersections as they have no idea what the takeoff requirements are of each aircraft, plus it is required for ATC to give these distances in the AIM 4.2.8.

Your last two arguments again seem to only accept part of the AIM and ignore another part. It is unclear.

It is very simple. If you just say "cleared for an immediate takeoff from X-ray" and the pilot reads that back to you, there is no confusion.

[justplanecrazy]

Bezerker, if you think the AIM is contradictory, then you're obviously misinterpreting it. I agree that the one reference refering to when we have to give runway length remaining and ask you if you can accept an intersection, is a little foggy. In my opinion that reference is only refering to airport layouts where you or the pilot will be departing from an intersection not at the end of the taxiway. On the other hand, the other reference clears up any misconceptions as to whether or not you can backtrack when you're only cleared take off and the answer is no!!!!

Every take-off clearance from a taxiway includes from "X" cleared take-off rwy XX. It's not hard, we do it everyday. To have to ask every aircraft if he can depart from the taxiway that doesn't go to the end and then tell him the runway length remaining, would take so much time on the freq, that we'd never be able to push traffic. That is why the reference in the AIM states that you are required to ask for a backtrack if needed.

All the experienced pilots that fly in and out of our field call tower with either XX ready for take-off, or XX with you for the backtrack. This eliminates an enormous amount of frequency congestion and lets us do our job. It was also drilled into me as a pilot as far back as my first solo, so I don't understand where the confusion comes in. Maybe you're not there in your flight training yet.

Take off with no delay is not subjective. If you are doing anything out of the ordinary, you are delaying. No smartass we don't have SOP's and AFM's for every aircraft but after seeing 1,000 of them take off every day you develop a pretty good idea of how long they will take. If they are going to do something that'll take another 30 seconds then the last 300 flights, then they are required to let us know before entering the runway. It's not fuckin' rocket science, but thanks for letting me believe it is. The reason I brought it up was someone on here was stating that they often sit in position for 30 seconds running up in the morning, after being cleared take off, and know they shouldn't, but don't care. 90% of the time, we need take-offs with no significant delay, should we give immediate's for 90% of our traffic? If we do that, we would have issues with an immediate not being an immediate take-off. How many times have you departed with your aircraft? If this time might take a little longer than the last 300 times... let us know. Once again, not rocket science.

Wow, you must fly out of some pretty wacky places to see 727's departing from intersections. If you ever want to know the rwy length remaining, sure go ahead and pull out the rulers to try and determine the exact length, but if its that important and you want to depart from the intersection, why not just ask ATC what length remains??? I'm starting to think that you're the guy in the 150 that's always eating shit for backtracking without a clearance, or perhaps a 200hr seneca wonder sitting right seat in an RJ. Where do you come up with this stuff? If you plan for and want full length, then you simply tell tower you're on tower ready for the backtrack. If you might want the intersection but need the exact length, then ask the tower length remaining. If you see in the CFS that the intersection is 1/2 way down a 3,000' rwy and you're thinking about departing it in a C150 but need to know if it's 1,400 or 1,600', then you probably shouldn't be departing from the intersection anyways.

Thanks for coaching me on my phraseology, I imagine you've determined this through your extensive experience controlling aircraft, hence the immediate clearance whenever a 1 minute delay would cause you problems.

I've been based out of fields with forced backtracks for full length departures and right from the beginning of my training through to my commercial flying, it was always known that you had to ask for a backtrack. If you say you're ready for take off, you're requesting an intersection departure. I now work ATC at a field with a forced backtrack. Every experienced pilot that flys out of here requests the backtrack. That is what leads me to believe you're flying a 150 with 20hr's, or spend a lot of time in uncontrolled airspace to not see the light.

It is very simple!!!! If you want a backtrack call tower, ready for the backtrack! If you want to request an intersection departure call tower, ready for take-off! If you want to know the exact rwy length remaining, ask! If you want a delay on the rwy, tell me before entering it!

And I think I'm done here as no doubt you will come back and argue for the sake of arguing and I'm not getting anywhere with this. Happy trails and enjoy the embarasment that comes with me explaining to your fellow pilots why they're pulling up and going around for you.

[bezerker]

Hmmm, you say that the AIM and MANOPS are foggy and then present your interpretation. You have yours, I have mine. It seems to me that the easiest way to avoid confusion is to say what you mean, and not to assume that everbody subscribes to your interpretations. Why is that so hard?

