New SID/STAR Phraseology Effective Apr 27 2017

[Rob Nabieszko]

Hello Canadian Controllers.

Please be advised that, effective April 27 2017, there will be new phraseology for SIDs and STARs in Canada. This new phraseology will bring us more in line with ICAO standards. Please take the time to review the following information prior to April 27.

New Phraseology

Effective April 27, the following new phraseology will be used: "Climb Via [SID name]" or "Descend Via [STAR name]".

For example, "ACA123, descend via HABBS3 arrival to 8,000" or "ACA123, descend via STAR to 8,000."

What It Means

When ATC uses the terms Climb Via/Descend Via, this means the pilot is expected to meet all charted restrictions on the indicated SID/STAR.

As always, ATC must issue clearance to a lower altitude prior to an aircraft starting descent. Any restrictions below the currently cleared altitude (while on a STAR) or above the currently cleared altitude (while on a SID) are not yet mandatory, but pilots should assume that they will need to meet these restrictions once further altitude clearances are received.

The new phraseology simply reinforces that the pilot must follow all restrictions on the STAR.

Pilot Phraseology

Pilots should now include any Climb via/Descend via clearances when contacting a new controller, as well as the cleared altitude. For example, "Toronto Arrival, WJA789 8,000 descending 7,000 via IMEBA2 arrival."

If a pilot does not mention the "via SID/STAR" phraseology during initial check-in, the controller should query if they received such a clearance, or assume they will not meet any published restrictions.

Use of the word VIA

Now that the word Via indicates a SID/STAR descent, the word Via must NOT be used for any lateral clearances while airborne.

The phrase "Proceed direct [fixname]" should be used for lateral routings. For example, "WEN7890, proceed direct OTMAG, rejoin FLAAM5 arrival."

For approach clearances conducted via a specific fix, use the phrase "transition". For example, "JZA649, cleared Halifax Airport RNAV runway 05, HOROW transition."

Note: The word VIA may still be used in taxi instructions, as it is not likely to be confused with airborne lateral/vertical instructions.

Departure Clearance Changes

Since SIDs are now part of most pre-departure clearances in Canada (whether via PDC or voice), top altitudes and climb via instructions must be included.

For example, "SWG604, cleared Vancouver, UKSAP1 departure, flight planned route. Depart runway 29. Climb via SID to 7,000. Squawk 1234."

Other Useful Phraseology

Should a controller wish to cancel remaining altitude and speed restrictions, use the following phrases:
"Climb/Descend Unrestricted to [altitude]."
"Climb/Descend to [altitude], Speed and altitude restrictions cancelled."

Further Reading

NavCanada has a page with a number of useful resources dedicated to this transtion:
http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/products-and-services/Pages/SIDs-STARs-phraseology.aspx

Among the documents you'll find there are links to the Aeronautical Information Circular, a phraseology guide for RNAV SIDS, STARs, and approaches, a FAQ, and a training video.


I realize this is probably as clear as mud, so please feel free to ask questions here. We will do our best to resolve any misunderstandings.

[Rob Nabieszko]

FYI, I will be writing a (shorter) post for pilots in the General forum shortly outlining the information from the pilot point-of-view.

[Rob Nabieszko]

One more note: "Descend Via..." phraseology replaces the "When ready, descend..." phraseology. "When ready, descend..." or "Descend at your discretion..." is implied when a "Descend via..." clearance is issued.

[Tomas Hansson]

What will the new wording be when we clear an aircraft for an approach via a STAR. The old phraseology was: "Cleared ILS rwy 26R approach via the CANUC4 arrival". It is not a transition so the example doesn't seem to apply - or does it?

Also, your example is using "via SID" in the IFR clearance. I believe "via" in the clearance should no longer be used: From the Q&A document:

23. What’s changing with the word VIA, compared to how it is used today?
ANS: VIA is removed from the routing segment of an IFR clearance. There is no replacement, it is simply removed.

[Rob Nabieszko]

What will the new wording be when we clear an aircraft for an approach via a STAR. The old phraseology was: "Cleared ILS rwy 26R approach via the CANUC4 arrival". It is not a transition so the example doesn't seem to apply - or does it?

Whatever the first point on the approach plate that the aircraft will fly, this will be the transition point. In this case, you will need to name the IAF, GOREG.
"Descend via CANUC4 arrival, cleared ILS runway 26R, GOREG transition."

Also, your example is using "via SID" in the IFR clearance. I believe "via" in the clearance should no longer be used:

That was a mistake in a hastily written example. I have corrected the example. It shows what a hard habit this will be for all of us to cease using the word via in these contexts.

