View Full Version : SID, RNP and Engine Out during SID
Hi guys,
just a couple of question for you :} :
1) The ICAO DOC.8168 says for the Turning Departure that the bank used to build the procedure is 15°. But is this a max or a min? (I guess a min; I've never been limited by my instructors to 15° bank but looking the document I got the doubt).
2) RNP. I know that the RNP enroute is RNP5 and in Terminal Area is RNP1 (SID and STARs).
The SID and arrival procedures headed "RNAV" should be flown with PRNAV equipment, the RNP5 could be flown with basic VOR/DME and ADF.
If an ATS route has an RNP different from 5 is indicated on the Enroute Jeppesen (if Jepp, or another mark).
Is that correct?
3) You are in a SID with high gradient, in IMC, just passed the 1 Eng out procedure chance, and the engine fail, the airplane is heavy (just near the RMTOW), no radar control (only procedural), the MSA is not so low. How do you manage the situation? Go for a direct to a holding fix (but remember, no radar control and MSA high, so out of protected areas) or other solutions? As you know the SID is based on 2 Eng. operating.
Regards
Davide
reynoldsno1
21st Dec 2006, 20:57
QUOTE]1) The ICAO DOC.8168 says for the Turning Departure that the bank used to build the procedure is 15°. But is this a max or a min? (I guess a min; I've never been limited by my instructors to 15° bank but looking the document I got the doubt).
[/QUOTE]
It is a MIN figure - for designing the procedure. If a higher AOB is actually used, then the aircraft will remain within the designed obstacle protection area. Doc 8168 is not intended to lay down aircraft operatiing limits, only procedure design critera - but it is, of course, useful to know this.
2) RNP. I know that the RNP enroute is RNP5 and in Terminal Area is RNP1 (SID and STARs).
The SID and arrival procedures headed "RNAV" should be flown with PRNAV equipment, the RNP5 could be flown with basic VOR/DME and ADF.
If an ATS route has an RNP different from 5 is indicated on the Enroute Jeppesen (if Jepp, or another mark).
RNP requires RNAV, so forget your ADF. RNP can be any figure, as determined by the relevant authorities. RNP5 is a European determination. RNP0.3 may be required for SID/STAR in some parts of the world.
Claw your way to msa as soon as possible then talk to ATC. Vectors and a safe outcome!Too much going on at a critical moment. Trust me! Above MSA then you and pax are safe!
Cheers and have a great Christmas and all the very best for 2007!
Yeah, but remember my question was without Radar available so that you are climbing (slowly) with a SID gradient high (so near obstacles).
RNP requires RNAV, so forget your ADF. RNP can be any figure, as determined by the relevant authorities. RNP5 is a European determination. RNP0.3 may be required for SID/STAR in some parts of the world.
For an airline pilot flying across different Countries and airspaces, how can we know the RNP of that Area? Maybe I'm asking more than that I need to know as a pilot :D But, I like to know details on various sides of my passion.
Thanks
Davide
bflyer
22nd Dec 2006, 03:54
I think the essential is to get to a safe altitude by any means available..i would dump fuel immediately if ground contact is an issue
then talk to atc and get to a protected area..i.e holding and sort my problems according to priorities and go back to land
merry christmas and a happy new year..to all
bflyer, while u plan to dump fuel, might as well order a coffee. U are on take off. If i remember correctly, eng fail charts does not apply in 2nd segment. SID would have eng fail factored in, with climb rates clearing MSAs.
OzExpat
22nd Dec 2006, 07:25
SID would have eng fail factored in
Sorry to burst your bubble on this, but SID design does NOT take account of engine failure considerations. That's the job of your flight ops department and, perhaps, an externally contracted performance engineer.
Old Smokey
22nd Dec 2006, 07:47
Thanks OzExpat, that pretty much said it. One of the major areas of concern in designing OEI escape routes is the scenario where the engine fails AFTER that point in the flight where the SID and the OEI Special Procedure deviate, and obstacle clearance is not yet ensured.
The solution that I apply to the problem in those departures where obstacles during the SID are excessive is to devise 2 sets of RTOWs for the same runway, one to follow the SID, and the other commited to the Special Procedure.
(1) If the Actual Takeoff Weight is at or less than that which would comply with engine failure during the SID, then fine, accept the SID.
(2) If the Actual Takeoff Weight EXCEEDS that for compliance with the SID (but obviously at or less than that for the Special Procedure), advise ATC that the SID is not acceptable, and advise of your requirement to follow the Special Procedure routing until MSA is reached.
That's the data that I give to 'my customers', others may do it differently, Mutt, John_T?
Regards, and Compliments of the Season,
Old Smokey
Thanks OzExpat, that pretty much said it. One of the major areas of concern in designing OEI escape routes is the scenario where the engine fails AFTER that point in the flight where the SID and the OEI Special Procedure deviate, and obstacle clearance is not yet ensured.
The solution that I apply to the problem in those departures where obstacles during the SID are excessive is to devise 2 sets of RTOWs for the same runway, one to follow the SID, and the other commited to the Special Procedure.
(1) If the Actual Takeoff Weight is at or less than that which would comply with engine failure during the SID, then fine, accept the SID.
(2) If the Actual Takeoff Weight EXCEEDS that for compliance with the SID (but obviously at or less than that for the Special Procedure), advise ATC that the SID is not acceptable, and advise of your requirement to follow the Special Procedure routing until MSA is reached.
That's the data that I give to 'my customers', others may do it differently, Mutt, John_T?
Regards, and Compliments of the Season,
Old Smokey
That is a very good solution. I don't know if all airlines has a performance sheet that gives RTOW with reference to the SID. It could be very useful. Of course, the Takeoff Analysis have of sure the Field/climb/obstacles/ items, but, as mentioned before, they refer to 1 ENG OUT at V1 with related 1 ENG OUT procedure built by the Airline (it's an airline's liability by ICAO DOC 8168). I also noticed that on my B737 manuals (TR manuals, not employed yet) there aren't tables with the Vertical Speed performance or the gradient that the airplane could achieve!
Many friend of mine pilots replied to my question with "hey guy, it's a Liner, it always stay within the gradients of the SIDs...." (that is not the reply I was waiting for...)
Thanks
Davide
john_tullamarine
23rd Dec 2006, 06:25
That's the data that I give to 'my customers', others may do it differently
.. sounds like a good strategy to me ... main thing is to get the message across to the folks that the SID is AEO and he who thinks otherwise is a CFIT waiting for a hill to happen along on the wrong day ...
I agree. Many pilots think that with the Takeoff analysis tables (or runway tables) you got the RTOW and you are ok for every problem....:=
The SID gradient is based on All engines operating and it's not related to the RTOW given in the Takeoff Analysis (except if the Dispatch Program used gives the facility to obtain the RTOW for the SID as said by Old Smokey).
The fact is that almost in each area we have the Radar control and the MVA that usually are lower than the MSA. But, even if I live in Italy, my city airport, Alghero Fertilia LIEA in Sardinia island has still the Procedural Approach (with the help of Rome ACC that covers with Radar till about FL100)...
Regards
Davide