Next you say that you do not have enough time to follow proper radio procedures. I am not sure what to say about that. It seems to speak for itself.

Whenever I have seen controllers "pushing traffic", the phrase "taxi to position at X-ray and be ready for the immediate" or "can you accept an immediate takeoff from x-ray" is common. One day you may visit a field that uses such procedures and you will see that it is not a big deal at all, and that it is actually required in the AIM for you to state the intersection when clearing an aircraft to position, as per RAC 4.2.5:

"The tower may instruct aircraft to “taxi to position and wait”. Controllers will issue the name of the runway intersection or taxiway with the authorization if the position taxied to is not at the threshold of the departing runway. "

Very clear english there. Nobody will backtrack unexpectedly with clear instructions like that.


Now, please point me to a definition of "take off without delay" asides from your personal one.

I have difficulty believing that you see 1,000 aircraft of the same type, with the same fuel and passenger load, same destination, and same wind/temperature conditions taking off every day. That seems hard to believe that you would even see that over many years. Also, how do you know how long my previous 300 flight took? Is there a chart with that info somewhere? Is there time guidelines that ATC uses with regards to being cleared for takeoff, or is it subjective, with ATC guessing the time in position, such as you saying 20 seconds one day and something else another day? I would be interested to know. We may be arguing about the same thing though. Obviously doing a runup is not in compliance with the wording "without delay." On another note, I have been at many airports with the controller issuing every aircraft an immediate takeoff clearance. It is not really a big deal.


I'm not sure what you are rambling about with your "pull out the rulers" comment. I earlier said that this is not what a pilot should do and it was you who originally suggested it. I can refresh your memory:

"As far as the comment about how much length remains, how about pulling out a CFS and looking where the intersection is and how long the full length of the runway is. A pilot should know where he is on the airfield and approx how many feet remain."

Forgetful I suppose, but it is good to see you are starting to change your tune on pilots knowing the remaining runway distances from intersections. And that you agree that the controller should give it to the pilot if requested. Which of course is actually required for you to give if you are the one to suggest the intersection takeoff.


Which brings us back to the regs, if the pilot didn't request it, and the controller didn't suggest it with the pilot accepting it, a takeoff from an intersection is not authorized. Very plain english there. If you took off from the intersection without meeting the above conditions, you would be breaking the rules.

You seem to love the statement:

"If the runway is to be entered at an intersection so that back tracking is required, the pilot shall indicate his/her intentions and obtain a clearance for the manoeuvre before entering the runway."

Well, if we put the two paragraphs together it becomes obvious that if the pilot has not asked for an intersection takeoff and you have not offered it to him, he has clearly indicated his intentions, which is to use the full length. The controller would of course recognize this situation and would understand that when he cleared the aircraft for takeoff, that he was clearing the aircraft to use the full length of the runway. Not rocket science.

So hopefully we are all clear on this matter now. It's to the end of the runway unless otherwise discussed. Anything else would be against the regs.

[zzjayca]

bezerker: Which brings us back to the regs, if the pilot didn't request it, and the controller didn't suggest it with the pilot accepting it, a takeoff from an intersection is not authorized. Very plain english there. If you took off from the intersection without meeting the above conditions, you would be breaking the rules.

You are correct it is very plain english and I agree with you. However, this DOES NOT authorize the aircraft to backtrack. You can't have it both ways. If you want to quote the AIM then make sure you use all appropriate references.

justplanecrazy is also correct when he says an aircraft is required to inform ATC of their intention to backtrack BEFORE ENTERING THE RUNWAY.

Also, after you have been working ATC for a couple of years, you learn what to expect from different aircraft types and even different companies flying the same type. This allows us to anticipate what the aircraft will MOST LIKELY do and it is obvious when an aircraft is not performing as it normally does (from an ATC perspective). If the flight crews aren't aware of their "normal" performance then I would suggest they pay more attention to their job. Again if you are going to quote the AIM, quote it completely. As justplanecrazy stated, an aircraft is REQUIRED to inform ATC of any UNUSUAL DELAY PRIOR TO ENTERING THE RUNWAY.

You can argue semantics about what is an "unusual delay" all you like. But if most flight crews have your attitude it really isn't any skin off my ass. It is you and your companies who will be delayed because ATC can't handle the aircraft efficiently as a result of flight crews not informing ATC of items which help us do our job.