PDA

View Full Version : "400ft at the departure-end-of-runway rule"


extra-november
14th May 2009, 01:07
So you shouldn't start any turn before reaching 400 ft above the departure end of the runway? There's been so much ambiguity on this so called "rule" it would be nice to once and for all straighten everthing out.

411A
14th May 2009, 03:33
Dunno anything about such a 'rule', but it sure didn't affect the turn required at 300 feet at the old Athens airport, long ago.

BOAC
14th May 2009, 08:07
It is a performance thing: From the FAA docs
"1. Unless specified otherwise, required obstacle clearance for all departures, including diverse, is based on the pilot crossing the departure end of the runway at least 35 feet above the departure end of runway elevation, climbing to 400 feet above the departure end of runway elevation before making the initial turn, and maintaining a minimum climb gradient of 200 feet per nautical mile (FPNM), unless required to level off by a crossing restriction, until the minimum IFR altitude."

I don't have the EUOPS ref to hand, but someone will.

Many airports require lower turns. If it is specified in your Ops Manual you can do it. If not, you are on your own!

Aussie
14th May 2009, 10:07
If i remember correctly, a RWY 35R departure out of Milano Malpensa requires a right turn before reaching 400ft.... On the Sirlo-Oskor SID.

bfisk
14th May 2009, 10:16
On some of our company climb out, a turn is required well below 400ft, sometimes with high bank. Examples; out of Honningsvåg (ENHV), is turn at 50 feet, with 20 degrees bank and then via localiser back course.


Regards the initial questions: as others have explained, this pertains to FAA departure procedures; where no SID or ODP is published. JAA (EU) land is a different ballgame -- ref EU OPS performance classes A, B and C, and PANS-OPS vs the American TERPS.

linedriva
14th May 2009, 12:59
Out of CNS (Cairns, Australia), the SID's for 15 all have 'at 400ft or departure end of the runway, whichever is earlier'.

It did make one of the last departures of mine in the 73 look exciting. I would have preferred a bit more height than what we had!

BOAC
14th May 2009, 13:03
Regards the initial questions: as others have explained, this pertains to FAA departure procedures; where no SID or ODP is published. JAA (EU) land is a different ballgame -- ref EU OPS performance classes A, B and C,

Not quite!
From EU OPS, Part A perf
(c) When showing compliance with subparagraph (a) above:
1. track changes shall not be allowed up to the point at which the net take-off flight path has achieved a height equal
to one half the wingspan but not less than 50 ft above the elevation of the end of the take-off run available. Thereafter,
up to a height of 400 ft it is assumed that the aeroplane is banked by no more than 15°. Above 400 ft height
bank angles greater than 15°, but not more than 25° may be scheduled;
2. any part of the net take-off flight path in which the aeroplane is banked by more than 15° must clear all obstacles
within the horizontal distances specified in subparagraphs (a), (d) and (e) of this paragraph by a vertical distance
of at least 50 ft; and
3. an operator must use special procedures, subject to the approval of the Authority, to apply increased bank angles
of not more than 20° between 200 ft and 400 ft, or not more than 30° above 400 ft (See Appendix 1 toOPS 1.495 (c)3).

Same difference? Just missing the term 'DER'

bfisk
15th May 2009, 07:08
Well done BOAC, I didn't know that :)

Aussie
15th May 2009, 12:45
Cheers mate. Reminds me of the ATPL exams all over again :}

TimeOnTarget
23rd May 2009, 16:21
At the risk of stating the obvious, we are talking about IMC vs VMC conditions right?

The whole point of a departure procedure is to ensure adequate obstacle clearance. In some cases, in the USA, you can depart as long as you can separate yourself from the terrain. As pointed out by BOAC, the TERPS manual determines the criteria that the departure must meet and how they are built.

seejonfly
29th May 2009, 04:45
Love it when ATC says, "speed and altitude permitting turn" putting it all back on the aircrew...

Jon

10DowningSt
29th May 2009, 16:19
putting it all back on the aircrew...


Very good point. How much better it is when the controller takes responsibility for deciding when you can turn safely.