SIDS & Obstacle Clearance
 

Weather is IMC. Receive a clearance to fly a SID with non-standard climb gradient, no ODP. Does the standard climb gradient of 3.3% keep you clear of obstacles? In other words, can it be assumed that the non-standard climb gradient on the SID serves a purpose other than obstacle clearance since there is no obstacle departure procedure?

5-2-8 of the AIM addresses this. Here is the first paragraph, but more can be found at faa.gov.

5-2-8. Instrument Departure Procedures (DP) - Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODP) and Standard Instrument Departures (SID)

Instrument departure procedures are preplanned instrument flight rule (IFR) procedures which provide obstruction clearance from the terminal area to the appropriate en route structure. There are two types of DPs, Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODPs), printed either textually or graphically, and Standard Instrument Departures (SIDs), always printed graphically. All DPs, either textual or graphic may be designed using either conventional or RNAV criteria. RNAV procedures will have RNAV printed in the title, e.g., SHEAD TWO DEPARTURE (RNAV). ODPs provide obstruction clearance via the least onerous route from the terminal area to the appropriate en route structure. ODPs are recommended for obstruction clearance and may be flown without ATC clearance unless an alternate departure procedure (SID or radar vector) has been specifically assigned by ATC. Graphic ODPs will have (OBSTACLE) printed in the procedure title, e.g., GEYSR THREE DEPARTURE (OBSTACLE), or, CROWN ONE DEPARTURE (RNAV) (OBSTACLE). Standard Instrument Departures are air traffic control (ATC) procedures printed for pilot/controller use in graphic form to provide obstruction clearance and a transition from the terminal area to the appropriate en route structure. SIDs are primarily designed for system enhancement and to reduce pilot/controller workload. ATC clearance must be received prior to flying a SID. All DPs provide the pilot with a way to depart the airport and transition to the en route structure safely. Pilots operating under 14 CFR Part 91 are strongly encouraged to file and fly a DP at night, during marginal Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) and Instrument Meteorological Conditions (IMC), when one is available. The following paragraphs will provide an overview of the DP program, why DPs are developed, what criteria are used, where to find them, how they are to be flown, and finally pilot and ATC responsibilities.

Thank you for that. I've already been through it several times, as well as AC 120-91. Still, the question remains unanswered.

DPs are designed using the TERPS criteria for terrain clearance but also take into account ATC needs, and noise abatement. So if there is no ODP and the climb gradient is non-standard I would guess it has to do with juggling arrivals and departures.

Where did you find a DP like this?

There are only two possible answers to this question.... 3.3% or as published.

Birdie:

Yes. If there is a published climb gradient but no ODP published, the climb gradient published is an ATC climb gradient. If you are unable to comply witht the climb gradient, notify ATC. They may be able to waive that restriction or give you another procedure.

If you are using US Government NACO plates, obstacle climb gradients are indicated by a dagger symbology (sword); whereas, ATC climb gradients are published without any special symbology.

If you are using JEPPs, they will say something to the effect of "This SID requires take-off minimums" and will state what is required for each runway. If there is an ATC requirement (which is always higher of course), they will also state "ATC climb of blah blah blah".

In either case, if there is no ODP but there are published SIDs, it doesn't hurt to study terrain charts and/or the minimum safe altitudes published on the approach charts for a sanity check. Publishers (Jepps and NACO) do and often make mistakes.

.........................

.....................................

Again Birdie, I don't know how else to tell you yes, the answer is YES in reference to your first question.

You always have to meet 3.3% or 200'/NM when departing IFR unless you've been specifically authorized otherwise.

The reason why I suggested it might be a good thing to "know your terrain" is so that chart errors, missing, or out of date pubs don't get you killed. If you are in doubt, ask ATC.

Don't know if you found the answer yet, but here is my $.02.

Answer: I say no. One cannot assume it will provide terrain clearance. Non-standard climb % are given for two reasons, obstacles or ATC crossing restrictions. If you want to know, then ask the facility in charge of the SID.

I would be careful mixing the terms ODP and SID. ODP is for (usually anyway) when ATC "isn't home", while SIDs require one speaking with ATC. ODPs require a certain climb gradient to miss the mountains. SIDs may require a certain climb gradient other than standard for one of the above reasons, which one, well flip a coin?

I don't agree with that. I'm pretty sure the only regulatory issue is that you must clear obstacles by 35' and 200' laterally within the airport boundary, and within 300' beyond that.

"If you are using US Government NACO plates, obstacle climb gradients are indicated by a dagger symbology (sword); whereas, ATC climb gradients are published without any special symbology."

