NAT/MNPSA Ops.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 174.79*E
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NAT/MNPSA Ops.
I have asked this question a number of times and am hoping an ATCO can provide an answer, with a text reference if possible.
1. Random Routes flown over the Atlantic. Are these routes a series of pre determined way points designed by ATC which are not part of the NAT track system or are they any series of way points that can be selected by an operator which is not part of the NAT tracks.
2. Regarding the requirement to establish a position 15nm from a NAT track in the case of an emergency, does that requirement also apply to a Random Track.
Thanks
C152
1. Random Routes flown over the Atlantic. Are these routes a series of pre determined way points designed by ATC which are not part of the NAT track system or are they any series of way points that can be selected by an operator which is not part of the NAT tracks.
2. Regarding the requirement to establish a position 15nm from a NAT track in the case of an emergency, does that requirement also apply to a Random Track.
Thanks
C152
There are several references and someone, hopefully a NAT region ATCO, to link to them. But, random routes can be requested by the flight planner for the operator and can be any legit waypoints or lat/long coordinates in 10 degrees of longitude.
As to the 15nm offset for contingency situations, the crew must first align themselves with any tracks that are in use, them offset and descend. When the track system is active, most random routes are either above or below the established levels, typically FL310 thru FL 400, I think. I do most crossings above the system at FL 430- 470 and briefing and planning the descent is a normal procedure.
GF
As to the 15nm offset for contingency situations, the crew must first align themselves with any tracks that are in use, them offset and descend. When the track system is active, most random routes are either above or below the established levels, typically FL310 thru FL 400, I think. I do most crossings above the system at FL 430- 470 and briefing and planning the descent is a normal procedure.
GF
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ICAO EUR/NAT Office
We file/fly random routes as Galaxy said on chosen Lat/Long, usually by requesting best route from Jeppesen flight planning system. We fly over the MNPS, we plot the current NAT tracks so we can plan an emergency descent aligned to the tracks but not on them.
Mutt
We file/fly random routes as Galaxy said on chosen Lat/Long, usually by requesting best route from Jeppesen flight planning system. We fly over the MNPS, we plot the current NAT tracks so we can plan an emergency descent aligned to the tracks but not on them.
Mutt
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 174.79*E
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NAT/MNPSA
To clarify the question.
If one is flying within the vertical airspace ie. FL285 to FL420 lets say FL360 and the Random Track flown is North of TRACKA or South of TRACKZ and no part of the planned track is common to any NAT Track. Does one still need to offset 15nm before descending in case of an emergency.
Secondly to confirm If a Random Track is planned again without any part of the track being common to a NAT Track. This track is chosen normally by the operator and is not a track selected by ATC which is a system of Random Tracks.
These questions are specific and are not really answered in the documents.
Thanks
C152R
If one is flying within the vertical airspace ie. FL285 to FL420 lets say FL360 and the Random Track flown is North of TRACKA or South of TRACKZ and no part of the planned track is common to any NAT Track. Does one still need to offset 15nm before descending in case of an emergency.
Secondly to confirm If a Random Track is planned again without any part of the track being common to a NAT Track. This track is chosen normally by the operator and is not a track selected by ATC which is a system of Random Tracks.
These questions are specific and are not really answered in the documents.
Thanks
C152R
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does one still need to offset 15nm before descending in case of an emergency.
Re Q2: I believe it is company requested but I have had them 'modified' by ATC. There cannot really be a "system of Random Tracks", although there are inevitably 'favourite' routes that will cross the Nat Tracks.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If one is flying within the vertical airspace ie. FL285 to FL420 lets say FL360 and the Random Track flown is North of TRACKA or South of TRACKZ and no part of the planned track is common to any NAT Track. Does one still need to offset 15nm before descending in case of an emergency.
12.3.1 The general concept of these Oceanic in-flight contingency procedures is, whenever operationally feasible, to offset from the assigned route by 15 NM and climb or descend to a level which differs from those normally used by 500 ft if below FL410 or by 1000 ft if above FL410.
Secondly to confirm If a Random Track is planned again without any part of the track being common to a NAT Track. This track is chosen normally by the operator and is not a track selected by ATC which is a system of Random Tracks.
not really answered in the documents.
