Turning direct to with no SID published
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Prague
Age: 34
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turning direct to with no SID published
Hi guys,
yesterday's departure clearance started a discussion where it is safe to start the initial turn in Nador with high MSA 7100ft in departure sector with no published SID. Clearance was CM FL200 ALM from runway 08 (this would mean left turnout of more than 90 degrees). I believe that you can start after passing DER at a height of more than 400ft, any other opinion? I just wanted to crosscheck it with someone
yesterday's departure clearance started a discussion where it is safe to start the initial turn in Nador with high MSA 7100ft in departure sector with no published SID. Clearance was CM FL200 ALM from runway 08 (this would mean left turnout of more than 90 degrees). I believe that you can start after passing DER at a height of more than 400ft, any other opinion? I just wanted to crosscheck it with someone
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Euroland
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
in VMC sure, but look out for those two rather tall antenna's on the left there. 
At night, climb straight ahead for a while then to ALM. You could consider NADP1 or keeping the flaps out a bit longer to climb fast and tighten the turn (with full climb thrust). Generally terrain won't be an issue there on departure 08.
At night, climb straight ahead for a while then to ALM. You could consider NADP1 or keeping the flaps out a bit longer to climb fast and tighten the turn (with full climb thrust). Generally terrain won't be an issue there on departure 08.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In Africa and other places with no SIDs, radars, and many other things - where nobody really cares about the exact aircraft position (e.g. no P-RNAV/RNP stuff) - why not get the airplane really stable and wait until at least 1000ft before starting any turn? And even then, as stated, consider extended NADP1 or perhaps cleaning before turn and then fly with "max angle" speed until MSA if there are any obstacles you think might be limiting. Also consider single engine performance if one of the donkies quits.
There is absolutely no reason to make low-level turns (below 1000ft) unless it is mandatory (SID, noise abatement, terrain, EOSID, etc.).
There is absolutely no reason to make low-level turns (below 1000ft) unless it is mandatory (SID, noise abatement, terrain, EOSID, etc.).
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Prague
Age: 34
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I just wanted to see a "legal" point of view for minimum height of turn. It makes sense to climb straight ahead for a while and then turn. Sane ATC wouldn't just give you a departure clearance (without condition) into terrain, even in Morocco (I hope that I am not too naive by trusting these guys a bit). So is there any other reference for minimum turning without SID?
). So is there any other reference for minimum turning without SID?
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: EU
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My manuals say no directs below MSA, unless its offered to you in VMC. But you cannot ask for it in VMC.
And no, I wouldn't trust Moroccan controllers. Don't even trust Spanish controllers tbh.
And no, I wouldn't trust Moroccan controllers. Don't even trust Spanish controllers tbh.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Euroland
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I just wanted to see a "legal" point of view for minimum height of turn. It makes sense to climb straight ahead for a while and then turn. Sane ATC wouldn't just give you a departure clearance (without condition) into terrain, even in Morocco (I hope that I am not too naive by trusting these guys a bit). So is there any other reference for minimum turning without SID?
Between this height and 400ft max angle of bank is 15°, above 400ft 25°.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Prague
Age: 34
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LookingForAJob,
thanks for your isight. From pilot's point of view what you are saying is in practice hardly practical. The only info you get is Jeppy plates which are derived from AIP and thus you get not all the obstacle information. In Morocco the only friend you have is Jeppesen Supplement handbook and I cannot imagine any pilot doing obstacle clearance analysis in 25 min turn-around.
thanks for your isight. From pilot's point of view what you are saying is in practice hardly practical. The only info you get is Jeppy plates which are derived from AIP and thus you get not all the obstacle information. In Morocco the only friend you have is Jeppesen Supplement handbook and I cannot imagine any pilot doing obstacle clearance analysis in 25 min turn-around.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Prague
Age: 34
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LookingForAJob,
it is rather unusual to fly to airports under IFR without any SID. Yes you get all these in ATPL (FYI it takes like 15 minutes to get all the charts out and plot it in), but for a jetliner which performance varies widely with engine derate, assumed temperature and take-off weight you check your performance in the FMC.
To answer the OEI: this is designed by ops department, if there is no obstacle ahead and OEI performance allows you to continue straight ahead then you continue RWY track, if there is obstacle penetrating your OEI flight path an emergency turn is designed. In the case of NDR there is no emergency turn and in case of EFATO you continue straight ahead from RWY 08.
I have created this Thread to ask about legal point of view as I couldn't find any reference to that. In that particular example we flew RWY track to 7100ft which is the MSA and than we started the turn which in my point of view doesn't seem to be the most efficient departure either, but for sure it is the safest one and doesn't leave any doubt that we will clear all obstacles. I was more questioning the departure clearance which was kind of suggesting to turn ASAP to ALM.
it is rather unusual to fly to airports under IFR without any SID. Yes you get all these in ATPL (FYI it takes like 15 minutes to get all the charts out and plot it in), but for a jetliner which performance varies widely with engine derate, assumed temperature and take-off weight you check your performance in the FMC.
