Cleared Direct To?

[Gannet167]

Often I enter a zone and I get cleared direct to a point further down the line. Sometimes this point is the exit point of the center/FIR, but sometimes it's random. Of course when it cuts a corner and saves some flight time it makes sense, but often I get cleared to a point that is on a very straight path and it saves no time at all. If ATC hadn't re-cleared me, or if I over flew all the in between points my flight path would have been basically identical. Sometimes when I'm about 1 minute from point A and about to make the turn to point B, I get cleared to point B and end up basically flying the flight planned route anyway.

It often seems like a bunch of useless radio chatter and button pushing. I'm sure there's something behind it though, from an ATC point of view. Can someone enlighten?

[Dees]

Sometimes, the direct-to is used to solve conflicts. Some old school controllers clear people direct, to ensure that they know the exact route the aircraft is going to fly on. Turns inside someone's airspace can create conflicts between aircraft or make them harder to judge.

[Gannet167]

So they're thinking that the radius of my turn between waypoints and/or the margin of error along an airway is an unknown, whereas a straight line is quite predictable?

[Dees]

and/or.... they've done it so many times, it's now become habit. Each chunk of airspace has some pretty common confliction points and a lot of these directs, takes aircraft out of the confliction points, and out of habit, they issue directs, even if there may not have been a conflict,

[Gannet167]

Thanks.

[green_between]

Being a typical type A controller, I know that sometimes I feel the inner OCD urge to do this just to "clean" things up (It may not seem like much but one less turn by an aircraft can be one less thing to monitor when busy). Also sometimes a more direct route of a degree or two can solve conflictions or help subtly with sequencing. Generally, at least for me, I tend to always want to give direct to as far a point as possible depending on procedures, coordination, traffic level, etc. Hopefully it helps the aircraft out, but it also gets the aircraft out of my airspace sooner, which is a bonus.

[husky]

Generally if operationally feasible (traffic, procedures etc.) I will ask the aircraft if it wants more direct, and if so where to. I understand planes will file sling shot routes to take advantage of winds etc. On the other hand, sometimes I NEED an aircraft to go somewhere for procedures or traffic, and in that case you are going to be cleared there whether you like it or not...By the nature of the job, sometimes people are going to get sent where they don't want to (ie a direct routing that you didn't request or an altitude that is less than ideal) because we haven't yet figured out how 2 planes can be in the same spot at once.

[Gannet167]

Alright, so to continue the DTO question - if I'm given a Direct To, I punch it in the box and it takes the position at the moment I press "Enter" as the "From" point and proceeds to the "To" point. This often results in an "S" turn as the aircraft turns towards the "To" point and then turns again the opposite way to intercept the new track that is defined by where I pressed "Enter" 5 seconds ago.

To alleviate this (because it sometimes seems to cause confusion on some people's radar screens) we press DTO, then as we're nearing the new RNAV defined track, press DTO again so the aircraft only makes one turn, and not an "S" turn. Technically, it's probably wrong since when I'm cleared direct to something, it's from where I am at the moment ATC says "direct to XXX" to that point, and by pressing DTO twice I am re-defining the "From" point in the box. The maximum difference would be the radius of turn.

What's ATC's take on this?

[Dees]

In a high level environment, it would be barely noticeable at best. Myself, I would appreciate avoiding an S-turn.

[YYZJuice]

In terminal we often use direct to the DTW for sequencing and yes a few degrees can matter. Often you will be asked to hold your heading beyond the DTW to put you on a slant base to fit you into the sequence on final.

[parrot_head]

And please....when being vectored around traffic and the controller says "cleared direct to SUMSPOT" don't turn back towards that traffic to intercept some arbitrary track from your departure airport to the destination.

[kevenv]

And please....when being vectored around traffic and the controller says "cleared direct to SUMSPOT" don't turn back towards that traffic to intercept some arbitrary track from your departure airport to the destination.

Huge +1

On one occasion I queried a pilot who did this very thing. His response was "you didn't say via present position direct".

Seriously? If cleared direct SUMSPOT doesn't mean from where you are right now, how could it possibly mean from where you are right now to some arbitrary point on the original track to direct SUMSPOT?

If you are cleared direct, it ALWAYS means from where you are right now. If I want you to re-intercept a track, I will give you a heading ("turn right hdg 310 to intercept on course")

[ILSfan07]

And please....when being vectored around traffic and the controller says "cleared direct to SUMSPOT" don't turn back towards that traffic to intercept some arbitrary track from your departure airport to the destination.

Huge +1

On one occasion I queried a pilot who did this very thing. His response was "you didn't say via present position direct".

Seriously? If cleared direct SUMSPOT doesn't mean from where you are right now, how could it possibly mean from where you are right now to some arbitrary point on the original track to direct SUMSPOT?