Mutt
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C152 - you may find this (Doc 7030 extract) of use regarding an emergency descent from a random track. (My bold and see reference to 'organised tracks' eg Nat Tracks). It would be foolish to merely offset 15nm from the random track and then steam blissfully across all the others
9.1.1.1.2 An aircraft compelled to make a descent through MNPS airspace, whether continuing to destination or turning back, should, if its descent will conflict with an organized track:
a) plan to descend to a level below FL 280;
b) prior to passing FL 410, proceed to a point midway between a convenient pair of organized tracks prior to entering that track system from above;
c) while descending between FL 410 and FL 280, maintain a track that is midway between and parallel with the organized tracks; and
d) contact ATC as soon as practicable and request a revised ATC clearance.
As we say, it depends on knowing where you are and they are
I think you will find Mutt's ref should read 13.3.1 in 007
9.1.1.1.2 An aircraft compelled to make a descent through MNPS airspace, whether continuing to destination or turning back, should, if its descent will conflict with an organized track:
a) plan to descend to a level below FL 280;
b) prior to passing FL 410, proceed to a point midway between a convenient pair of organized tracks prior to entering that track system from above;
c) while descending between FL 410 and FL 280, maintain a track that is midway between and parallel with the organized tracks; and
d) contact ATC as soon as practicable and request a revised ATC clearance.
As we say, it depends on knowing where you are and they are
I think you will find Mutt's ref should read 13.3.1 in 007
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some people are way out of date re. Oceanic procedures and others are simply wrong!
C152R (and others) I suggest you:
Follow this link to ICAO Doc4444 Amendment 2 and see 15.2 "Special Procedures for in-flight contingencies in Oceanic airspace" Also suggest you look at 16.5 "Strategic lateral offset procedures (SLOP)"
Follow this link to CAA CAP694 and see Chapter 9 "Special Procedures - Shanwick Oceanic Control Area (North Atlantic Region - NAT)"
Follow this link to NAT Regional Supplementary Procedures (SUPPS) (Doc7030) which should provide answers to more general questions.
Come back if you're unsure of anything, having read the above, as I may be able to help.
RK
(EGGX ATCO)
C152R (and others) I suggest you:
Follow this link to ICAO Doc4444 Amendment 2 and see 15.2 "Special Procedures for in-flight contingencies in Oceanic airspace" Also suggest you look at 16.5 "Strategic lateral offset procedures (SLOP)"
Follow this link to CAA CAP694 and see Chapter 9 "Special Procedures - Shanwick Oceanic Control Area (North Atlantic Region - NAT)"
Follow this link to NAT Regional Supplementary Procedures (SUPPS) (Doc7030) which should provide answers to more general questions.
Come back if you're unsure of anything, having read the above, as I may be able to help.
RK
(EGGX ATCO)
Last edited by rab-k; 16th Nov 2011 at 23:47.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When the track system is active, most random routes are either above or below the established levels
Does one still need to offset 15nm before descending in case of an emergency.
"Specifically, the pilot shall:
a) Leave the assigned route or track by initially turning at least 45 degrees to the right or left, in order to acquire a same or opposite direction track offset 15 NM (28 km) from the assigned track centerline. When possible, the direction of turn should be determined by by the position of the aircraft relative to any organized route or track system."
In addition, the SUPPS to Doc7030 state:
"9.1.1.1 Descent through the MNPS airspace
9.1.1.1.1 An aircraft that is not MNPS/RVSM-approved and is unable to maintain a flight level above MNPS/RVSM airspace should descend to a flight level below MNPS/RVSM airspace".
- going on, with regard only to those above F420 who do not have MNPS/RVSM approval, infringing the OTS during an emergency descent, to state:
9.1.1.1.2 An aircraft compelled to make a descent through MNPS airspace, whether continuing to destination or turning back, should, if its descent will conflict with an organized track:
a) plan to descend to a level below FL 280;
b) prior to passing FL 410, proceed to a point midway between a convenient pair of organized tracks prior to entering that track system from above;
c) while descending between FL 410 and FL 280, maintain a track that is midway between and parallel with the organized tracks; and
d) contact ATC as soon as practicable and request a revised ATC clearance.
a) plan to descend to a level below FL 280;
b) prior to passing FL 410, proceed to a point midway between a convenient pair of organized tracks prior to entering that track system from above;
c) while descending between FL 410 and FL 280, maintain a track that is midway between and parallel with the organized tracks; and
d) contact ATC as soon as practicable and request a revised ATC clearance.