To answer the OEI: this is designed by ops department, if there is no obstacle ahead and OEI performance allows you to continue straight ahead then you continue RWY track, if there is obstacle penetrating your OEI flight path an emergency turn is designed. In the case of NDR there is no emergency turn and in case of EFATO you continue straight ahead from RWY 08.
I have created this Thread to ask about legal point of view as I couldn't find any reference to that. In that particular example we flew RWY track to 7100ft which is the MSA and than we started the turn which in my point of view doesn't seem to be the most efficient departure either, but for sure it is the safest one and doesn't leave any doubt that we will clear all obstacles. I was more questioning the departure clearance which was kind of suggesting to turn ASAP to ALM.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Prague
Age: 34
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is only available chart we have on board which depicts obstacles in the area. As you can see you don't have any idea about all the obstacles in the area. Together with that it is offset to show approach for RWY 08 and thus some obstacles are out of the chart.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: FL390
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Climb straight ahead, keep speed at Flap Up speed and climb to MSA before turning and accelerating would be my plan if I found myself at a similar airport.
Day VMC with good terrain contact perhaps clean up and turn a bit sooner but if any doubt or uncertainty exists then going to MSA is the best and safe option.
With regard to turns in general, we don't do any turns below 400ft.
Day VMC with good terrain contact perhaps clean up and turn a bit sooner but if any doubt or uncertainty exists then going to MSA is the best and safe option.
With regard to turns in general, we don't do any turns below 400ft.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From PANS-OPS:
"For each runway at aerodromes where instrument departures are expected to be used, a departure procedure shall be established and promulgated."
At this airport, at least, Morocco is clearly not in compliance with ICAO requirements.
"For each runway at aerodromes where instrument departures are expected to be used, a departure procedure shall be established and promulgated."
At this airport, at least, Morocco is clearly not in compliance with ICAO requirements.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having said that, I noticed that the approach angle on the chart you have included is steeper than normal - 4½ or even 5˚ (does it say it on the chart? I couldn't find it)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Prague
Age: 34
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No hearths broken. I have spoken with colleague of mine who works for another company and their procedure is to fly OEI procedure in this case it would be straight ahead. Or you can follow the missed approach profile but you would have to catch up with the 2,5% climb gradient which starts at DA.
At first I was thinking that it is just an omnidirectional departure which is not published. But then I checked the heights of the nearby obstacles which would penetrate the Obstacle identification surface. The problem, as aterpster said, could be that Morocco didn't wholly adopt the PANS-OPS and this is "design-it-yourself" departure.
At first I was thinking that it is just an omnidirectional departure which is not published. But then I checked the heights of the nearby obstacles which would penetrate the Obstacle identification surface. The problem, as aterpster said, could be that Morocco didn't wholly adopt the PANS-OPS and this is "design-it-yourself" departure.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
noox89:
It would be interesting to look at another low-traffic airport with more difficult terrain to determine whether it is, indeed, policy to not establish departure procedures.
It would be interesting to look at another low-traffic airport with more difficult terrain to determine whether it is, indeed, policy to not establish departure procedures.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
172 Driver:
aka: GMFO
I looked at a couple airports similar to this one. The have an initial turn restriction, but nothing else.
At GMFO it states Runway 24 turn right. Then Jepp has a page showing the turn to about 060.
Quite pathetic I would say.
aterpster, I present to you Oujda, OUD:
No DP published, significant terrain and the border to Algeria within a few miles east
No DP published, significant terrain and the border to Algeria within a few miles east
I looked at a couple airports similar to this one. The have an initial turn restriction, but nothing else.
At GMFO it states Runway 24 turn right. Then Jepp has a page showing the turn to about 060.
Quite pathetic I would say.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very pathetic, and departure clearance from OUD tells you nothing more than cross OUD at or above FL100. Apparently driven by the political relations to Algeria. The company has instead multiple escape routes and guidance on normal departure procedures.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
172 Driver:
I don't see anything in the Jepps that tells me to remain clear of Algeria.
If Morroco ever has a departure accident we may never learn much about it.
Obviously, a good air carrier would develop its own all engines operating DP as well as it OEI DP, hopefully following the same track.
Very pathetic, and departure clearance from OUD tells you nothing more than cross OUD at or above FL100. Apparently driven by the political relations to Algeria. The company has instead multiple escape routes and guidance on normal departure procedures.
If Morroco ever has a departure accident we may never learn much about it.
Obviously, a good air carrier would develop its own all engines operating DP as well as it OEI DP, hopefully following the same track.