If you are cleared direct, it ALWAYS means from where you are right now. If I want you to re-intercept a track, I will give you a heading ("turn right hdg 310 to intercept on course")

While vectoring is different, and obviously in a radar environment, I was under the impression that there is an important distinction between "cleared direct" and "cleared direct present position". For example, picking up IFR after departing an uncontrolled airport, especially in a non-radar environment. (i.e. go direct on the legs you said you would when you filed, because I don't know exactly where you physically are right now, and don't want to be responsible for sending you into a mountain)

Correct me if I'm wrong? Just a point of clarification for my future reference.

[ahramin]

Small wonder there is so much confusion, neither the AIM nor the MANOPS specify what direct, present position direct, or proceed on course means.

[parrot_head]

under the impression that there is an important distinction between "cleared direct" and "cleared direct present position"

I'm assuming you meant "cleared present position direct", and no, from an ATC point of view, there isn't any difference. Direct, no matter how it is phrased means direct.

For example, picking up IFR after departing an uncontrolled airport, especially in a non-radar environment. (i.e. go direct on the legs you said you would when you filed, because I don't know exactly where you physically are right now, and don't want to be responsible for sending you into a mountain)

If you are cleared direct Airport A from Airport B, you can carry out your departure procedures and then point your nose direct Airport B. No need to go and intercept the direct track from A to B. There are non-radar procedures that ATC uses to allow for deviations either side of track and ATC is not able to clear you below minimum IFR altitudes while in controlled airspace. (obviously, in uncontrolled airpsace you are on your own). If lateral separation is going to be an issue, your clearance will contain very specific instructions on radials/bearings to intercept.

And to add more fuel to the fire, if you filed Airport A to Airport B via direct and your clearance contains the the instructions to climb runway heading to 8,000 before proceeding on course, you can point the nose direct Airport B as soon as you reach 8,000. No need to backtrack to intercept a direct track from A to B. I've checked with Terminal and Enroute controllers (radar and non-radar) and they all agree.

Let the games begin.

[Braun]

Parrot_head got it 100%. +1 here

[Shadowfax]

WRONG!

IF you file to Point B via Point A (or any intermidiate points) and are cleared "on course" you are to intercept that on course track - no exceptions.

If you are cleared via "present position direct" it means EXACTLY that - including any maneuvering to intercept that course from the time you receive the clearance, input it into FMS (etc) and execute the command.

IF you are cleared "direct XXX", after a vector or noise or whatever, then you may turn and roll out direct.

To categorically state ATC will not notice is a falacy and a disservice. A 30 degree rate half turn at M.80 chews up considerable real estate - more than the radar sep standard - they MAY be relying on exactly what they issued (although there is likely a plan B). NON-radar you likely won't get PP > from a point in space because it can't be plotted with enough accuracy to meet any lateral standard (if lateral sep is required - which isn't always the case).

Do we need to debate "protected airspace" radar vs non-radar all over again?

[kevenv]

IF you file to Point B via Point A (or any intermidiate points) and are cleared "on course" you are to intercept that on course track - no exceptions.

Correct, but then again this discussion is about "direct". If I am being that general there is no traffic and honestly I really don't care what you do.

If you are cleared via "present position direct" it means EXACTLY that - including any maneuvering to intercept that course from the time you receive the clearance, input it into FMS (etc) and execute the command.

Would you be so kind as to point me to where in our books I can find "present position direct"? I've never been taught it nor I have I used it in over 20 years of doing this job, both terminal and enroute. You won't find it.

IF you are cleared "direct XXX", after a vector or noise or whatever, then you may turn and roll out direct.

Correct. Of course this also applies to the popular "present posion direct".

To categorically state ATC will not notice is a falacy and a disservice. A 30 degree rate half turn at M.80 chews up considerable real estate - more than the radar sep standard - they MAY be relying on exactly what they issued (although there is likely a plan B). NON-radar you likely won't get PP > from a point in space because it can't be plotted with enough accuracy to meet any lateral standard (if lateral sep is required - which isn't always the case).

The flow of European traffic to and from North America goes right over my airspace. The controllers there expect the same thing as me when they clear someone direct. Whether or not you are M.80 or not is irrelevant. Turn, roll out, push a button, do whatever you have to do to go direct from where you are. Non radar is definitely another issue and if there is other traffic you are correct, you won't get it. I have non radar airspace and traffic permitting give a/c that file direct their F/P when I can. Otherwise I issue very precise instructions to keep a/c separated.

Do we need to debate "protected airspace" radar vs non-radar all over again?

There is no such thing as "protected airspace" in a radar environment. You get 3, 4, 5, 6 miles or more radar separation from the next guy depending on where you are and your type. This is measured from the center of the target on my screen. Period.

Edited to add: If in doubt ask me. Far better to seek clarification than to just take a guess. I often ask pilots questions about stuff like this when things are slow on the frequency. I have also had them query me on things I have done. I don't know anyone that minds this.