This is very good and probably the answer I'm looking for. Thank you for that.

.... and so in the absence of the dagger, 3.3 will keep you clear of obstacles, regardless of the published climb gradient on a SID. Is this correct?

This is simply not true. SID's must be part of an ATC clearance while an ODP does not require a clearance. I would agree with that. But to say an ODP is there because ATC is not... well that is just bogus.

Uhh, yes it is, but good luck with what ever you're looking for....

fyi, if you are taking off out of an uncontrolled field IFR and get a departure time, what SID will you fly? SIDs aren't always part of an IFR clearance. ODPs aren't either. It depends on whether ATC supports the airport or not.

have fun...

ODP's need not be part of an IFR clearance. And if you believe that an ODP is there for a case when "ATC isn't home", I would ask your explanation for a departure from a runway that includes both an ODP and a SID for a 24 hour airport. But that would be going off on a tangent. Anyway, I think I got my answer from KC10 FATboy.

Just remember that if departing an uncontrolled field when you can not maintain your own terrain separation and absent of any other clearance by ATC you must follow the ODP published on the back of the JEPP plate on the bottom box for the specific runway. Otherwise you must tell ATC that you can MAINTAIN YOUR OWN TERRAIN SEPARATION. Por ejemplo, try departing EGE or ASE by climbing to 400' and then turning on course maintaining a 3.3 degree climb gradient. In the real world we look at several different factors when it is IMC or night.

One-Engine-Inoperative Departure procedure-Aircraft Performance Group provides this data if required for that airport. *This will give you a non standard route to save your bacon if you bag a blower on departure*.
(I ALWAYS have this one in the back of my mind just incase)

JEPP DP on back of airport diagram for all-engines operative IMC departures

OR climb to 400' then proceed on course if their is no published ODP

Follow these steps at any airport and you will be safe. KC-10 is right that if non standard climb gradients are published for a SID and you are CLEARED via that SID then you must adhere to climb gradient or get a waiver from ATC regardless of whether it is for terrain, noise abatement or traffic.

Steel is also correct that if Tower is "home" you will not be doing a DP. You will either be cleared via a SID or given a heading to fly after takeoff to be funneled into the system. ODP=Uncontrolled field

All good comments and they are helpful. And certainly you must be able to comply with climb gradients when accepting a SID (based on all engines operating). I would just note that a SID is a DP, so to say that if the tower is "home" you will not be doing a DP is false. Also not true is ODP=Uncontrolled Field. That is incorrect. There are plenty of examples of runways served by both a SID and a ODP with a 24 hour control tower.

Reference the new Teterboro 6 off runway 1.

That is an interesting point, I wonder when if ever one would be issued a JEPP ODP from the back of the plate in lieu of a SID or Radar vectors at a tower operating airport. Maybe ATC does have the ability to issue a clearance like "fly the published ODP" But I have never heard of such a clearance. I make distiction between an airport diagram ODP and an actual dedicated SID.
In giving this further though I suppose that there might be a towered airport with mountainous terrain but is not served by a SID especially in other countries. This would definitely be a time where you would be cleared for takeoff but not given a SID or a radar vector but rather be expected to comply with the ODP on the back of the airport diagram. I havent ever run into this but now that I think of it, I bet it is fairly common in places like South America. Food for thought I guess.

I've been through the chart legend and looked over a variety of SIDs and have yet to see a dagger symbol. Please give a reference... anybody.

A 24 hour towered airport could still have a published ODP in the event the radar goes out.

Seems to me a SID of for ATC convenience. ie, they don't have to tell you the freqs / alts / routing if it's depicted and therefore makes their job easier.

An ODP, on the other hand, is simply to get the aircraft from the runway to the enroute structure without hitting dirt along the way. It's not for ATC, it's for the health of the pilot and pax.

I would also imagine that both SIDs and ODPs have to comply with the same climb gradient / terrain clearance requirements in the TERPs, but I could be wrong there. Just a hunch.

I think I'll take a stab at this one.

No. Reference the Bob2 Departure at UZA and the take off minimums information for the airport (from the front of the book):

http://www.airnav.com/depart?http://...5361BOBCAT.PDF
http://www.airnav.com/depart?http://...0909/SE2TO.PDF

You'll notice that the greater than standard climb gradient for a runway 2 departure is dictated by trees off the DER. At 100 ft tall and a quarter mile from DER, assuming you use more than 3800 ft for take-off, 200 ft per nm is gonna put you in the trees (or too close to them, at least). No ODP is necessary at UZA because the obstacle threat is right there at the airport, and the only thing that is going to get you safely over it is a greater than standard climb.

