IFR departure turns below 500 feet?
 

Does anyone know of any examples of IFR departure procedures where a turn at less than 500 feet is authorised (e.g. for obstacles, noise etc)? As far I can gather the CAA generally doesn't approve them (AIP GEN 1-7-53).

NS

RWY 15 YBCS. There's a big hill at the end the other side of town...

400' or 2.6DME turn left......

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...CSDP03-109.pdf

New York JFK 31L, Canarsie climb turn at 300ft
Nice, France NCE 04R? ditto

Madeira another. In my experience, 400' is the 'normal' limit unless lower is required to avoid hitting something.:)

The procedure design criteria assume a climb to 400ft above the DER (Departure End of Runway) elevation before turning - this will translate to 500ft altitude for ruways elevations between 0-100ft amsl.
Lower altitudes may be prescribed if required

Nice LFMN

Madrid Torrejon - LETO

Lanai City, Hawaii runway 3 obstacle departure procedure is an immediate (defined for us as speed and altitude permitting, at least 50 ft agl, as soon as practicable) left turn to 300 or right to 180, climb to 3400 ft. This is to avoid hitting a 3000 foot high mountain about 3 miles off the departure end of the runway.

Lanai is so beautiful, you almost don't care if you hit that mountain.;)

Sumburgh (Shetland Islands) - UK
Runway 15 requires a right turn to be initiated at 50 feet

Molde - Norway
Runway 07 - as above

That is perf specific to my type so a different type/operator might have a different procedure.

Think there is a slight right turn from Southampton off runway 20 which is done below 100 feet.

ICAO docs (haven't got them to hand right now) indicate 400ft agl as minimum turn height.

As indicated by some, there are many airports that REQUIRE early turns at low altitudes.
The respective concerned airlines have a choice, of course.
Comply, or fly elsewhere.
ICAO, and/or the UK notwithstanding.
Just the way it is, folks.:bored:

Chevvron and all,
ICAO allow for three kinds of departure, straight ahead, turning, and a third category, when 1 or 2 can't be accommodated.
For 3, there are a considerable variety of combinations and permutations to achieve the desired result, ie; not hitting anything all engines or engine out.
Of the departures mentioned in previous posts, with which I am familiar, all are in the third category, all meet ICAO requirements, but some of the operating requirements are "interesting".
Tootle pip!!

Milan Rwy 35...SID`s to west , to RMG NDB..

Thanks to all of you for your examples - eye-watering stuff! I can just hear the screams from the back as you crank it into a 25 degree bank at 50ft above the runway.

But presumably the all-engines procedure would have to have enough margin in it that you could still fly it OEI? That would surely mean that you always have to design the procedure on the basis of OEI?

Taking the Cairns r/w 15 example, this requires a min 25 degree banked turn to the left through 120 degrees, starting no later than the DER. But what happens if you get a right engine failure just as you rotate?

NS

The Cairns RWY 15 EOI procedure, as designed by myself and others, in this case, is identical to the SID. It has to be due to terrain considerations. The difference is that the OEI procedure is predicated upon a 15° bank angle, not 25°. A sped limit, for the AEO SID, and the OEI Special Procedure is essential to 'contain' the turn radius.

A fairly rare case where the OEI Special Procedure and the SID are the same or very similar.

Regards,

Old Smokey

Experienced a similar early morning departure riding in the back of a DC-9 long, long ago. Departure track was some 80 degrees off runway heading and it seemed like more than 25 of bank, no worries to the pax though.

Omnidirectional departures - still the same assumption of a turn at 400ft above the DER - more critical can be turns before the DER. Omnis are predicated on track guidance not being required.