IFR Departure - Climb to MSA/LSALT within 3nm?

[Guptar]

Been trying to find the reference in the AIP regarding an IFR departure from a non controlled aerodrome and the requirement to climb to the MSA or LSALT if same by 3nm. Found the reference for on track by 5nm, been searching AIP ENR 1.5 but I guess my eyes are going.

Anyone got an idea where to find it?

[Lasiorhinus]

It doesnt actually say that for departures, only for arrivals.

[BOK_]

Guptar,

There is no real specific reference to your question but if you refer to GEN 3.3-16 Para 3.6 it states the rules somewhat to your situation. In particular the bit that says can only be "below LSALT during climb after departure".

In order for you to protect yourself at night then you would have to climb up to your 10nm MSA, 25nm MSA or track LSALT whichever is the lower within the circling area and then depart off. The only real concern here is if you became IMC below the MDA but the conditions would have to be pretty horendous for that and if the conditions were that bad then you would have to give yourself a good brief before you started to roll down the runway in relation to terrain/obstacles in the area.

Bear in mind as well that for most GA planes the take off minima is 300'AGL/2000M.

Take care up there especially in night IMC conditions.


BOK

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

requirement to climb to the MSA or LSALT if same by 3nm

This is news to me .......... and I have a renewal on Wednesday!

I was always taught to determine a safe route/procedure to depart a non-controlled aerodrome so as maintain terrain clearance in the climb - and particularly in the case of an engine failure.

Dr :8

[glenb]

NEVER depart if you cant get safely back in.

[BOK_]

Can I also remind you all of the rule in AIP's ENR 1.5-28 Note 4 (a) which basically states words to this effect:

Terrain clearance is assured until reaching either enroute LSALT or dept aerodrome MSA and this can be complied with should engine failure occur in multi engine aircraft anytime after lift off or encountering non visual conditions.

BOK

:ok:

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

NEVER depart if you cant get safely back in

??

I will take-off with 300' - 2 km in a twin or a single. Gives me the option of a low level circuit if there is a problem - but once in IMC, I sure as hell ain't gonna get back in there.

Kinda interesting to be sitting on the ground at Atherton waiting for 300' ceiling to TO - and watch a croppie coming and going at 50'.

Dr :8

[Ovation]

My personal minimums are far greater than 300'/2000M, however when asked during a CIRSE renewal how I'd depart from COOMA in an emergency situation, my response was to climb and remain in the circling area up to MSA.

The ATO pointed out that you have terrain clearance when you fly the reverse of a GPS ARRIVAL i.e. distance/altitude in a sector from a reference point, which I then had to perform.

[Alice Kiwican]

I was taught that there are a few ways to depart non-controlled airports when in IMC or at night.

1.Remain in circling area until MSA/LSALT.
2.Conduct the published missed approach if applicable.
3.Conduct the GPS ARR procedure in reverse if aircraft can maintain appropriate climb gradient.
4.Conduct the NDB or VOR in reverse if applicable and aircraft can maintain appropriate climb gradient.
5.Climb out on a pilot calculated track and able to maintain terrain clearance during this procedure.

Obviously a careful pre departure brief is essential in all departure scenarios.

[airman1]

The ATO pointed out that you have terrain clearance when you fly the reverse of a GPS ARRIVAL i.e. distance/altitude in a sector from a reference point, which I then had to perform.


Ovation , in practise I do exactly that dial up the RNAV of the opposite RWY ect or track outbound on the reciprocal of the VOR let down. Step climb all the way to the MSA or work out the climb gradient required. But with that said really the take off minima’s should be at least equal to the landing minimum for that aerodrome in my opinion.

"The back of the approach departure shouldn’t be used or mentioned in a renewal as it isn’t legal" I have done it in a renewal and the ATO was less than impressed!:{:{


(SECIR - are a different story (climb out or departure) when the donk dies in the soup you don’t have too many options unless you have pretty dam good local knowledge.):eek:

[Alice Kiwican]

That's interesting airman1 because I suggested that very thing during my last 2 renewals and the ATO (2 different ATO's by the way) said that was exactly right!

[airman1]

Terrain clearance is assured until reaching either enroute LSALT or dept aerodrome MSA and this can be complied with should engine failure occur in multi engine aircraft anytime after lift off or encountering non visual conditions.


Alice Kiwican, Prob depends on the ATO but there is no way a GA twin could meet the gradient to comply with a "back of the approach departure" if a donk gave in. with the info and regs I have researched this would be the only way you could get away with it (meeting the gradient)! But I do know that in practise this method is fairly commonly used.

[The Green Goblin]

I will take-off with 300' - 2 km in a twin or a single. Gives me the option of a low level circuit if there is a problem - but once in IMC, I sure as hell ain't gonna get back in there.

Don't think you have any option but to get back in there somehow in a single.

Pretty dopey to take off at the minima in ANY single or light piston twin without guaranteed performance regardless of the regs!

[VH-XXX]

Thought the MSA by 3nm was for NVFR.....

[Chimbu chuckles]

So Green Goblin complying with the regs is 'dopey'?

