CNS RWY15 EOSID
Originally Posted by Arm out the window
PS, just another thought - that procedure would have to be premised on an engine failure in a very small window (after being able to stop on the runway but before commencement of the 400 ft / DER turn, wouldn't it? I'd assume that once the turn was started you'd continue onto the north-eastery SID track rather than reverse and head out down the valley ... again, just asking.
ALGOL-
EK A380 TOPA Engine Out procedure for YBCS 15
EOP - NON- STD. At D3.5 CS turn LEFT to 360 deg (Max 161 KIAS during turn), intercept and follow R030 from CS to R030/D10 CS HP. R030/D10 D113.0 CS HP:Inbound 030 deg, LEFT turn.
I hope this helps.
We use LIDO
EK A380 TOPA Engine Out procedure for YBCS 15
EOP - NON- STD. At D3.5 CS turn LEFT to 360 deg (Max 161 KIAS during turn), intercept and follow R030 from CS to R030/D10 CS HP. R030/D10 D113.0 CS HP:Inbound 030 deg, LEFT turn.
I hope this helps.
We use LIDO
Always good to question - I've got a Jepp chart of Bali were they transposed the spot heights of the two big mountains to the north - several thousand feet difference ... could ruin your day !!
Lots of chart errors out there
Lots of chart errors out there
Airbus getting to grips with performance describes how an engine out procedure is designed and should be flown.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: ?
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FWIW, here's a clip of a dual engine failure after takeoff off RW15 at CNS in the VA Embraer sim
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9Klye2N40M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9Klye2N40M
Algol, in your original post you stated:
That point is 100% correct and I am very glad that you have brought it to their attention.
The issue however has nothing to do with MFRA or green dot speed, the issue is the TRACKING. The instructions they have given you will steer you directly into one of several mountains! At 11Nm a right turn takes you immediately into a >4000' mountain range.
It is extremely worrying that any airline could be flying out of Cairns with such a gross error. Thank god no one has had the need to fly that manoeuvre as the consequences would be horrific.
Has no one at your company ever flown the procedure in a simulator?
My companies EOSID for RWY15 is wrong.
The issue however has nothing to do with MFRA or green dot speed, the issue is the TRACKING. The instructions they have given you will steer you directly into one of several mountains! At 11Nm a right turn takes you immediately into a >4000' mountain range.
It is extremely worrying that any airline could be flying out of Cairns with such a gross error. Thank god no one has had the need to fly that manoeuvre as the consequences would be horrific.
Has no one at your company ever flown the procedure in a simulator?
Hi Bloggs,
I don't know what the SID says (I don't have access to it), but notwithstanding, our Flight Operations Performance engineers supply the EOPS's along with performance data and calculations. I daresay they would not ever look at the Air Services SID charts. Besides the SIDs are not designed around Terrain avoidance necessarily.
Cheers
Why would you delay the left turn from the SID turn point?
Cheers
Wild guess - they probably figured that in a 4 engine jet which (can) use much more of the runway than a twin and consequently be lower over the DER, it's safer to be another mile towards the high terrain - but still within limits - than starting a turn over the DER which many EOSIDS and standard SIDS have.
Air France provided Cairns ATC with quite a bit of data for the occasions when they operated Concorde out of Cairns. Two of the ones I remember:
Depart RWY33 unless tailwind component was greater than 15KT.
Engine out departing RWY 15 continue straight ahead and turn left through Russell Heads (24DME) or until enough altitude to turn left over the terrain along the coast - only departed during daylight with a minimum cloud base.
To do a 180° right turn at 11DME there is probably enough room for a 3NM radius turn - not a good option in IMC. There are already enough aircraft parked on hills around Cairns, we don't want any more.
Depart RWY33 unless tailwind component was greater than 15KT.
Engine out departing RWY 15 continue straight ahead and turn left through Russell Heads (24DME) or until enough altitude to turn left over the terrain along the coast - only departed during daylight with a minimum cloud base.
To do a 180° right turn at 11DME there is probably enough room for a 3NM radius turn - not a good option in IMC. There are already enough aircraft parked on hills around Cairns, we don't want any more.
Last edited by topdrop; 2nd Sep 2016 at 12:13.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 1999
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Concorde into CNS? Wow. I never heard of that. Interesting.
Capt.Bloggs, thanks for the RNP Chart, its useful to see that RNP procedure in relation to the terrain. Wish it showed more spot heights though, the contouring isn't really detailed.
To those saying its wrong to go straight out to 11dme - look at the RNP chart.
RNAV Waypoint CS528 is at 10.6DME. So our EOSID turn point (11DME) is .7NM past that. The valley is at its widest point right there, and a RIGHT turn takes you away from the nearest terrain to your left (not straight into it as some here declare).
