Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Human Factors; Procedure; Chart Or Publication; Company Policy
Departure clearances consistently read 'CLEARED XXXXXX DEPARTURE XXX TRANSITION MAINTAIN 230 KNOTS CLIMB VIA SID EXP FL370 10 MIN AFT DP;DP FRQ XXX.X' They read the same via CPDLC or PDC. Confusion comes from improper phraseology. Should read 'CLIMB VIA SID EXCEPT MAINTAIN 230 KNOTS'. Sometimes an altitude restriction is also included and this is normally phrased correctly. Many of the RNAV SIDs have a speed restriction of 230 knots; which leaves pilots wondering if the 230 knot restriction is a reminder not to exceed the first crossing restriction or if ATC wants us to maintain 230 until otherwise advised since climb via comes directly after the speed restriction (it is the latter). Approximately six months ago I requested clarification from ATC on this exact point and the controller sounded irritated that I was even asking the question; as if they had answered this exact question many times before. I suggested over the radio that they change the text to reflect verbal phraseology which seemed to induce further irritation in the controller. After multiple trips in and out of SLC; phraseology has not changed and several captains I have flown with have asked me to clarify with ATC. Most of these have occurred without the controller sounding irritated. But bottom line; the verbiage remains confusing and should be corrected BEFORE an incident occurs.As a short term fix send notice to Clearance Delivery to change verbiage phraseology on takeoff clearance to match expected/standardized phraseology. 'Climb via SID except maintain 230 knots and 10;000 feet' (I used a dual restriction since it is fairly common as well). As a long term fix I recommend changing RNAV SIDs to reflect standard clearance from ATC. Only the WEVIC5 does not have a 230 knot speed restriction. ATC could submit a change to incorporate a 230 knot restriction at a point of their choice and include 230 knot crossing restrictions later on the other SIDs and just have ATC cancel airborne if not needed. Ultimately; if ATC needs to implement a 230 knot climb restriction on every departure; it should change the SIDs to reflect this need and eliminate the 'exceptions.'
Air carrier First Officer reported the speed restriction verbiage used in their clearance received via CPDLC/PDC is confusing to pilots due to its non-standard nature.