So how many days would you sit waiting for 'acceptable' weather, whatever you define subjectively as 'acceptable', to mitigate against the utterly tiny chance that an engine might fail just airborne?

As opposed to 10nm down the track...or 20?

Do you hide in your house when its raining outside or do you assess the risk of a fatal car accident/strike by lightning, tree falling on you, run over by car, electrocuted by fallen power lines differently?

I am struggling to remember the last EFATO into low weather fatality in Australia yet you have judged it to be 'dopey'. :ugh:

Guptar et al there is NO such guidance. There is guidance on minimum obstacle clearance required on the proposed flight path and there is guidance defining that flight path but the rest is up to you. You can do ABSOLUTELY anything you like as long as you comply with minimum obstacle clearance criteria.

It just takes some thought.

If someone, including an ATO, is unhappy with your plan listen to his...might even be better...but if they are just trying to impose their subjective choice over yours, or worse insist that their subjective choice is the ONLY legal option, challenge them to prove it..."that is interesting can show me where it says that?"

My personal preference at unfamiliar aerodromes was to follow the missed approach path for the runway approach on the runway I was using. Equally I might just blast straight on track at a familiar aerodrome on flat terrain.

[topdrop]

AIP ENR 1-1
4.9 Terrain and Obstacle Clearance
Obstacle/terrain avoidance while below the LSALT or MSA, as applicable, is a pilot responsibility except in the circumstances described in para 4.9.1.
4.9.1 ATC is responsible for terrain clearance when an aircraft has been assigned a level using ATS surveillance service terrain clearance procedures until:
a. the pilot is assigned the responsibility for maintaining such
clearance visually, or
b. a visual or instrument approach is commenced.
So, from OCTA, how you get to LSALT/MSA is your responsibility. Where LSALT/MSA is in CTA, I clear acft as follows (Mareeba Innisfail for example) "Track as required, climb 7000, when ready track direct IFL. This allows the pilot to track as he needs to, to avoid terrain and then direct when he is satisfied first part has been complied with.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

A failure in a single which may dictate a hasty return to the departure AD would be an alternator failure or smoke in the cockpit. For this reason, my personal take off minima in a single would be approach minima.

Appropriate response to an alternator failure would depend on the level of redundancy of the particular aircraft. Not necessarily a big deal!

"Smoke in the cockpit" - bit hard to see how the appropriate response in a single would differ from that in a twin (ie park it as soon as possible). Therefore, are you suggesting that appropriate TO minima for a light twin should be the approach minima?

Dr :8

[The Green Goblin]

So Green Goblin complying with the regs is 'dopey'?

So how many days would you sit waiting for 'acceptable' weather, whatever you define subjectively as 'acceptable', to mitigate against the utterly tiny chance that an engine might fail just airborne?

Its not just an engine failure mate, it could be any emergency such as an unlatched door, unruly pax the list goes on. I for one want to know that I can return to land or conduct an instrument approach to land at that particular aerodrome.

Its much more comforting when you are flying something that can give you the performance you require on one engine however to satisfy 20.7.1B

[43Inches]

A problem with following an instrument procedure in reverse is that the design gradient may be as high as 6.5% (600fpm at 100kts) in the final segment and 8% (800fpm at 100kts) in the initial. And this is more likely the case if significant obstacles are located nearby. Few light twins and even some bigger ones would struggle to climb at this rate following an engine failure.
Also the approach path may not follow the lowest terrain as it has to account for obstacles in both the approach and missed approach path, this will be more the case if the approach has been runway aligned.
As stated earlier the missed approach path only guarantees 100ft clearance at 2.5% if the missed approach is commenced from the MAPt at MDA.
If you are departing into IMC from an airport with significant surrounding terrain work out suitable departure/escape routes. Regular operators to such places would have generated a company departure procedure to be used both in normal and preformance loss situations. If no suitable paths exists then just climb in the circling area and depart once clear of critical obstacles.

[Hugh Jarse]

Guptar, back in the days when men were real men and had to hold a Class 1 Instrument Rating, do 10 wpm Morse and renew every 6 months - the 3 miles rule did apply.

Since the advent of Pans Ops, the 3 mile requirement has been both superseded and forgotten (unless you're an ATO/FOI who hasn't kept up with the times) :}

There is/was a reference in Jepp for 3nm circling area dimensions for pre Pans Ops runways, and from 1700m(1800m?) lengths the tangent rule applies (using a DGA), but I don't have them in front of me because I'm on holidays :ok::} (and CRAFT is setting in). However, this applies to some arrivals but not departures.

Haven't really looked lately, but none of the places I operate to are pre-Pans Ops 4 anyway.

Hope this helps.

[airman1]

Interesting........

43Inches, Good points what if we look at a scenario down at Albury. The airport is socked in with BNK low cloud (say 500ft) pouring rain but VIS is well above 2 km and the ATIS dictates multiple layers or BNK cloud to say 3000ft. There is no SID for Albury, and there is pretty nasty terrain around Albury as it is in a bit of a valley. So after you get your airways clearance you ask for your company departure. What if ATC can’t comply due inbound traffic and an overhead departure is also not available ect ect. (Pretty unlikely I know but it does get busy down there with several RPT cuing up for the approach on a bad day)

Do you wait on the ground for traffic congestion to minimize?
Do you wait for the weather to improve?
Do you depart knowing that if a donk gives in you won’t be able to maintain terrain clearance? (talking GA twins)

Why don’t they have a SID for AY? I think Tamworth has one from memory!

