DCS departure from EDI 24

[Young Paul]

The vertical profile of this route contains an interesting feature.

At I-TH 14d, there is the BAA standard 6000' level point.

At I-TH 19d, there is a note on the SID to expect FL100, and to inform ATC if unable to comply.

That gives 5 miles to climb 4000' on an ISA day, at 250 kts (below FL100). You'd have to get a wiggle on - that gives you about 1 minute to do the climb

Now, the points I would like to make are

a) Nobody seems to know why the restriction is there.
b) Pilots seem to be unaware of it (they generally think the 19d point is the turn point towards TRN).
c) On occasions when I have managed to get anybody in ATC to comment on it, they have said that it wasn't an issue "today", with no explanation.
d) So why have a restriction which is verging on unflyable, and which won't be enforced anyway?

In actual fact, it is rarely an issue, since you normally get a clearance to FL250 before you reach 6000'.

I strongly suspect that the EDI DCS and GLA NGY SID's were drawn by somebody who has never been in an aeroplane, anyway, they seem to go so far in the wrong direction.

[radar707]

Can't coment on the EDI DCS departure but the GLA NGY1H goes the way it does so as not to conflict with inbound traffic routeing via Turnberry, we'll do our best to get an early left turn sorted if possible but sometimes it isn't.
As for the NGY1J it turns left at the GLG again to stop conflicts with inbound traffic via LANAK and STIRA again we'll do our best to get a n early right turn, but sometimes (usualy due EDI traffic) that isn't posible either.
The SIDs at GLA are due to be changed soon when we lose the AC, the GLG and the GOW, so maybe they ask us controllers what we think about how best to route the departures, but then again, do they really care what we think!!!!!

[Take up the Hold]

Young Paul

Hopefully the following will give the answers

a) Deancross SID and, Turnberry SID as well, have to climb above Glasgow inbound traffic via LANAK. Glasgow inbound traffic has to be at Minimum Stack Level, normally FL70/80 by LANAK, and 6000ft or below about 8 miles past LANAK. The climb profile on the SIDs is to enable the departing traffic to be climbed safely through the level of the Glasgow inbound traffic. If you cannot make FL100 by 19DME (44before TRN) tell Edinburgh. They will tell ScACC who can then plan accordingly. When the SIDs were designed about 10 years ago the airline operators were consulted and all indicated that there would be no problems in complying with the restriction. Have things changed?
c) It is only designed to climb aircraft above Glasgow arrivals via LANAK. If there are no Glasgow arrivals there is no problem.
d) Answer to the first comment is in a) above

The wrong direction SIDs were drawn that way to separate jets and non jets. As ScACC are not having to separate jets and non jets in the initial stage of flight the jets, although on a slightly longer route, normally get unrestricted climb. Once you have sufficient height more direct routings are given.
Because the jets and non jets are on different routes it reduces the complexity of ScACC operations and gives the airfields a shorter time interval between jet following non jet departures. It also increases the sector capacities in ScACC airspace thus enabling more traffic to fly through them.

[Young Paul]

In the four or five years (or longer? tempus fugit) that the additional restriction at 19d has been in force (it wasn't in the original DCS SID), quite frankly I have worked with only one pilot who has pointed out the restriction and checked whether we could comply with it, if we were at 6000' at 14d. I have got into the habit of pointing it out to my colleagues and discussing the implications to increase awareness of it, but basically, people aren't aware of it.

The 19d restriction was added without fanfare, on the Thales plates it is buried in the tracks for the turn, and looks like the turning point, and I reckon that no more than 20% of jet pilots with Thales plates are aware of it.

Of course, SIDs are designed to be radio-failure compatible - but if people haven't briefed the restriction, then they won't be aware of it, and on the day you have a radio failure, that will be the day that you don't get the climb above 6000' until 14d.

There are much tidier ways of separating jet and prop traffic IMHO. Even with these SIDS we get 2+ minutes separation, which seems a lot compared to much busier ATC environments. At CDG for example, the standard arrangement on 27 is for prop aircraft to turn right when able onto a heading and stop climb at 3000'. Once the prop a/c is established north of the runway, the following jet is cleared to take off - separation about 1 minute. Much less pollution over a much smaller area.

Similarly, a full reconfiguration of airspace for easterly and westerly flow would mean that departure tracks don't have to plan on going 20 miles one way or the other to get around the (central) arrival tracks, and the arrival routes can get closer to the direct track, rather than going generally for the airfield.

(Mind you, at CDG south they also clear you to land when you talk to the tower controller at 7 miles with another aircraft still on the approach in front of you ... and there are footpaths across the taxiways, so who are they to judge .....)

[Take up the Hold]

YP

There is a problem with getting more controlled airspace to the east of the present ScTMA and B4 because of our military colleagues and the use of D510 and D512. We would love more airspace to the east. This would help us split the Glasgow and Edinburgh arrivals earlier.
In the Scottish TMA you must have 2 minutes between departures following the same route, as long as they are in the group. Jets are generally in the same group. But there are slow jets, C550 for example that may require increased spacing. All the SIDs are designed to give ScACC 5NM separation( the minimum they can use) 30NM from the departure airfield at a speed of 250KTS. How often are you given free speed outbound?
The traffic is controlled within the constraints of controlled airspace and the complexity of the traffic situation around the ScTMA.

[Ayr-Rage]

From the ATC point of view the FL100 point was always part of our requirements and plans, guess it must have gotten missed from the original SID charts.
The only aircraft that have regularly informed ATC that they were unlikely to make it are our Shamrock friends in their BAE146, but we treat all 146's with care as we did the BAC1-11.
As for early turns and getting subsequent departures away....dream on....the noise preferential routes are such that this is an impossible dream, unless you are in the LIGHT category, about King Air size and below, and that normally requires the airfield radar unit working the aircraft and agreeing a new plan with ScACC, more co-ordination and phone calls which neither of us really need.
The "old" system in the TMA where everyone departed on TLA SIDs (and then to DCS) would NEVER work now, as we are far too busy.
The only really helpful thing that is achievable, is to de-activate Spadeadam and Otterburn ranges, and drastically widen the Airways system in the vicinity on Margo/Shapp/Talla.
I suggest you lobby the Airspace Utilisation people via your company, and also pay us a visit in our antique building in Prestwick, and see how little room we have to play with, then it might make a bit more sense.

[NudgingSteel]

Young Paul,
On the subject of SID tracks and departure spacings, as others have mentioned above, it's a compromise between what the operators want (expedition), what the local residents want (quiet), and other bits such as R/T fail separations. The really busy units have immediate turns after departure (watch those 747s out of LHR!) but the quiter airports, I suspect, would have a heck of a job with local residents, in trying to alter SID tracks (although as one house gets overflown more, surely another gets less noise?). Never mind the argument that a 737 sitting on the runway for 4 minutes awaiting departure behind an ATP or SF34, is burning 4 minutes worth of fuel into the environment....

I have seen EDI operating with a large industrial fire on the 24 climbout (huge black smoke column about 2 miles out) - for safety, all props went immediate left and all jets immediate right.
1-minute separations really got things moving!!!

As A-R says, if you get the chance, you'd be very welcome as a 'customer' to visit ScATCC/GLA/EDI. We're delighted to hear how to improve our service to crews, especially if you bring biscuits...