Corporate jet flight crew expressed concerns about the new Runway 18 VFR Departure procedure out of SPS.
Synopsis
Corporate jet flight crew expressed concerns about the new Runway 18 VFR Departure procedure out of SPS.
Narrative
Aircraft and crew were ready for departure at SPS Runway 18/36 (former 17/35). Received clearance for takeoff from SPS Tower with additional instruction to fly west at 2;000 FT MSL. Normal departure instructions are south at or below 2;300 FT MSL until 5 miles south of the airport. Pilot Not Flying inquired about southbound VFR departure and Controller repeated instructions. Additional query due to new departure procedure resulted in Tower Supervisor (Student/ Trainee personnel present in different positions on Sheppard AFB) restating 'fly west at 2;000 FT MSL'. Pilot Not Flying acknowledged takeoff clearance and I made a normal takeoff. After initial takeoff; cleaning up the airplane and at a safe altitude (1;700 FT to 1;900 FT MSL); we initiated a turn towards the west but realized that from our present position and at 2;000 FT MSL there could be an obstacle clearance issue with 2;100 FT MSL towers SW of our position. We contacted Sheppard AFB Departure Control on a SSW heading to stay clear (east) of obstacles. ATC issued a 'fly heading 180' and continue the climb for our IFR clearance. No other communication was received from Sheppard Tower or Sheppard Departure Control for conflicting obstacles and no communication was received upon return on same day. During flight and upon return we (crew) discussed the new Runway 18 VFR departure procedure especially pertaining to obstacle clearance when maintaining 2;000 ft. MSL or below (1;000 FT AGL). We discussed further the problem that this clearance could present to local community and non-local pilots unfamiliar with obstacles to SW of Runway 18. We asked local FAAST Team representative to invite Sheppard AFB ATC/Tower or Safety personnel to next local monthly Safety meeting and brief local community on any possible changes being initiated by Sheppard AFB and our concerns for potential conflicts with obstacles SW of SPS.Having flown aircraft in the military while stationed at Sheppard AFB for XX years perceived situational awareness of conflicts with other aircraft in pattern high and before accepting departure procedure that could conflict with obstacles should have been discussed more with crew and ATC to make sure all participants are aware of potential obstacle conflicts. Communications within community and safety organizations is important to ensure that new procedures that are developed and implemented by Sheppard AFB have included community input and traffic deconfliction (Military VFR pattern on [Runway] 15R and civilian traffic departing or arriving to Runway 18) versus obstacle clearance. Both new and old departure and 'standard arrival procedures' (2;300 ft. MSL while approaching Runway 18 from the west) provide traffic clearance of at least 500 ft. vertical clearance between aircraft.Hopefully a conversation between Sheppard AFB personnel with pilots in the local community can facilitate awareness about traffic conflicts; potential obstacle conflicts and emergency procedure operations of civilian aircraft and have continued mutual safe operations.
Second reporter narrative
Standard VFR Runway 18/36; formerly 17/35; to the south 'straight out to south at or below 2;300 FT MSL until 5 miles south.' This flight I called for T/O 18 VFR to the south; TWR stated new unexpected instructions; 'fly west at 2000 FT MSL.' I inquired about south VFR departure; controller repeated; 'fly west at 2;000 FT MSL.' I queried if new procedure for southbound VFR departures and supervisor came on (student/trainee personnel at SPS) and restated fly west at 2;000 FT MSL to our query. I acknowledged and we made normal takeoff to south and as reaching safe altitude (1;700 - 1;900 FT MSL) we initiated a westerly turn but then realized arc of turn from our present position at 2;000 FT MSL could conflict with 2;100 MSL obstacles SW of our position. We contacted SPS departure on SSW heading (east of obstacles) and ATC issued 180 heading and climb for our IFR clearance. No comments from Tower or Departure about our departure track for conflicting obstacles or traffic. During flight and upon return; we (crew) discussed 'new' 18 departure instruction and potential conflict with obstacles SW of airport; especially if not aware of local area; and if SPS intending 'new' procedure as yet undebriefed with local community. Contacted local FAST team rep to see if he could invite SPS ATC and safety personnel to next local monthly safety meeting to brief local community on any possible changes being initiated by SPS and our concerns for potential conflicts with obstacles SW of SPS. Having flown off SPS for YY years; expectation bias high on receiving 'old' instructions for VFR to south (fly south at or below 2;300 FT MSL) and clarifying 'new' instructions important to understand. Before automatic compliance with ATC (i.e.; just for the sake of compliance) awareness and discussion within crew important for potential conflicts with obstacles as well as traffic with resolution to deconflict as event unfolds. Communications within community and safety organizations important for ensuring 'new' procedures develop/implemented by SPS have included community input and deconflicting solutions for procedures (normal T38 traffic pattern on 15R; 6000 FT horizontally and 500 FT above) versus obstacle awareness to the SW. Both 'old' and 'new' departure procedures provide exact same close proximity to T38 traffic operations that locals are used to (T38's in right overhead closed traffic off 15R). 'New' procedure for westbound at 2000 FT MSL does not change relationships to T38 (overhead) traffic but presents potential conflict with obstacles SW of airport and arc of turn for higher performance aircraft (180 to 200 KIAS/GS) initiating westerly turns after reaching altitudes (700 to 1000 FT AGL) after takeoff. Hopefully SPS can be made aware of their 'New' (unintentional?) conflicts and work with local community and operators to provide for continued safe operations that deconflict both obstacles and traffic.
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.