Yes, you are turning toward another area of high terrain, but considering you've been climbing for the last 11 miles (hopefully!) you should have gained sufficient altitude to clear the closest stuff, and its now a matter of keeping the speed down to make the turn as tight as possible (as the EOSID dictates).
The success of this whole manoeuver depends a lot on accurate tracking in the initial climb. If you lose #1 and allow yourself to drift left - you could hit something.
BeerBaron, remember again - this procedure is LIDO approved! So I presume it satisfies all the legalities concerning tracking error (the cone) and turn radii.
The other option of the early left turn - at the departure end of the runway - is what a lot of other carriers seem to use, and it overcomes the issue about what flap or EOAA to use in order to stay below the max speed for the right turn at 11DME, thereby also avoiding any requirement to limit take-off/landing weight to stay below the limit speed after clean up.
Capt.Bloggs, thanks for the RNP Chart, its useful to see that RNP procedure in relation to the terrain. Wish it showed more spot heights though, the contouring isn't really detailed.
To those saying its wrong to go straight out to 11dme - look at the RNP chart.
RNAV Waypoint CS528 is at 10.6DME. So our EOSID turn point (11DME) is .7NM past that. The valley is at its widest point right there, and a RIGHT turn takes you away from the nearest terrain to your left (not straight into it as some here declare).
Yes, you are turning toward another area of high terrain, but considering you've been climbing for the last 11 miles (hopefully!) you should have gained sufficient altitude to clear the closest stuff, and its now a matter of keeping the speed down to make the turn as tight as possible (as the EOSID dictates).
The success of this whole manoeuver depends a lot on accurate tracking in the initial climb. If you lose #1 and allow yourself to drift left - you could hit something.
BeerBaron, remember again - this procedure is LIDO approved! So I presume it satisfies all the legalities concerning tracking error (the cone) and turn radii.
The other option of the early left turn - at the departure end of the runway - is what a lot of other carriers seem to use, and it overcomes the issue about what flap or EOAA to use in order to stay below the max speed for the right turn at 11DME, thereby also avoiding any requirement to limit take-off/landing weight to stay below the limit speed after clean up.
Algol,
Probably the easiest reference for terrain in that area is the 33 LOC chart.
That chart has an 11 DME point marked on the chart, which makes the comparison easy. Abeam the 11 DME point there is a spot height of 3602 ft and a little further to the north west is a spot height of 4289 ft.
11 DME is by my calculation about 8.4 nm from the end of the runway.
Minimum gross climb gradient for a twin on one engine is 2.4% (1.6% nett). 2.4% is about 144 ft/nm give or take a few feet.
If the aeroplane is climbing at 2.4% then in the 8.4 nm it covered to get to 11 DME it will have climbed about 1200 ft.
Now it will only be doing that if a number of planets align, but it is not inconceivable that the aeroplane loaded to max performance limiting take off weight would only be maybe 1200-1300 ft at around 11 DME.
This is why a lot of operators do the departure end of the runway turn and get the aeroplane away from the terrain and over the water.
To clarify one thing though, even though LIDO provide this info via their EFB, it isn't "LIDO approved" they are just the messenger.
I think you are right to question the procedure.
Probably the easiest reference for terrain in that area is the 33 LOC chart.
That chart has an 11 DME point marked on the chart, which makes the comparison easy. Abeam the 11 DME point there is a spot height of 3602 ft and a little further to the north west is a spot height of 4289 ft.
11 DME is by my calculation about 8.4 nm from the end of the runway.
Minimum gross climb gradient for a twin on one engine is 2.4% (1.6% nett). 2.4% is about 144 ft/nm give or take a few feet.
If the aeroplane is climbing at 2.4% then in the 8.4 nm it covered to get to 11 DME it will have climbed about 1200 ft.
Now it will only be doing that if a number of planets align, but it is not inconceivable that the aeroplane loaded to max performance limiting take off weight would only be maybe 1200-1300 ft at around 11 DME.
This is why a lot of operators do the departure end of the runway turn and get the aeroplane away from the terrain and over the water.
To clarify one thing though, even though LIDO provide this info via their EFB, it isn't "LIDO approved" they are just the messenger.
I think you are right to question the procedure.
I've been looking at Google Earth. I calculated that your 11DME point on extended centerline is at -17.0232 145.815.
In nil wind, and assuming 200kts and 15°AoB your turning radius will be about 2.2nm. Double, obviously for the diameter.
