Radius-to-Fix SID
 

I see that there are two Ocean 2A/2C SIDS at HKG. One is P-RNAV and one is not. Our filed routing will likely just say OCEAN 2A although the flight plan does include our navigation capability. If I want to use the OCEAN PRNAV SID, I just want to confirm that we have to specifically request a radius to fix SID from Clearance Delivery.

150ft, "Autopilot 1, my first rest, wake me up with a coffee with milk".
It's not hard.

Holy crap, do you want us to hold your hand while you ask?

''I just want to confirm that we have to specifically request a radius to fix SID from Clearance Delivery.''

Try it. I would love to hear their response!

Stab,

I think what they are saying is that ATC have no way to know if your aircraft is suitably equipped and you're approved to fly radius-to-fix. Therefore you won't be given that SID unless you specifically ask for it.

Fly safely!

JS

Have a look at OM-A 8.3 page 23, RNP-1, second paragraph.

STP

got a chart number on for those two sids.....can only find one on navtech (though at this time of night, there should be two of everything)

Radius-to-Fix SID
 

STP: He's not CX according to another thread. Won't have access to OPs A

"I see that there are two Ocean 2A/2C SIDS at HKG."
Jepp 10-3H - 3 Jun 11

"One is P-RNAV and one is not"
They appear to BOTH be RNAV SID's, specifically P-RNAV or RNP1 depending on which side of the world you come from. The only difference at first glance I see is that one is for 07L and one is for 07R

"Our filed routing will likely just say OCEAN 2A although the flight plan does include our navigation capability."

HKG ATC do not like you submitting a FLT PLN with the SID on it, they want you to enter the transition point only as the SID will be issued by delivery and may not match what you files - Can't give you the AIP reference but from a few nasty-grams that is what experience tells me

"If I want to use the OCEAN PRNAV SID, I just want to confirm that we have to specifically request a radius to fix SID from Clearance Delivery."
The SIDs you mentioned are not RTF SIDs. They are P-RNAV SIDs. An example of an RTF SID is ATENA 1E. Using the ATENA as an example, how do you get it? Ask for it would be my best suggestion. I am not sure what presentation ATC get the new ICAO Item 10 letters outlining your capabilities but I can't imagine they look at them for each A/C before giving a clearance (opinion only)

In HKG the RANDOM DEP 1/2 A/B/C/D are not RTF and the E/F ones are.

All of the above is jf the top of my head having looked at the Ocean chart only so all care, no reliability.

Not only is chart 10-3H an OCEAN 2A/2C departure. Chart 10-3W is also OCEAN 2A/2C departure but this one is for "non-RNP1/P-RNAV approved aircraft or whose RNP1/P-RNAV capability has been degraded before departure". There is a slight difference in routing but perhaps they are close enough together that ATC doesn't care which one you fly when cleared for one of these SIDS.

Actually, now that I look through the SIDS a bit more, a lot of them seem to have the same thing, either being for RNP equipped aircraft or not and published on two separate pages.

Feel free to let me know what that paragraph is saying Steve. Much appreciated.

The company I fly for seems to file a specific SID for every departure out of HKG.

Anyways....thanks "jtr" for the information. Your information is very helpful
I had not seen the Altena 1E and some other E/F departures specifically mentioning about RTF. We ended up using the Rasse PRNAV departure(but non-RTF)last night.

I shall look into whether being P-RNAV equipped means you are capable to do RTF departures.

As for "iflylow"....I am really glad I don't fly with low

Hey, cut the guy some slack on a potentially confusing issue. At least his question didn't make the fleet newsletter, unlike some dumb@ss who wants to know "what we're supposed to say when we check in with tower".....

How about: "Tower, this is Ghost rider requesting a flyby"

Seriously, someone asked??
I should read crews news more often!

@JS

Not much point really as the information is company specific.

STP

If you get bored get a copy of ICAO Doc 9613 - Perf. Based Nav. and also the Airbus "Getting to grips with Modern Navigation" and you will find most questions answered, or if not the relevant references given.

With no disrespect intended - If you are asking questions such as the one this post was kicked off with (regarding RF), I would hazard a guess either a)You, b)Your company or c)Your A/C or some combination of the above are not trained/approved/authorised.

A quick litmus test would be if the procedures were in your FMS (the RF SIDs) Were they? If not then there is a pretty good hint that some work needs doing. (Again, only said in the interest of helping)

If I can jump in...as a tower controller (and hence one that struggles with combined delivery and ground at 12:34 in the morning), we will give you the normal SID that has long been in use, i.e. "CX 253, cleared (to destination) via BEKOL, flight plan route, ATENA 1A (for 07R) Departure, Squawk code ----" If you want the new RNAV departure, then you would request on 129.9 (or 122.55) that you want the ATENA 1E, and it shall then be given in the format "CX 253 you are now cleared via the ATENA 1E SID, everything else remains the same". No queries are made on behalf of ATC as to whether or not you are going to do it upside down, backwards etc. Meanwhile another 10 aeroplanes jump in squealing the frequency....see you in a few nights!!!

Thanks jtr,

I am just doing my training right now so priorities have been elsewhere. Will look into the FMS to see if it is there. I am going to HKG again very soon again(in a few hours).

I suspect that we are not approved. I have seen an article about curved approaches which require a specific approval and I think training. I believe only a few operators such as Westjet and maybe Southwest have this type of approval and remember seeing a curved approach for Palm Springs as an example. Maybe it is RNP 0.1 stuff. Will look up the docs you recommended.

I really appreciate your help.

No approval required. Not the same as an AR approach you are thinking of.
Not many FMS are capable of entering RF path terminator yet. CX 777 and 748 are capable. Dunno about other operators.

Designed to contain the noise contour. RF adjusts bank angle to make good a radius over the ground, RNAV using DF (Direct to Fix) produces splay of tracks depending on wind.
Make sure your company has a good engine-out procedure- the nominal turn point is the same as the conventional and DF procedures but the way the aircraft starts the roll in before the fix on the RF turn makes those hills at the end of Lantau look awfully close. :eek: All within PANS-OPS of course. But that assumes all engines operating.

Sorry Bedder, pedant mode on:
Was hoping you would just say "recleared ...".:8

Thanks bekolblockage,

First of all, an admission of error. Our ATC flight plans are not filed with a SID or STAR for HKG.

I am a bit confused as your statement about approval not required for such a procedure conflicts with an earlier stament shown below.

JS
 

Correct, you don't know what runway will be in use at planning stage so the SID/STAR is not inserted. Our Flight Data Processing System appends the SID/STAR based on the runway in use at activation time. As Bedder pointed out, our system doesn't know if you are RF capable or not, and the procedure is not mandatory even if you are, so will issue the normal SID as default. If you want the RF SID then simply request it.

To clarify my non-approval statement.
I was assuming your aircraft was RNAV 1 approved by the State of registry.
I took it your question was in relation specifically to any special approval required to use the RF turn.
If your aircraft is RNAV 1 approved and your FMS is RF path terminator capable, you can fly the RNAV(GNSS) SID using the RF turn.

As I indicated before, this is different from the 2 RNAV(RNP) approaches (previously referred to as RNP AR approches by ICAO) to the north runway which specifically require CAD approval due to their requirement of RNP 0.3 in the intermediate and missed approach segments for obstacle clearance.