Approach charts are for approaches, not departures, and they're crowded enough already. The triangle-T on the approach charts is merely a courtesy, reminding you to do what you should always do anyway, which is to check the Takeoff Minimums section of the Terminal Procedures book before departing any airport under IFR.
Not unless you were attempting a go-around from way below DA/MDA, and that's beyond the scope of the charted procedures.
The triangle-T means they are published and that's all it means. While it is true that adherence to the published takeoff minimums and ODP's is not required by regulation for non-commercial operators, failure to adhere to them can be fatal for any operator. Choose wisely.
It is still well beyond the scope of SIAP, and it would fill the plate with clutter to the point of making it unreadable. But if you really think it's that important, send a suggestion to the FAA and see what they say.
Yes, they are providing a reference. It's up to you to follow it to the other page in your TP book to find the reference, just like looking the References section at the back of a text book.
FAR 91.13 does effectively prohibit taking off IFR without considering and planning to avoid those obstructions. However, it does not prohibit a pilot on a non-commercial operation from using alternate means to ensure obstruction clearance.
Thank you.
I must have misread what you posted. I thought you were suggesting that 91.13 would prohibit noncommercial pilots from launching in less than the published minimum takeoff weather or using anything but the published ODP. In response, I was pointing out that noncommercial operators do have the legal option of "rolling their own" in that regard as long as they take adequate precautions so they don't hit anything on the way up/out. Obviously, if they hit something while they were either departing with weather below the published mins or using their own self-developed ODP instead of the published ODP, the legal principle of res ipsa loquitor ("the thing speaks for itself") might be applied to the situation to show they were careless/reckless. However, when someone hits something in that situation, the case is nearly always heard before St. Peter rather than an ALJ, making the FAA regulatory issue moot.
No kiddin'. As I've said before, IMO there is almost no perceptible correlation between the current IR knowledge test and what you need to know to be a safe, effective instrument pilot. The FAA is supposed to be releasing a completely new IR written shortly; I hope to be pleased by its complete departure from the past (but won't be shocked if it doesn't).
The Notes are required to be "charted" according to Appendix D of Order 8260.46D . Whether that means they are only charted in the takeoff minimums section or can be notated on the face of a chart, I can't say with certainty. According to the AIM, par 5-2-8, "To eliminate publishing an excessive climb gradient, the obstacle AGL/MSL height and location relative to the DER is noted in the "Take-off Minimums and (OBSTACLE) Departure Procedures" section of a given Terminal Procedures Publication (TPP) booklet." But the current chart legend and Chart User's Guide only mention non-standard takeoff minimums and obstacle departure procedures. If you think it's important they mention Notes too, you might make a suggestion: 9-ATOR-HQ-PubGrp@faa.gov . EDIT: Ooops, that was for the AIM, this is for reporting chart errors: 9-AMC-Aerochart@faa.gov
I have a database of almost 800 questions, so I did a search for "obstacle departure" and quit looking at them after the first three. They seem to be represented. The first one was specifically about the "T" and what it means.
dtuuri