EGLL sid
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: EDDF - LIRF
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EGLL sid
Hi everyone,
Can anyone of you explain me something i noticed just today.
Flying out of EGLL i noticed that ALL the departures of LHR are "still" conventional departures, not even RNAV overlays.
It made me thinking that as soon as one nav aid goes down they have to provide radar guided sid (even if this is actually standard in LHR )
Is this choice to have conventional departures a choice rather than a need? Is there any background info?
Thanks to you all,
Bio161
Can anyone of you explain me something i noticed just today.
Flying out of EGLL i noticed that ALL the departures of LHR are "still" conventional departures, not even RNAV overlays.
It made me thinking that as soon as one nav aid goes down they have to provide radar guided sid (even if this is actually standard in LHR )
Is this choice to have conventional departures a choice rather than a need? Is there any background info?
Thanks to you all,
Bio161
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: EDDF - LIRF
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
now this is a positive answer!
maybe never, maybe once every 10 years, maybe everyday..the question is just background related Capt Fathom..is there ANY reason behind the fact they operate only with conventional sid?
i admit, it can be as easy as it works quite good and they do not need anything else. i´m only wondering if any of you have some kind of other sources to explain it...seriuosly hopefully......
maybe never, maybe once every 10 years, maybe everyday..the question is just background related Capt Fathom..is there ANY reason behind the fact they operate only with conventional sid?
i admit, it can be as easy as it works quite good and they do not need anything else. i´m only wondering if any of you have some kind of other sources to explain it...seriuosly hopefully......
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: -------
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good point actually, don't have the right answer, but can tell what happened to me four years ago in Gatwick (ok, it's not the same but pretty close ); on the approach, just upon ILS intercept, with the app mode armed and vor/loc and g/s captured with a/p on we both noticed the airplane symbol on the map display going far away from the magenta line...asked tower about ILS status, the controller wait a bit before answer than he replied "sorry, ILS on test (or something like that and no notam) and not working, can you accept radar approach?", we were in the cloud so we couldn't see anything, accepted radar approach and fortunately break out at 800 feet and land...so, Fathom, don't know how often that happens, but for sure it happens, so you'd better be prepared.
FB
FB
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Home of the Gnomes
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
Is this choice to have conventional departures a choice rather than a need? Is there any background info?
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bio161:
What kind of FMS are you using? Must be a very basic model. In modern FMSes all ground-based navaid SIDS (and STARs) are coded to be flown with LNAV. Here is an "entry level" light airplane Garmin G-1000:
Flying out of EGLL i noticed that ALL the departures of LHR are "still" conventional departures, not even RNAV overlays.
It made me thinking that as soon as one nav aid goes down they have to provide radar guided sid (even if this is actually standard in LHR )
It made me thinking that as soon as one nav aid goes down they have to provide radar guided sid (even if this is actually standard in LHR )
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aterpster - I think the poster means 'conventional' as in not using RNAV waypoints, but VOR Rad/D and NDB. He/she was not asking about LNAV. Have a look at a chart?
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOAC:
Because he mentioned RNAV overlay, my point is all the ground-based SIDs are coded in today's LNAV systems as LNAV departures. As an example:
Aterpster - I think the poster means 'conventional' as in not using RNAV waypoints, but VOR Rad/D and NDB. He/she was not asking about LNAV. Have a look at a chart?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: EDDF - LIRF
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hallo aterpster,
Thank you all for your answers!
Maybe i´m wrong, but when i intend RNAV overlay i intend a conventional SID which is constructed with RNAV waypoints for the whole profile. When a SID is simply conventional it does have a Lateral navigation in the FMS, but these are all waypoints which are not RNAV (officialy i mean) being just based on a reconstruction of the SID from the FMS. So the SID itself is not certified to be flown managed from the FMS profile (altough all of us do it instead of following needles).
In the SID description when i have a SID which is RNAV overlay i have the description of BOTH paths. the one conventional and below the one according RNAV waypoints.
When i just have a conventional SID i just have the conventional description. And, at least for the LIDO charts, this is the case of LHR.
Thanks anyway!
Thank you all for your answers!
Maybe i´m wrong, but when i intend RNAV overlay i intend a conventional SID which is constructed with RNAV waypoints for the whole profile. When a SID is simply conventional it does have a Lateral navigation in the FMS, but these are all waypoints which are not RNAV (officialy i mean) being just based on a reconstruction of the SID from the FMS. So the SID itself is not certified to be flown managed from the FMS profile (altough all of us do it instead of following needles).
In the SID description when i have a SID which is RNAV overlay i have the description of BOTH paths. the one conventional and below the one according RNAV waypoints.
When i just have a conventional SID i just have the conventional description. And, at least for the LIDO charts, this is the case of LHR.
Thanks anyway!
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by bio
It made me thinking that as soon as one nav aid goes down they have to provide radar guided sid
It's not NATS or CAA, the airport operator owns the SIDs.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And for the OP, if a navaid required by a SID is out of service, it is NOTAMed and aircraft who cannot accept the SID are advised to inform ATC prior to start. In 15 years at LHR, I can count of the fingers of one hand how many times an aircraft has requested vectors due to this.
We did a recent survey of operators, and all of those questioned are flying RNAV overlays on top of the conventional navigation SIDs.
We did a recent survey of operators, and all of those questioned are flying RNAV overlays on top of the conventional navigation SIDs.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Gonzo
and all of those questioned are flying RNAV overlays on top of the conventional navigation SIDs.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: My views - Not my employer!
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOAC - FMC updates along with better SID coding have pretty much sorted those problems.... (737...)
On the bus, with its overfly function then we can ensure that waypoints are overflown. However, with only a few exceptions, the coding is pretty much spot on in the first place.
On the bus, with its overfly function then we can ensure that waypoints are overflown. However, with only a few exceptions, the coding is pretty much spot on in the first place.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BUR VOR went out one day. Imperial Airways VC-10 asked how he was supposed to fly the SID without the VOR. I said he should expect radar vectors. "No thank you; we'll use INS". Prat!
Thus in the BUZAD shown you would be required to pass over the D10 before turning onto the BIG 331 whereas the kit might 'anticipate' that turn.
AIP:
Climb straight ahead to LON D1.5, then turn left onto track 052° to intercept LON VOR R073, cross LON D10 at or above RWY 09L 3000 and turn left onto BIG VOR R331, cross BIG D20 at or above 5000 and BIG D23 at 6000 to BUZAD.
SID BUZA3K RNW 09L FIX OVERFLY D113B AT OR ABOVE 590 TRK 052 INTERCEPT RADIAL 073 TO FIX D073J FIX OVERFLY D073J AT OR ABOVE 3000 TURN LEFT DIRECT FIX D331T AT OR ABOVE 5000 FIX D331W 6000 FIX BUZAD