SLOP Strategic Lateral Offset Procedure
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Home
Posts: 903
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SLOP Strategic Lateral Offset Procedure
Just wondering how many of you guys/ladies apply this procedures in oceanic (especially NAT) and remote airspaces?
Also if applied how long have you used it for?
Cheers
Also if applied how long have you used it for?
Cheers
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Grobelling through the murk to the sunshine above.
Age: 60
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, occasionally, if it seems appropriate with the traffic & wind situation.
It was promulgated as a 'normal' procedure in about Nov 05, but took around 6 months or so to trickle into our Ops Manual.
It was promulgated as a 'normal' procedure in about Nov 05, but took around 6 months or so to trickle into our Ops Manual.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SLOP
As a tool to assist in increasing the safety margins in MNPS airspace by distributing aircraft laterally and equally across 3 available positions (centrline, 1R and 2R) I tend to offset on every sector that I am PF. Before applying the offset I apply a bit of common sense and try to see what other aircraft on my track are doing by using TCAS and the good old Mk1. It is reassuring to see those other contrails way off to the left of me.
NATS figures for aircraft in the Eastern portion of the North Atlantic show a disappointing frequency of offset by airlines - less than 10% compared to the hoped for 67%. (AT least those were the most up to date figures I could find. Anybody 'in the know', know better)?
Anything that increases your safety and reduces your chances of wake turbulence encounters has to be good, I sometimes even use SLOP on random routes.
Considering applying offset is encouraged by the company and is up to the pilot to apply as he/she sees best.
NATS figures for aircraft in the Eastern portion of the North Atlantic show a disappointing frequency of offset by airlines - less than 10% compared to the hoped for 67%. (AT least those were the most up to date figures I could find. Anybody 'in the know', know better)?
Anything that increases your safety and reduces your chances of wake turbulence encounters has to be good, I sometimes even use SLOP on random routes.
Considering applying offset is encouraged by the company and is up to the pilot to apply as he/she sees best.
I have been using this for the past 18 months or so but I find that few of my colleaques seem to be doing so. Quite a few of them claim never to have heard of it when I suggest that they might like to apply it!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't really see the need to SLOP if no one else is around. I also think its silly if my aircraft is SLOPPED and the aircraft behind SLOPS too - this happened a while back and a Jumbo went straight underneath us, setting the RAD ALT off. It seems that only 67% of flights should do it when crowded, otherwise no need.
Given that its not usually THAT busy on random routes and even on the NAT tracks, I find I only use it about 1 or 2 in 10 times, so maybe 10% isn't too bad?
Given that its not usually THAT busy on random routes and even on the NAT tracks, I find I only use it about 1 or 2 in 10 times, so maybe 10% isn't too bad?
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: ? ? ?
Posts: 2,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think some people might be missing the point here. The objective of the procedure is to re-introduce the randomness of tracking which was common in the "old days" before GPS etc. SLOPS suggests that each pilot changes his tracking every crossing. Say on centreline first time, 1nm right next time and 2nm right third time. If everyone does this then the likelyhood of having a Rad Alt tripped by an underflying B747 for instance is significantly reduced as is the risk of a head on with opposite direction traffic.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Not Ardua enough
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Feature available on both Boeing and Scarebus FMC/MCDU
Says it all...note randomness comments.
http://www.scottipc.com/course/content/view/37/61/
Says it all...note randomness comments.
http://www.scottipc.com/course/content/view/37/61/
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: West
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For my company:
Mandatory in Africa
Recommended in South America
should consider for NATS
I was under the impression that SLOP was very helpful concerning opposite direction traffic, and not so much for same direction traffic.
The rate of closure for nearly same direction traffic gives me more time to detect, analyze, and take preventive action compared to opposite direction traffic.
There is always that occasional jet that did not show up on TCAS. SLOP proves its benefit when he goes by 2 or 3 miles off the left wing.
Mandatory in Africa
Recommended in South America
should consider for NATS
I was under the impression that SLOP was very helpful concerning opposite direction traffic, and not so much for same direction traffic.
The rate of closure for nearly same direction traffic gives me more time to detect, analyze, and take preventive action compared to opposite direction traffic.
There is always that occasional jet that did not show up on TCAS. SLOP proves its benefit when he goes by 2 or 3 miles off the left wing.
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the IFALPA Safety Bulletin june 06:
SLOP Strategic Lateral Offset Procedure
1. Crews should be aware of this procedure for use in
oceanic and remote airspace. SLOP should be a SOP, not a
contingency, and operators should be endorsing the use of
lateral offsets for safety reasons on all oceanic and remote
airspace flights.
2. Crews should be aware of the coast-out to coast-in
operational use of the procedure.
3. Crews should only offset 1 nm or 2 nm RIGHT of
centerline.
NOTE: Operators are reminded that the current SLOP is
designed to mitigate the effects of wake turbulence as well
as to enhance flight safety.
And from the IATA Oceanic Errors Safety Bulletin - Ed. 2, 2006
Strategic Lateral Offset Procedure (SLOP):
With widespread use of GPS, lateral navigation accuracy on the OTS has increased significantly. Ironically,
there has been a corresponding increase in the probability of critical traffic conflicts resulting from large height
deviations. SLOP is designed to enhance flight safety by reintroducing a degree of randomness among aircraft
flying the OTS..