Plotting this turn takes you to within 2nm of a 700m peak (read off the local 1:250K topo) - that's 2300'. (look for the rectangular mini housing estate, east of the highway, just north of Gordonvale)
I have made no allowance for wind in the turn, assumed an instantaneous turn at 11DME, and assumed that the outbound track from the DER was straight (and not blown to the right as RWY HDG was kept in a bit long as it was all going bang).
Now I fly planes better than I can design SIDs, but I'm guessing you have flown 8.6nm since the DER [NOT 11nm as that's the VOR which is well to the north of the airport], then another 5nm in the turn.
Maintaining the minimum gradient after takeoff, what height will you be?
I doubt it, but nevertheless, it MIGHT be legal with the buffers and 30kt omnidirectional winds and 6 second pilot turn reaction times (calculating this is beyond my level of expertise) but by christ it ain't smart.
In nil wind, and assuming 200kts and 15°AoB your turning radius will be about 2.2nm. Double, obviously for the diameter.
Plotting this turn takes you to within 2nm of a 700m peak (read off the local 1:250K topo) - that's 2300'. (look for the rectangular mini housing estate, east of the highway, just north of Gordonvale)
I have made no allowance for wind in the turn, assumed an instantaneous turn at 11DME, and assumed that the outbound track from the DER was straight (and not blown to the right as RWY HDG was kept in a bit long as it was all going bang).
Now I fly planes better than I can design SIDs, but I'm guessing you have flown 8.6nm since the DER [NOT 11nm as that's the VOR which is well to the north of the airport], then another 5nm in the turn.
Maintaining the minimum gradient after takeoff, what height will you be?
I doubt it, but nevertheless, it MIGHT be legal with the buffers and 30kt omnidirectional winds and 6 second pilot turn reaction times (calculating this is beyond my level of expertise) but by christ it ain't smart.
Last edited by compressor stall; 2nd Sep 2016 at 14:21.
Algol,
Serious suggestion - when you go flying next run the software for a 33 departure and see what the EOSID text is. If that EOSID turns you left towards the terrain then there is an issue (or another issue depending on how you want to look at it!)
It may well be something as simple as someone, somewhere, has transposed the 15 and 33 text, which is why, when you tell the company about it they say and do nothing because they go and look at the raw data and say it is ok - thus ignoring your report/concerns.
It might not be that simple either, it could just be crappy procedure design, but it is another avenue of investigation to support your report
Serious suggestion - when you go flying next run the software for a 33 departure and see what the EOSID text is. If that EOSID turns you left towards the terrain then there is an issue (or another issue depending on how you want to look at it!)
It may well be something as simple as someone, somewhere, has transposed the 15 and 33 text, which is why, when you tell the company about it they say and do nothing because they go and look at the raw data and say it is ok - thus ignoring your report/concerns.
It might not be that simple either, it could just be crappy procedure design, but it is another avenue of investigation to support your report
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm late to the discussion, so I hope I can add something useful.
We fly A330-300s out of CNS and have done for more than 20 years now.
Our procedures state that if we have already commenced the left turn when the failure occurs (in other words, we have reached 400' aal) then we keep the turn going.
If the failure happens before the start of the left turn, then we follow the EOSID which takes us straight down the valley.
I have no doubt that the aircraft will have adequate performance to keep us clear of the ground, but occasionally when the weather is a bit poor, we suggest to ourselves that we may "interpret" the start of the left turn and take what may be a better option with regards to terrain clearance. The handling aspects of the aircraft in a left turn at max weight could be challenging though (normal SID states 25 deg minimum AOB, but of course EO is max 15 deg AOB - so if one is late to start the turn one might end up a bit closer to terrain than is ideal).
edited to add: Half our departures are to BNE, so very light weight, the other half are to HKG. very close to max weight, so that can play a part of the decision making process.
We fly A330-300s out of CNS and have done for more than 20 years now.
Our procedures state that if we have already commenced the left turn when the failure occurs (in other words, we have reached 400' aal) then we keep the turn going.
If the failure happens before the start of the left turn, then we follow the EOSID which takes us straight down the valley.
I have no doubt that the aircraft will have adequate performance to keep us clear of the ground, but occasionally when the weather is a bit poor, we suggest to ourselves that we may "interpret" the start of the left turn and take what may be a better option with regards to terrain clearance. The handling aspects of the aircraft in a left turn at max weight could be challenging though (normal SID states 25 deg minimum AOB, but of course EO is max 15 deg AOB - so if one is late to start the turn one might end up a bit closer to terrain than is ideal).
edited to add: Half our departures are to BNE, so very light weight, the other half are to HKG. very close to max weight, so that can play a part of the decision making process.
Last edited by OK4Wire; 2nd Sep 2016 at 23:44. Reason: as above.