Not doubting anyone, but I've never seen the daggers either. However, on a NACO SID chart, it is my understanding that the "Takeoff Minimums" section lists the minimum climb gradient allowed for a safe departure. ATC preferred climb gradients will be specified elsewhere in the procedure. Reference the LGA2 departure:

http://www.airnav.com/depart?http://...AGUARDIA_C.PDF

So, I think my answer is not what you wanted to hear. Perhaps I am wrong. My opinion is however; if the SID has a greater than standard climb gradient published in the "Takeoff Minimums" section of the NACO chart, then you must comply. Maybe that is not always the case, but that has been my experience. Certainly you cannot always assume that no ODP equals some reason other than an obstacle for the greater than standard climb. Hope this helps.

In addition to AIM 5-2-8, there is FAR 91.175(f)(3):

You file direct. No SID, just direct. Clearance: "cleared as filed". Tower: "cleared for takeoff". No further (conflicting) instructions are given, no SID or vector. Now you just fly the ODP, then on course. No clearance is necessary. The controller might appreciate a little warning, though if it's IMC or night he should be expecting it. In theory this is how it works. Apparently you can be cleared on an ODP too. Does this ever happen? I dunno.

Thanks for your responses.

The reason this issue came up is because some SIDS have rather demanding climb gradients. Should one lose an engine, these gradients are often impossible. I understand that engine failure and TERPS are independent. TERPS is for all engines operating. With an engine failure, responsibility lies with the operator.

With charter operators and perhaps with fractional operators, airport analysis (AC 120-91) is cost prohibitive. So I was wondering, as long as I can achieve 3.3% could I still fly the SID and remain clear of obstacles, even if the SID required a steeper climb gradient, presumably for ATC reasons.

Unlimited runway analysis via APG costs less than $100/month.

I assumed it was cost prohibitive. But $100/month certainly is not. Unless it is $100/month per airplane. A 50 plane operation would cost 60K/year.

Back to the original question... does the standard climb gradient keep you clear of obstacles on a SID, even if higher than standard climb gradients are published?

No. See my post at the top of the page. Do you disagree?

I believe we pay 75 a tail (or is it type? I'd have to check). We do a ton of ops out of EGE and ASE and its allows us to take alot more payload, so it is worth it.

Birdie, you are a frustrating OP. If there is anyone who can help me explain it, then please chime in as I am always willing to learn new tricks. But, Birdie, if you don't like the answers you get, then please, do the research yourself. Here's a link to United States TERPS and Changes 1-19. Good luck with that. :rolleyes:

8260.3B Chgs 1-19 United Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) [Changes 1-19]

In the one post I mistyped and there is an error. The government plates use an * for minimum climb gradients (obstacles) and the dagger for ATC climb gradients. Reference Nellis AFB. But they don't always use this symbology. On other charts they clearly write out what is required for obstacle and ATC requirements. Reference Salt Lake City. Additionally, they will have the proverbial trouble T (a fat looking T symbol) in which the user is expected to reference the takeoff minimums page and read what is required. This is also where you find ODPs. Reference LaGuardia.

I think the US Government is moving away from the * and daggers and are clearly writing the text like Jepps does.

http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0909/00227DREAM.PDF Nellis

http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0909/00365TWINFALLS.PDF Salt Lake City

http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0909/NE2TO.PDF LaGuardia Minimums (see NewYork)

http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0909/00289LAGUARDIA.PDF LaGuardia 1

http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0909/00289LAGUARDIA_C.PDF LaGuardia 2

http://naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0909/00289LAGUARDIA_C2.PDF LaGuardia 3

I disagree with you. TERPs requirements are to be met even with OEI (one engine inoperative) unless you've been authorized to go lower -- which I believe requires you to have an approved emergency escape procedure or special departure procedure. Airlines don't take off knowing that if they lose an engine, they just killed everyone. Additionally, some operators are allowed to operate at much heavier weights which allow them to meet the required climb gradients all engines, but use the SDPs for when they lose an engine.

AC 120-91

"Standard Instrument Departures (SID) or Departure Procedures (DP) based on TERPS or ICAO Procedures for Air Navigation Services—Aircraft Operations (PANS-OPS) are based on normal (all engines operating) operations. Thus, one-engine-inoperative obstacle clearance requirements and the all-engines-operating TERPS requirements are independent, and one-engine-inoperative procedures do not need to meet TERPS requirements."

I think if you took the time to comprehend the original question that started this thread, you would not be talking to me about ODP's. Go back and read it again.

So did you post this question assuming you already know that answer and feel like arguing with people until you get the answer you already think is correct? Good luck on your...well, whatever you are doing.

