Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

NAT-MNPS inflight contingency procedure

Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

NAT-MNPS inflight contingency procedure


Old 12th Oct 2018, 12:28
  #21 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 359
If the "captain is unwilling or unable" to descend then the 500ft offset contingency procedure can be applied. What if you are flying over the top of a line of CBs is one example? You going to turn left/right 45 degrees maintaining direction of flight and descend into TS?
MCDU2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 14th Oct 2018, 15:05
  #22 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: In Space
Posts: 574
Originally Posted by Stanley Eevil View Post
If your ultimate strategy is to divert to an airfield `abeam` or an airfield `behind you` then you will have to leave the track centreline to ensure separation from other OTS traffic.
Because your eventual diversion route is not (yet) subject to a formal ATC clearance then changing level by +/- 500 ft (assuming you were cruising below FL410 and not thrust limited) will be necessary to give you some degree of vertical separation from other traffic.
You are NOT obliged to descend below FL285, even if diverting `across` the OTS (weather issues i.e. CB below you, or shortage of fuel?). You could divert from Track `D` to Keflavik maintaining FL355 if you wanted to (NAT doc 007 refers).
If your intention is to divert to an airfield ahead of you, then it may not be necessary to leave the NAT track in the first place. Because you are then complying with an existing oceanic clearance, if you still have sufficient thrust, no change in FL would be necessary.
Thanks for the reply. What you said is my thoughts also. Turning around around would require a 500ft change I understand that part. But If your going to an abeam airfield as you said, I could not see the the point of descending to FL285 other than avoiding the Tracks.

At my current OP we only flying T16 and T9 but the the contingency still applies. The wording in our OPs manual says we need to descend FL285 before considering a divert. Deviating 500ft and diverting would make more sense.
B737900er is offline  
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service