MaxAsks: Manchester AP Today; ATIS “No Intersection Departures” During High Tempo Ops, Yr Opinion Pls

Would approving “Intersection Departures” at this buzzey HUB with limited North Side Parking and dual offset Runways have relieved taxi way congestion & shortened delay? Your Opinions Pilots Pls.


No, because if a Cessna or other small aircraft that doesn’t need the full runway tries to use an intersection departure, larger aircraft in line behind it that need the full runway will be forced to stop, extending the takeoff line until the intersection departure gets clearance. Intersection departures are better when the airport has less traffic to be held up.


@Dylan_Bright. MaxSez: Believe you should relook at the Pilots Handbook Dylan. Intersection Departures by Reginals and GA are not cheating and are a typical Trash Hauler’s whine. Expedited Intersection Departure between big fat Trash Haulers with poor ground manuverability
and highly maneuverable craft with skilled aviators at the helm need to be recognized as equals all thing considered. Routinely 1 1/2 GA between Hauler is the average (Ref: It’s of record in the AIM, FAR and the Pilots Handbook time you check them out this procedure is an expediter. Fact v Opinion, I’ll take Fact!

He’s right. It also is a burden on controllers when we keep on getting requests for takeoff when there is nothing to do. Such as:
-Requests takeoff but not first in line
-Requests takeoff when the plane in front of them just got lined up on the runway

If controllers are distracted by unnecessary calls that distracts us from monitoring the inbounds. If my attention is on unnecessary calls from planes on the ground that takes my attention away from the planes landing, and if it’s an airport like KSAN with one runway that will just lead to more go arounds and keep on lengthening the takeoff line.

My point is if I’m getting takeoff requests from 3 different planes at a time it is more of a burden than just one. Light traffic - I have no problem with it but when there’s 40 inbounds there is no business in intersection departures or pattern work. Infinite Flight is still continuing to grow and the airports will continue getting busier and pilots go where ATC is.


Agreed, also without intersection departures there is a clear cut line and planes can’t cut in front of others


As long as they don’t block a taxiway holding short I’d be good with it. Idk what everyone’s rub is.


In a perfect world, only GA’s would try intersection departures in a way that wouldn’t cause problem.

The rub probably is, that if you’re not declaring it as not allowed… you’ll have two 748’s and three A380’s trying to take off from half down a 9000ft runway creating a 15000ft taxi line.

A bit exaggerated perhaps… but you know :)


Personally, I don’t like intersection departures because that gives commercial airliners the opportunity to cut in front of the long departure queue. I prefer full length taxi only.

As Dylan stated, I can tolerate intersection departures when the airport isn’t busy but I’d only prefer GA aircraft utilizing them or a small airliner if the runway is really long.

In the real world, I do see intersection departures being performed all the time for GA and commercial planes. It’s especially prominent at airports with more than adequate runway lengths (Atlanta and Chicago are great examples).

The issue with GA pilots in Live is that they tend to always fly runway heading after takeoff, therefore delaying the departure flow behind them until there is enough lateral spacing between them, and the next larger plane. GA aircraft shouldn’t be flying out of a busy class bravo field at all, actually (applies to RWA in some circumstances).

I recommend any pilots deciding to fly GA to immediately turn away from the departure path in order to help keep the long departure queue moving. I see this happening at a lot of busy airports in the United States. At Boston-Logan (KBOS) for example, prop aircraft always takeoff and then turn away from the airport towards a different heading versus traveling straight (or following the established SID routing).

If the method above is performed by GA pilots in Live, I wouldn’t mind giving them an intersection departure while the airport has a long departure queue.

My two cents.

1 Like

@IFATC-Tim MaxSez: Did Note responses are welcome from Pilots.
The Question was Today’s Operations at Manchester. Not a general critique of “all thing considered”. I’ll respond to you though since it follows the standard frustrated controllers party line. Your group grinds this opinion, a shame sport Pilots like Dylon pick up on it. Some day he & you may fly RW and have one hell of a mind set adjustment. Rather than do the dueling banjo bit I’ll just refer you to IFATC Recruiter/Supervisor Sandstrom’s input below.

(PS, I dispatched for AmWest when you where in high school. And flew the first time before you where a gleam in your daddies eye. Wanna challenge me position on this send me a PM. G’nite

@Maxmustang it does actually so happen that i am also part of the same “group” as Tim. However, I’ve always had the same opinion even before I became IFATC.

@Nathan… As I said to Tim this one subject question about Operations at Manchester was addressed to Pilots. A heresy discussion on Intersection Departure is not Germaine here. Your controllers view is interesting however just another sports pilot I conclude. Again as with Tim I refer you to IFATC recruiter/supervisor Sanstroms Post. G’day

1 Like

@Dylan_Bright… MaxSez: Explains it young man, not even a sports pilot.
Go talk to Brandon son, he’ll set you straight. Regards

MazSez: Thanks for jumping in Mr. @schyllberg. The rub on this one is the Manchester “ATIS No Intersection Departure” statement, thus the unanswered question.

From the attitude shown by the controllers that jump in full bore here to a simple interrogatory you recognize this is a ripe Topic thst get the juices flowing. Appears some Controller juices are always flowing. Listen and learn boys and girls. One must fly with cool jets most of the time, afterburners always via PM, LOL.

@schyllberg, Pls close this Topic it served its purpose.