SID's and ODP's

[Wranga]

Hey all,

I write this after a couple of weeks of studying and sourcing answers from colleagues only to be met with differing answers.

I fly in Australia so my TERPS knowledge is limited... Bare with me.

1) According to the IPH and other documents, if you have been cleared a SID, you are not required to execute an ODP.. Is this a correct statement or have I misinterpreted?

2) If the SID you have been cleared has no "takeoff minimums" published on the plate and no trouble T, does this mean standard takeoff minimums and standard climb 200ft per nm?

3) If the SID you have been cleared has no takeoff minimums published on the plate but does have a trouble T, and when reading the trouble T section it does not state any minimums but says instead "departure procedure all rwys use XXX departure" (which I interpret to be a graphical ODP) does this mean you have to fly the XXX departure to completion then fly the SID, or you are to use the takeoff minimums from XXX departure and just fly the SID or does it mean cause XXX departure is an ODP you can ignore it and just use standard minimums (which is strange given the trouble t)?

Finally...

4) If a non standard minimum is given... Let's say for e.g. 1700-2 1/2 or standard with 270' per nm until 1000... Does this mean you are able to use standard climb gradient of 200' per nm if the prevailing conditions are equal or better than published as long as you use the see and avoid principle? Does this ensure adequate obstacle clearance post 1700 if the MSA is higher (assume still tracking SID)? Or does 1700 essentially become a pseudo DER screen height? And finally, assuming the first question in this part is the correct one, if you have to avoid, are you still conducting the SID (personally I think it puts you in a grey area)

Any advice or expertise would be greatly appreciated... This issue has created alot of discussion at work...

[galaxy flyer]

In order,

1/ Correct, fly the cleared SID, using any required climb gradient.

2/ Yes, 200ft/nm and standard mins, as published in any Ops Specs or 1 mile, 2 engines, 1/2 mile three or more, for commercial operators. All of them have Ops Specs.

3/ a little confused here, but if the Trouble T says fly xxxx departure, fly it (it will a SID, not many graphical OPDs). Apply any weather or climb gradients to the PERF planning associated with THAT SID, no fair mixing and matching.

4/ 1700 and 2 1/2 are required weather for VISUAL maneuvering during departure, expected to be within the immediate vicinity of the airport. The 1700 is, by definition 100 feet about the controlling obstacle, not much clearance. Once above 1700', it is assumed that 200'/nm gradient will be maintained until reaching a published altitude on a published route. If there is OR, it means a pilot can use the visual maneuver OR apply standard mins and plan to meet the climb gradient until reaching the specified altitude. There are a few cases with "AND", in which case, the pilot s expected to visually maneuver until reaching the altitude above the field, THEN make good the climb gradient on the specified routing. Just a few, in the mountains.

Hope this helps,

GF

[Wranga]

Thanks heaps for the response,

For question 3 I'll refer you to PHNL jepp plates. If you file the Molokai 4 departure (no published takeoff minimums), then refer to the takeoff section it states use Honolulu departure, which looks to me like a graphical ODP (obstacle printed at the top of the plate).

Does this mean you use the takeoff minimums from the ODP and fly the Molokai 4 departure, or does it mean fly the ODP first (using it's minimums) and then fly the Molokai 4 departure?

[galaxy flyer]

Well, that's a good one and been on/out of there many times. If assigned the MKK.4, the tracks and altitudes are similar, but not identical to the HNL ODP. The ODP is for times when NO SID was assigned or used, think an uncontrolled departure. What I can't answer is why the MKK.4 doesn't have ceiling/ visibility OR climb gradients like the HNL.1 ODP has.

I am tempted to say "fly the SID, if assigned, and do the performance planning (via a runway analysis, preferably) for the HNL ODP. Certainly, ATC expects the MKK.4 to be flown, if they assigned.

GF

[Wranga]

Excellent,

Thanks heaps for that, it will put to rest an argument that has started at work. I assumed that using the HNL1 departure minimums would be the prudent and safest thing to do. We've had a few differing opinions on the correct course of action for that departure and hopefully this will standardise our operations

Cheers

[galaxy flyer]

Wranga

Just spent more time looking at the PHNL SIDs. The only difference I can see between the MKK and the HNL ODP is the Molokai SID has a specified "turn within" distance (HNL 3DME) while the HNL just specifies a climbing turn. Not sure of the TERPS details on this.

The obstacles shown on the ODP are "close in", defined in TERPS as less than 200' above the departure end elevation. They are NOT accounted in the Climb Gradient, as to set a gradient could produce a very high one. Most runway analysis programs do account or them.

Ceiling, btw, is the height of the obstacle rounded up to the next 100'; visibility is the distance from the departure end of runway to the obstacle,not to exceed 3 statute miles.

GF