Just my 2 cents I am sure someone older and wiser will shed some light!:sad:

[OzExpat]

I don't know much about Albury except that it used to be the place where I had to change trains between NSW and VIC! :eek: However, I do know about aerodromes that are close to high and/or steep terrain.

First problem is that, to get a decent SID for such a place will usually require climb gradients that few, if any, aircraft can meet.

Having resolved that problem, the next problem is that the designer confines an aircraft to a specific track that will, in all probability, ultimately steer the poor pilot straight into a thunderstorm factory.

Game... set... match... :ugh

I think that everyone needs to appreciate that, if the aerodrome doesn't have a SID, there's a more than fair chance that pilots need to make their own very conservative plans for departure.

Keep safe out there!

[43Inches]

airman - few points make albury not a very good example;

1. Albury tower would not let you depart into IMC conditions with inbound traffic which could conflict with you until you reach MSA or can manuevre visually to the MSA. It is up to you however to notify the tower or traffic in a CTAF if you require to depart overhead due normal performance requirements.

2. Safety beyond that is up to you and if your escape route is blocked by traffic or lack of clearance then any of your options apply.

Do you wait on the ground for traffic congestion to minimize?
Do you wait for the weather to improve?

Also an aircraft with engine loss below MSA would declare an urgent situation (Mayday or Pan-Pan) due to restricted performance/manuevrability, the tower would be forced to relocate traffic to improve your situation. You do whatever is necessary to avoid hitting the ground including turns contrary to clearance and notify the tower as soon as you are able to.

3. A SID at albury would not help aircraft in an emegency as the minimum design gradient for a SID is 3.3 degrees, I would assume an AY SID would initially be much higher than that. SID do not allow for performance degredation following an engine failure and exist mostly to provide noise abatement and traffic segregation until positioned en-route.

[airman1]

43,

You are correct but...... from my VFR days based at AY anywhere from the 020 radial to the 055 radial it is clear of terrain and also 220 radial to 250 radial is also clear of terrain. My aviation dictionary states a that a SID is used to satisfy "noise abatement procedures, airspace segregation, terrain clearance requirements immediately after takeoff and maxuim traffic flexibility"

While everything you have said is 100% true in my book, if you lost a donk at AY whilst departing in IMC the level segment in which you are trying the get the A/C cleaned up (feathering, shutting down, or fault finding ect ect) whilst it may only be 40 secs or so you may find yourself heading straight for terrain! Just thought that a SID in either of the above radials would allow reasonable terrain clearance (flat terrain) in the event of an emergency especially in a single. In those approx radial directions I don’t think you would need a very excessive SID gradient it's pretty flat from memory.

But we can discuss SIDs for various aerodromes all we like but it has been this way for years and I guess no major miss haps so as always common sense prevails! The big key with any scenario like this as you and other have stated is planning and briefing yourself before lift off.

Fly Safe.:ok:

[OzExpat]

A SID at albury would not help aircraft in an emegency as the minimum design gradient for a SID is 3.3 degrees,
I'm sure that everyone realises you meant 3.3%. :ok:

[jjdnyc]

I did my CPL/ CIR in Oz 10+ years ago. Have now started flying again in the US and re-did my IFR. This place is paradise for pilots, but, one thing we have here which I guess I had forgotten we don't have in Oz is Departure Procedures for every non-towered IFR airport and where relevant, Obstacle Departure Procedures. So, no guess work about reverse engineering the GPS approach or whatever - just follow the DP. When you get your IFR release, ATC will protect the area around the field and over the course of the DP so you know you are good for traffic also. Seems to me that is what we should have in Oz, IMHO.

Here is the ODP for a strip in Vermont that I fly out of sometimes (KDDH):

DEPARTURE PROCEDURE: Rwy 13, climbing left turn
direct to CAM VORTAC, continue climb in hold to 3500
before proceeding on course. Rwy 31, climbing right turn
direct CAM VORTAC continue climb in hold to 3500
before proceeding on course.

[Cap'n Arrr]

Here's another question for you...

What if you take off IFR from an aerodrome with no navaid. Let's say the LSALT is 3000' and the cloud is at 700', AD is at MSL.

How would you stay within the circling area once you got in the soup? What if there's wind changing strength and direction as you climb? What other options are there? Assuming you don't have GPS/RNAV.

[ReverseFlight]

It really depends what % rate climb you can achieve and what the 10/25 nm MSA is. The same applies to approaches to places like Albury, as light twins might only be able to achieve say a 2% climb OEI so that the published MDA might have to be raised by a few hundred feet for going around if you're not visual.

Has anyone mentioned in this thread one needs to be on track within 5 nm for departures, apart from the usual MSA/LSALT requirements ?