[ahramin]

Kevenv, try MANOPS 833.5 C

833.5 C. Example:
FECK 102 CLEARED TO THE WINNIPEG
AIRPORT PRESENT POSITION DIRECT,
MAINTAIN FL260 CLEARANCE VALID UPON
REACHING FL260.

[Braun]

Honestly, even if it's in MANOPS I have never heard anyone I work with use "present position direct" and inversely have never seen a pilot not go direct present position to the point he is instructed to go too...but maybe that's just here!

[kevenv]

Kevenv, try MANOPS 833.5 C

833.5 C. Example:
FECK 102 CLEARED TO THE WINNIPEG
AIRPORT PRESENT POSITION DIRECT,
MAINTAIN FL260 CLEARANCE VALID UPON
REACHING FL260.

My apologies to all!

Let me rephrase lol, can anyone find it outside of chapter 8 "Altitude Reservations and Military Directives"? Guess I should have did a complete search. Outside of CH8 it doesn't exist. I deal with ALTRVs and Military ops on a daily basis and have never used the phrase.

Again my apologies, especially to Shadowfax.

[YYZJuice]

Honestly, even if it's in MANOPS I have never heard anyone I work with use "present position direct" and inversely have never seen a pilot not go direct present position to the point he is instructed to go too...but maybe that's just here!

Funny, just this week I worked a piston aircraft through terminal airspace. He was on vectors to parallel V98 to keep him clear of Pearson arrival traffic. Upon initial check in he requested to go direct destination CNP3 when able. I cleared him direct at that point which should have kept him 10 miles north of the airway and out of conflict with all traffic.

The pilot began a 90 degree turn to the south to join the airway. I don't see how this is direct in any sense of the word. If you are unable direct, then request vectors for a non-radar route.

[cyeg66]

Funny, just this week I worked a piston aircraft through terminal airspace. He was on vectors to parallel V98 to keep him clear of Pearson arrival traffic. Upon initial check in he requested to go direct destination CNP3 when able. I cleared him direct at that point which should have kept him 10 miles north of the airway and out of conflict with all traffic.

The pilot began a 90 degree turn to the south to join the airway. I don't see how this is direct in any sense of the word. If you are unable direct, then request vectors for a non-radar route.

Agreed. I've recently had exactly the same thing transpire, and funny enough, it was a 'Ho as well. At least, in my case, the pilot asked me, prior to making the turn, if it was ok if he'd turn right to intercept an outbound track, which in this instance, I had no problem with. Guess he figured he didn't want to lose his ass in a midair because he knew he'd just been vectored around some other fast moving object. How is it possible to interpret being cleared Direct To from any spot other than where the airplane actually is in time and space? You are HERE, I want you to fly straight THERE. DO we need to dilute (and pollute) common language as airlines have, no longer flying passengers "direct" but "non-stop"? What horseshit. IMO, controllers who use "present position" are only lending to pilot confusion on exactly what it means. On my 2D scope, all I want to see is a straight line from your little blip (ironically called Present Position Symbol) to the point where I just cleared you to, no more, no less. Undoubtedly, someone will again counter this point armed with terrific wisdom, "years of doing it this way", and some obscure paragraph in Manops. (hint: I only really care about part 4, sprinkled with little important bits of info from parts 3 + 5). The rest I take with me to the shitter (Not so pleasant when it's the CD-Rom version ) So let's have it.

[Shadowfax]

KevenV this needn't descend into yet another AVCanada personal attack episode. That being said, one person's opinion based upon their individual experience does not a country wide interpratation make - it really only highlights that individuals scope of understanding. Quite obviously this is an issue or the question would not be asked - regardless of your individual experience with the phrase in question.

I think it important to understand that not everything ATC says is an encrypted code word with required definable aviation only glossary type meaning (hence no AIM defn). I think the simple common definition of the language ought to suffice. If a controller says "I want you to go from your present postion in space direct to this point" - it means exactly that. If your A/C is RNPC certified there is a very real expectation of precise and required navigation performance. It is also eminently possible that the particular and precise track has been plotted, on RADAR, as clearing not only other traffic but some form of restricted airspace volume (MTCA, CYR etc). As stated there is no such thing as "protected airspace" on RADAR - flights are expected to navigate precisely as cleared and accepted (really no different than maintaining an altitude + or -). If the "present position direct" track clears said restricted area by 5.2nm the controller rightly assumes an appropriately certified A/C will follow that exact track. Granted if they don't there is a back up plan - however that does not replace the PIC accepting and complying with an ATC clearance ( a gross Nav error starts at 10nm off course - that does not mean pilots can wander either side of track by 10nm)

Bottom line ignoring ATC waxings, if in doubt ASK! Transmissions are free - fines are not

[kevenv]

KevenV this needn't descend into yet another AVCanada personal attack episode.

Personal attack? Ummmm.... I apologized dude.