If one is flying within the vertical airspace ie. FL285 to FL420 lets say FL360
We have had, (most recently from crew operating EINN - CYQX), telephone calls to our desk from biz jet crews who don't regularly jump the pond and who have apparently been provided with way out of date procedures or worse, none at all. However, asking for info re. procedures on sites like this has its risks - better just to provide the links, as per Bigears, and let the OP do the rest IMHO.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However...
1. A random route is any series of way points selected by an operator which do not correspond exactly to the (entire) route and level(s) of a published track.
2. Yes.
Firstly: Yes
Secondly: All routes are chosen by the operator for FPL purposes; whether they are wholly on a published track at a published level, they partially infringe a track at a published level, or they remain clear of the OTS at the published OTS levels.
However, ATC will issue an Oceanic Clearance on the basis of traffic already cleared, predicted traffic volume, airspace restrictions, and any route restrictions/requirements between ATSUs which operators may/may not be aware of on the day in question. Any of these may result in the route specified in the Oceanic Clearance differing from that of the FPL. The basic FPL requirements are outlined in the CAA ref in my first post.
I have asked this question a number of times and am hoping an ATCO can provide an answer, with a text reference if possible.
1. Random Routes flown over the Atlantic. Are these routes a series of pre determined way points designed by ATC which are not part of the NAT track system or are they any series of way points that can be selected by an operator which is not part of the NAT tracks.
2. Regarding the requirement to establish a position 15nm from a NAT track in the case of an emergency, does that requirement also apply to a Random Track.
1. Random Routes flown over the Atlantic. Are these routes a series of pre determined way points designed by ATC which are not part of the NAT track system or are they any series of way points that can be selected by an operator which is not part of the NAT tracks.
2. Regarding the requirement to establish a position 15nm from a NAT track in the case of an emergency, does that requirement also apply to a Random Track.
2. Yes.
If one is flying within the vertical airspace ie. FL285 to FL420 lets say FL360 and the Random Track flown is North of TRACKA or South of TRACKZ and no part of the planned track is common to any NAT Track. Does one still need to offset 15nm before descending in case of an emergency.
Secondly to confirm If a Random Track is planned again without any part of the track being common to a NAT Track. This track is chosen normally by the operator and is not a track selected by ATC which is a system of Random Tracks.
Secondly to confirm If a Random Track is planned again without any part of the track being common to a NAT Track. This track is chosen normally by the operator and is not a track selected by ATC which is a system of Random Tracks.
Secondly: All routes are chosen by the operator for FPL purposes; whether they are wholly on a published track at a published level, they partially infringe a track at a published level, or they remain clear of the OTS at the published OTS levels.
However, ATC will issue an Oceanic Clearance on the basis of traffic already cleared, predicted traffic volume, airspace restrictions, and any route restrictions/requirements between ATSUs which operators may/may not be aware of on the day in question. Any of these may result in the route specified in the Oceanic Clearance differing from that of the FPL. The basic FPL requirements are outlined in the CAA ref in my first post.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, asking for info re. procedures on sites like this has its risks
c) while descending between FL 410 and FL 280, maintain a track that is midway between and parallel with the organized tracks; and
NAT Regional Supplementary Procedures (SUPPS) (Doc 7030) Working Copy – 5th Edition - 2008
So which are we supposed to follow?
Mutt
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOAC had in fact quoted the following:
...from a document Bigears had linked to earlier:
"NAT Regional Supplementary Procedures (SUPPS) (Doc 7030) Working Copy – 5th Edition - 2008
This version of the Working Copy of the 5th Edition of the NAT Regional Supplementary Procedures (SUPPS) (Doc 7030), Amendment No. 3, dated 15 October 2010, includes the following approved amendment(s) which have not yet been published."
My point re. the above was that it was not relevant to the scenario outlined by the OP.
The document you refer to, "GUIDANCE CONCERNING AIR NAVIGATION IN AND ABOVE THE NORTH ATLANTIC MNPS AIRSPACE Edition 2010", was last updated on 17th October 2011, (link here), however, according to the ICAO webpage linked to above, the SUPPS were last updated on 4th July 2011. You be the judge.
For my part, allow me to misquote Kiefer Sutherland: I have two books at my bedside, the MATS Part 2 and the King James Bible. The only proper authorities I am aware of are my Local Area Supervisor and the Lord our God.
