IFR departures NOT on a SID

[AlanM]

What happens to IFR departures off your airport NOT on a SID/SDR?

Are they given headings/levels close to the SID - or do you make up your own?

[No_Speed_Restriction]

I would of thought (assuming you are talking about an airport outside controlled airspace) you are to navigate to a waypoint within an airway in which your flight plan defines as your first "port of entry".....ish!!:E

[flower]

We have that problem at the moment.
They do exactly as NSR says they route to a particular point within the airway to join.
With us the current clearance is given as
Cleared to **** via L9 , climb on track ALVIN to maintain FL100 further climb enroute squawk etc.

[AlanM]

OK - what about departing an airport inside CAS - but landing at an airport - say - outside CAS? (or in a CTZ for all that that counts!)

(Irrespective of whether or not you join CAS/land in CAS!)

opinions???

[almost professional]

if the route required is close to a SID track then we encourage use of the track to keep to the NPR-if not then most direct route subject traffic-normally just a heading and level
some places-Luton?-do have non airways NPR's

[AlanM]

AP = thanks for that - but what then:

If you departed an International airport serving a major City, but wanted to depart into the Open IFR at the MSA in the most direct route (not as per any published SID)

[tori chelli]

Alan

I think a lot depends on the size of the A/c and whether it's affected by Noise limitations.

Non-noise - go off in whichever direction you require subject to good-neighbourliness.

Noise limited, then you would follow the SDR (if there is one) until at a level - say 3,000' - when NPR's no longer apply, then own-nav to the chosen waypoint.

If you need to be noise-compliant but without SDRs, then I would suggest that a radar heading approximating to the NPR until at a non-noise limited level would be the sensible option.

In the absense of procedures, I find operators/crews ask "what would you like us to do on departure?"
Tori
:ooh:

[flower]

Leaving us to depart IFR outside the airways system i use a clearance along the lines of;
Cleared to leave the zone on track climb maintain FL squawk etc

[AlanM]

thanks for that everyone.

flower, that's what we do - but it seems they want us to put it out on a SID.

Frankly, if that is what they think should happen fine - but releasing someone on a SID to stop below the SID level sounds a tad confusing.

[CosmosSchwartz]

"After departure after passing xxxx feet route direct/right turn/left turn direct <waypoint> is approved"

Works pretty much everywhere I go.

[Spitoon]

I'm a bit puzzled by the question here. I would agree with Alan that sending an aircraft on a SID but without any intention of allowing it to reach the end of the procedure is a recipe for errors and misunderstandings. Presumably the SMS in use at the unit will require the possible problems to be identified and addressed. I guess this will mean that such problems will be considered.

Looking at it from a practical point of view, if you have a regular need for non-airways departures to head off in a particular direction then introduce a published procedure that does just that - with a unique name.

[Slaphead]

AlanM

I'll think you'll find that there are two possible solutions in use at t'other end of the room which can be used at City

At Luton they use Standard Departure Routes; these are published in the AIP and are specifically designed for aircraft that depart from an airport inside CAS but which are then leaving CAS. The SDR includes routing and level instructions which comply with the minimum noise routes for Luton (in effect they mirror the SID route) but climb is restricted to 2400 feet or another level which keeps the departure beneath the LTMA. Departures from Luton to EGWU, EGLC and EGTF use these if they aren't going into the LTMA. Because the routes are published and are specifically for aircraft that intend to route outside CAS there is little room for confusion.

At Stansted there are two SIDs which go out through BKY which stop initially at the same level as an airways departure but the routing after BKY is different, these departures leave CAS north of BKY. If however the departure is going on a track which doesn't go through BKY, towards EGMC for example, they are given a SID but with a restricted altitude.

In my experience the Luton solution is better because there is less opportunity for confusion and crews can brief the departure at their leisure rather than get a convoluted restricted SID route.

[ebenezer]

Looking at it from a practical point of view, if you have a regular need for non-airways departures to head off in a particular direction then introduce a published procedure that does just that - with a unique name

Nice idea but...if you're talking about the UK, then you can't do this unless you submit a formal Airspace Change Proposal to the CAA (Directorate of Airspace Policy) which will require consultation with all 'affected' parties including representatives of the local NIMBY and NOPE associations, CPRA, FOTE, as well as other airspace users e.g. AOPA, BGA, PFA, MOD, BHGA, etc.

Several months and many hundreds of letters/e-mails later you might be lucky and find that the CAA graciously permits your application to move forward into the 'Formal Consultation' phase where again, the proposal will be subjected to close scrutiny.

If there are no organisations or groups who can claim not to have been consulted (and don't forget the local Representative of the Flying Pig Farmers Association...) , the procedure will then be published. However, Friends of the Earth and the CPRA will undoubtedly seek leave to challenge the CAA's decision and so there will be a further delay of several months whilst the matter is brought to Appeal.

If the Appeal is thrown out, the aforementioned groups will then attempt to take it to the European Court of Human Rights (presumably, travelling to the Court for any hearings, by Eurostar...).

If the appeal is then rejected, the procedure can be brought into use.

Welcome to the PC world of 21st Century - and I'm not talking computers...

...then introduce a published procedure that does just that

Mmm, a nice idea.

:hmm: :\

[Pierre Argh]

What happens to IFR departures off your airport NOT on a SID/SDR? An SID is designed to provide, among other things, a known profile that a. simplifies the job of separating aircraft on climb-out and b. provides terrain clearance.

In my experience, in unregulated airspace you can probably (forgive me) get away with "less" control of the departure. SIDs may still be utilised, but under the conditions of the ATS available in Class F &G airspace the pilot is responsible for terrrain clearance. Therefore, IMHO, if granted a non-standard departure ROC issues would be left to you in the cockpit. I would, however, still expect the pilot to climb to a level that provided IFR en-route terrain clearance. I cannot allocate a heading until above a safe level (as this is construed as issuing a vector and re-introduces terrain clearance issues)... but we get around this by using the phrases such as "own navigation" or "direct"

Subject to the above... I can/will approve a requested non-standard departure profile, subject to workload, as long as it does not conflict with other traffic. If there are no beacons, radials or DME requirements, I would consider the departure profile ended when steady on heading and either level or passing any given level.

PS: Be careful when reading any replies on this thread, and remember to take into account that local procedures may not apply where you are flying....

PPS: We have some pilots who insist on asking for a "non-standard SID"... bit like the pilot I once heard asking for an "actual PFL"?

[AlanM]

All interesting stuff.

Places like LHR have a SID which is rarely used, just a heading and level issued (CPT SID on Easterly ops I believe)

[DFC]

I think that what you are looking for is what is called an "omnidirectional departure procedure".

Basically when it comes to obstacles, a pilot should be able to climb to a height of 400ft at the standard climb gradient (3.3%) and turn in any direction and continue the climb to MSA without any obstacle problems. If not then the Omnidirectional Departure procedure should specify the turn height or position at which the turn (in any direction) is made.

However, I can see where the confusion would arrise at many London Airports - Noise ends at 3000ft but the Base of controlled airspace outside the zone is 2500.......so how can you say "After noise fly heading 360 maintain 2400ft"!

This is probably something that you have not experienced but - how would you handle an aircraft doing a series of radar circuits and SRAs? - Would it not be the same principle except that insted of departing the aircraft into the radar circuit, you would put it on a heading to leave the zone?

Regards,

DFC