[David Sapira]

I find it very odd that the new phraseology seems to include the use of the word "to", which I understand as generally frowned upon in ATC communications.

Climb via SID 7,000 should theoretically better than Climb via SID to 7,000 (which could be interpreted as 27,000).

Edit:

Found this reference guide which was helpful

For an RNAV SID with published restrictions, “ABC CLEARED TO THE HAMILTON AIRPORT, WATERLOO ONE DEPARTURE, DIRECT, CLIMB VIA SID FOUR THOUSAND, SQUAWK…” is used

[Rob Nabieszko]

I find it very odd that the new phraseology seems to include the use of the word "to", which I understand as generally frowned upon in ATC communications.

Climb via SID 7,000 should theoretically better than Climb via SID to 7,000 (which could be interpreted as 27,000).

David, I totally agree. I don't know where I read it, but I swear at some point I read a document that strongly urged that controllers eliminate the word "to" in climbs and descents. But as I've reviewed the MANOPs (and Sloan will tell you), all the official NavCanada documentation still references the phrases "CLIMB TO (ALTITUDE)" or "DESCEND TO (ALTITUDE)". I still plan to teach people to try to avoid the word "TO" just to avoid those misunderstandings.

Thanks for the link and the sample departure clearance. I was wondering how the VIA phraseology was going to fit in. Now good luck to all of us, trying to strike the word VIA from our vocabularies. I think avoiding "...via TEXEN, cleared RNAV32" is going to be the hardest change.

[David Sapira]

What I found fairly interesting was this part of the Q&A:

26. How and when will ATC use “CLIMB VIA” for hybrid Vector-RNAV SIDs?

ANS: In the case of a hybrid SID (vectors to waypoint on transition route), ATC will use CLIMB TO in the initial IFR clearance. The departure controller will use CLIMB VIA SID once the aircraft joins the RNAV portion of the SID which has charted restrictions

I believe this is referring to airports with departure procedures like Toronto which provides a runway heading and climb departure, with a vector onto the SID.

So I think the clearance would look like:

ACA124 is cleared to Montreal Trudeau airport, DEDKI3 departure, MIGLO transition, flight planned route. Depart Runway 24R. Climb 5000. Squawk 1234.

Which makes sense, as there aren't any vertical restrictions on the climb. The departure controller would also provide a 'CLIMB' and not a 'CLIMB VIA' instruction due to DEDKI3 not having any published altitutde or speed restrictions.

[Rob Nabieszko]

Which makes sense, as there aren't any vertical restrictions on the climb. The departure controller would also provide a 'CLIMB' and not a 'CLIMB VIA' instruction due to DEDKI3 not having any published altitutde or speed restrictions.

Thank you for pointing this out. It makes sense. In Canada, there are actually very few SIDs with altitude restrictions, so the Climb Via phraseology will seldom be applicable. Excellent point.

[Mark Walsh]

ACA124 is cleared to Montreal Trudeau airport, DEDKI3 departure, MIGLO transition, flight planned route. Depart Runway 24R. Climb 5000. Squawk 1234.

Why are we even saying Climb 5000 when the DEDKI3 departure is Maintain 5000?

[Rob Nabieszko]

To me, adding the "Climb 5,000" phrase will probably be more helpful in VATSIM than in the real world. Since so few people read the chart associated with the SID, but simply program the FMS blindly, reiterating the final altitude should be viewed as a welcome redundancy that is likely to reduce altitude excursions. 

[Neil Ryans]

Can the Departure / Arrival lists be adjusted to display the required information for the new phraseology as a prompt when it gets busy, how do I do this  ?

Thanks for the help

Neil

[Geo Jones]

Can the Departure / Arrival lists be adjusted to display the required information for the new phraseology as a prompt when it gets busy, how do I do this  ?

Thanks for the help

Neil

Yea press the S button on top of the list you want to add to, then add what you want to it.

[Mark Walsh]

Can the Departure / Arrival lists be adjusted to display the required information for the new phraseology as a prompt when it gets busy, how do I do this  ?

Thanks for the help

Neil

Nothing changes for us in Moncton Neil, as we don't have any STARS with a transition, nor do we insert the "Climb to" for the phraseology.  The only change is the arrival phraseology, and if your busy, you'll have too hard of a time to insert anything into ES.  I would suggest a little cheat sheet card or something similar close by to help you until you get accustomed to it.

Mark