The (SUPPS) non MNPS/RVSM descent through OTS does not make any appearance in our current MATS Pt 2; which is good until 2nd December 2011.
9.1.1.1.2 An aircraft compelled to make a descent through MNPS airspace, whether continuing to destination or turning back, should, if its descent will conflict with an organized track:
a) plan to descend to a level below FL 280;
b) prior to passing FL 410, proceed to a point midway between a convenient pair of organized tracks prior to entering that track system from above;
c) while descending between FL 410 and FL 280, maintain a track that is midway between and parallel with the organized tracks; and
d) contact ATC as soon as practicable and request a revised ATC clearance.
a) plan to descend to a level below FL 280;
b) prior to passing FL 410, proceed to a point midway between a convenient pair of organized tracks prior to entering that track system from above;
c) while descending between FL 410 and FL 280, maintain a track that is midway between and parallel with the organized tracks; and
d) contact ATC as soon as practicable and request a revised ATC clearance.
"NAT Regional Supplementary Procedures (SUPPS) (Doc 7030) Working Copy – 5th Edition - 2008
This version of the Working Copy of the 5th Edition of the NAT Regional Supplementary Procedures (SUPPS) (Doc 7030), Amendment No. 3, dated 15 October 2010, includes the following approved amendment(s) which have not yet been published."
My point re. the above was that it was not relevant to the scenario outlined by the OP.
The document you refer to, "GUIDANCE CONCERNING AIR NAVIGATION IN AND ABOVE THE NORTH ATLANTIC MNPS AIRSPACE Edition 2010", was last updated on 17th October 2011, (link here), however, according to the ICAO webpage linked to above, the SUPPS were last updated on 4th July 2011. You be the judge.
For my part, allow me to misquote Kiefer Sutherland: I have two books at my bedside, the MATS Part 2 and the King James Bible. The only proper authorities I am aware of are my Local Area Supervisor and the Lord our God.
The (SUPPS) non MNPS/RVSM descent through OTS does not make any appearance in our current MATS Pt 2; which is good until 2nd December 2011.
Last edited by rab-k; 17th Nov 2011 at 08:57. Reason: Link to 2011 edition
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears that these 2 sources of information contradict each other regarding contingencies, MNPS guidance states to go 15 nms offset, while Doc 7030 states to go midway between two tracks which is 30nms!
If i hadnt gotten into this discussion I wouldnt even know that the Doc 7030 etc existed as they were never mentioned by our training provider in either Dubai or the USA, so please dont be surprised that crews don't totally understand what you expect them to do
Mutt
If i hadnt gotten into this discussion I wouldnt even know that the Doc 7030 etc existed as they were never mentioned by our training provider in either Dubai or the USA, so please dont be surprised that crews don't totally understand what you expect them to do
Mutt
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
..........and still, despite the plethora of links - some 'yet to be published', C152 still does not know what to do after setting up a perfect 15nm offset from his/her random track. What an a/c descending through MPNS airspace from above 420 should do should be no different to what an a/c starting at 360 should do, surely? Perhaps you can quote that procedure for the OP from the bedside book? Personally I would weigh the odds against hitting the traffic coming the other way below me exactly on my random track against sailing blithely (offset 15) downwards through several established tracks definitely full of metal. My bedside reading says more important to put myself between and parallel to fixed tracks than to simply fly an immaculate 15nm offset on my random track. My choice, I reckon, since they are my passengers.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears that these 2 sources of information contradict each other regarding contingencies, MNPS guidance states to go 15 nms offset, while Doc 7030 states to go midway between two tracks which is 30nms!
so please dont be surprised that crews don't totally understand what you expect them to do
What an a/c descending through MNPS airspace from above 420 should do should be no different to what an a/c starting at 360 should do, surely?
My bedside reading says more important to put myself between and parallel to fixed tracks than to simply fly an immaculate 15nm offset on my random track.
I imagine that discussions elsewhere precisely along these lines have resulted in the appearance in the SUPPS of such. As I see it the issue, other than not appearing where you would expect/hope to find it, is that going for the mid-point is equally as sensible for MNPS certified as it is non-MNPS certified when descending from a position directly above the OTS to a position below. (The advantage for MNPS certified a/c having to go for only a 15NM offset is that a descent could possibly commence earlier than might otherwise be the case if having to delay until reaching the midpoint).
Last edited by rab-k; 18th Nov 2011 at 09:34. Reason: (xtra bit)