SLOP does not require an ATC clearance. It is not necessary to advise ATC of the offset flown
Crews should only offset 1 nm or 2 nm RIGHT of centerline.
The FMS must be used to program the offset, with LNAV used to maintain the offset course.
Use SLOP procedures for wake turbulence or weather avoidance at 1nm or 2nm intervals RIGHT of track
SLOP is SOP, not a contingency. Operators should endorse the use of lateral offsets for safety reasons in all
oceanic and remote airspace flights where implemented.
The decision to fly an offset should be determined to benefit in randomly distributing traffic. TCAS may be used
to determine the best lateral offset to achieve randomization with other traffic or for wake turbulence avoidance.
Ensure a return to track centre-line prior to Oceanic Exit point.
I'm sure the current versions have more to say but this was the last time I gave an RVSM/MNPS course.
SLOP Strategic Lateral Offset Procedure
1. Crews should be aware of this procedure for use in
oceanic and remote airspace. SLOP should be a SOP, not a
contingency, and operators should be endorsing the use of
lateral offsets for safety reasons on all oceanic and remote
airspace flights.
2. Crews should be aware of the coast-out to coast-in
operational use of the procedure.
3. Crews should only offset 1 nm or 2 nm RIGHT of
centerline.
NOTE: Operators are reminded that the current SLOP is
designed to mitigate the effects of wake turbulence as well
as to enhance flight safety.
And from the IATA Oceanic Errors Safety Bulletin - Ed. 2, 2006
Strategic Lateral Offset Procedure (SLOP):
With widespread use of GPS, lateral navigation accuracy on the OTS has increased significantly. Ironically,
there has been a corresponding increase in the probability of critical traffic conflicts resulting from large height
deviations. SLOP is designed to enhance flight safety by reintroducing a degree of randomness among aircraft
flying the OTS..
SLOP does not require an ATC clearance. It is not necessary to advise ATC of the offset flown
Crews should only offset 1 nm or 2 nm RIGHT of centerline.
The FMS must be used to program the offset, with LNAV used to maintain the offset course.
Use SLOP procedures for wake turbulence or weather avoidance at 1nm or 2nm intervals RIGHT of track
SLOP is SOP, not a contingency. Operators should endorse the use of lateral offsets for safety reasons in all
oceanic and remote airspace flights where implemented.
The decision to fly an offset should be determined to benefit in randomly distributing traffic. TCAS may be used
to determine the best lateral offset to achieve randomization with other traffic or for wake turbulence avoidance.
Ensure a return to track centre-line prior to Oceanic Exit point.
I'm sure the current versions have more to say but this was the last time I gave an RVSM/MNPS course.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: In the Sand
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The best way to do it is to check the Jepp section for the country you are flying in first, not all airways are permitting SLOP procedure.
Ex. India is one, only few track can do SLOP. mainly over indian/oman sea.
Ex. India is one, only few track can do SLOP. mainly over indian/oman sea.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Age: 79
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has been commented that flying an offset track can improve the odds of avoiding collisions due to the extreme accuracy of navigation systems now. From reading SLOP procedures it would appear that the selected offset is either on-track, 1 nm or 2nm to the right, although I note that there are proposals for other offsets. This seems strange in that I thought the idea was to simulate past generations inherent lack of airway precision. Would it not be more appropriate that the system (or PF) introduce a random (but fixed) right offset during the on-route portion of the flight, lets say between 0 and 2 nm. Can anybody comment as to why specified offsets are preferred?
I realize this is an old thread but seemed the logical place to post.
I realize this is an old thread but seemed the logical place to post.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Arizona Bay
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
topper28...
always in africa...you never know what you're gonna get.
so always offset.
I've seen more horror-stories of "african carriers" trying to kill us on a regular basis climbing too quickly.
always in africa...you never know what you're gonna get.
so always offset.
I've seen more horror-stories of "african carriers" trying to kill us on a regular basis climbing too quickly.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: "como todo buen piloto... mujeriego y borracho"
Posts: 2,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AS CI100 points out, in Indian airspace it is only permitted in the "Oceanic" airspace, which is where it plays an additional risk reduction benefit due to the often poor HF radio quality/accessibility with Indian ATC.
In China, ATC typically instructs us to offset 2nm right of track as part of their RVSM program. Seems like a very sensible procedure to reduce risks inherent with the complex China RVSM procedures.
To me, SLOP seems like a very sensible procedure on two-way airways-- it applies the "rules of the road" where you drive on the right hand side of the centerline of the street (at least in progressive, civilized countries
), rather than on the exact center of the roadway with the logic that being equidistant from the pavement edge is the safest way to go.
In China, ATC typically instructs us to offset 2nm right of track as part of their RVSM program. Seems like a very sensible procedure to reduce risks inherent with the complex China RVSM procedures.
To me, SLOP seems like a very sensible procedure on two-way airways-- it applies the "rules of the road" where you drive on the right hand side of the centerline of the street (at least in progressive, civilized countries
), rather than on the exact center of the roadway with the logic that being equidistant from the pavement edge is the safest way to go.