No, I don't know the answer. You think I'm doing this for entertainment? I thought somebody out there may be able to help. What I'm doing is trying to find an answer to an issue that came up in the company. Can you provide an answer or any helpful information, or are you here just to antagonize?

I think one of your earlier posts hit the nail right on the head.

You have to have TERPS or as published. If the FAA determines that 200' the per nm clearance plane is violated, they will publish a procedure for you to fly that will keep you from scratching the paint. The FAR's bind you to flying that "procedure" when it is necessary.

This gets emphasized at FlightSafety every recurrent session.

And that procedue may not necessarily be an ODP. It may be a SID since a SID also provides obstacle clearance.

I have been told that when departing from an airport served by a SID with a non-standard climb gradient AND no ODP, the standard climb gradient (3.3%) will satisfy obstacle clearance in the event of an engine failure. I don't agree with that but I can't prove it.

Anyway, not trying to provoke anyone and I'm not on here for entertainment. I was looking for guidance. Probaby time to drop it and move on. I will plan to meet the non-standard climb gradient OEI until I can prove otherwise.

Here is a problem that we can all work. Maybe this practical example will answer our questions. We seem to be able to quote, cut and paste things pretty well, but let's apply it. Let's keep it fun and contempt free.

Departure from Sioux Falls, SD (KFSD).

It's 0200, the tower is closed. It is dark. The FBO is out of coffee. Starbucks is closed.

Runway 15 is the only runway open. The winds are 150 at 25 anyway. The lineman put a gun to your head, you WILL use runway 15....get the point...?

The ceiling is 100 feet, the visibility is 1/4 mile. You want to fly IFR, it is IFR.

You are Part 91.

There is no published SID. There is the "Trouble "T" in the front fodder of the NACO approach plates.

To quote Keanu Reeves in "Speed..."

"What would you do....WHAT WOULD YOU DO?"

--------------------------------------------------
I do not agree with that either. A SID with a non-standard climb gradient means that 3.3% does not apply. The non-standard part may be 3.4% which is above TERPS. I do not agree with the engine failure element either. The FAA does not care if your engine fails when they are surveying and obstacle clearance plane. Engine failure is a consideration, the new AIM amendment clears this issue. The PC12 pilot has to consider an engine failure just as much as the Citation pilot has to consider an engine failure...the PC12 pilot has to consider more in my opinion.

My KFSD example has no SID published , but it has the Trouble "T"...which is an ODP. If you do the math, it is a 6.6% climb gradient...WAAAY above TERPS.

I am going to do the same thing. I will comply with the ODP or SID, and I will compute performance for OEI and load accordingly. If I am taking off from any airport that does not have a DP or ODP or SID, and if it is 110 degrees and my airplane won't climb at at least 3.3%, then I will flight plan accordingly to maintain that 3.3%, because the FAA has checked that out for me. I am not doing myself (or my passengers) any favors if I can only maintain a 2% climb gradient and I clip a cell phone tower that the FAA determined to be at 2.5%.....below the 3.3% clearance plane.

The un-published ODP for RW15 @ KFSD is climb via heading 150 to 2000', then right turn direct FSD. With 404ft/nm to 1700' climb, STD visibility is 1sm and Adequate Visual Reference is 1/4.

CPCALC shows to make 404ft/nm to 1700' per the ODP, at ISA, our CJ2+ can only depart at 11,569lb at Flaps 15; Flaps 0 is 12,339lb.

APG runway analysis for KFSD RW15 shows, for a Flaps 0 takeoff, we can depart at the 12.5k max structural takeoff weight up to 49C; at Flaps 15 we're max structural to 45C and obstruction limited at 49C to 12132lb.

I'd say the ODP is published. It is in the front fodder of the NACO charts, or it is on the back of the 10-9 Jeppesen chart. There is no "published" DP or SID. If there was a published DP/SID, and if I worked for the FAA, I would call it the "TALL ANTENNA TWO." We don't have this here, just the "Trouble T."

Essentially, I think you are saying that you would load your CJ2 to comply with the 6.6% gradient...and you would consider losing one engine.....I would do the same thing. CPCALC is wonderful.

I meant "unpublished" as in there's not an independent chart for the ODP, such as the SKOTT1 @ Glacier Park or the SARDD1 @ Aspen.

But you're right...it *is* published and easily found.

But back to the APG runway analysis. I understand how to utilize APG data when there is an alternate DP (such as at GPI or ASE), but this doesn't seem quite as clear. APG uses type-specific performance data derived from the same AFM as CPCALC, yet shows a greater allowable weight for departure.

Why is that?