Can anyone actually use this ODP?

Yeah I do not see a restriction. I see a standard climb to an altitlde via waypoints and headings.
 
RotorAndWing said:
It doesn't require crossing ANGIF or CAXAB @ 4000'.
Click to expand...

Well, the text can be read two different ways, and getting it wrong in the less restrictive manner can make for a really bad day. It's true that none of the waypoints are over significant terrain, but there is a parallel mountain range with peaks up to 4000 just a few miles east.

In practice, no one local seems to use the ODP. They always want vectors.
 
MAKG1 said:
Well, the text can be read two different ways, and getting it wrong in the less restrictive manner can make for a really bad day. It's true that none of the waypoints are over significant terrain, but there is a parallel mountain range with peaks up to 4000 just a few miles east.

In practice, no one local seems to use the ODP. They always want vectors.
Click to expand...

Unless it specifies "Cross ANGIF at 4000' " or shows 4000 next to the waypoint there is not a crossing restriction.
 
The ODP only specifies the path to fly while climbing to 4000, i.e., direct to CAXAB and then direct to DECOT without any minimum altitude at any point. Since there is no minimum climb gradient stated, the standard 200 ft/nm minimum climb gradient applies. There is no minimum crossing altitude at CAXAB, so you can climb to 4000 at 200 ft/nm without worrying about where you reach 4000. Given the 19nm distance from the departure end of the runway to DECOT, even at 200 ft/nm, you should be at 4000 MSL by the time you reach DECOT.
 
moreover the fixes would be underlined with the altitude on the side if they were crossing restriction
 
Only an RV-8 in a "zoom climb" could cross 2 miles at 4,000 ft.
 
Ron Levy said:
The ODP only specifies the path to fly while climbing to 4000, i.e., direct to CAXAB and then direct to DECOT without any minimum altitude at any point. Since there is no minimum climb gradient stated, the standard 200 ft/nm minimum climb gradient applies. There is no minimum crossing altitude at CAXAB, so you can climb to 4000 at 200 ft/nm without worrying about where you reach 4000. Given the 19nm distance from the departure end of the runway to DECOT, even at 200 ft/nm, you should be at 4000 MSL by the time you reach DECOT.
Click to expand...

I would read it that they want you to cross DECOT not less than 4,000. That is way it shows in the Garmin database: 4,000 underscored at DECOT.
 
RotorAndWing said:
Unless it specifies "Cross ANGIF at 4000' " or shows 4000 next to the waypoint there is not a crossing restriction.
Click to expand...

Also I believe any non-standard climb rate restriction would be explicitly stated under Takeoff Minimums on the chart.
 
Clues that you don't have to cross the first waypoint at 4000:
No non-standard climb gradient noted on the chart.
No altitude notations at ANGIF or CAXAB.
"Climb to 4000 via...and...." rather than "Climb t 4000 via...then...." a indicates that both tracks are included in the climb instruction.
 
From Garmin Phonem 300 trainer. Note 4,000 is underscored at DECOT: (193.25 feet per mile climb gradient.)

DECOT%20ODP_zpscipessnl.jpg
 
OK, thanks.

My CFII made a comment for my flight planning exercise that the ODP was not usable. Still trying to figure out why. Looks usable to me, at least if you don't mind it dumping you on an inconvenient airway for a southbound destination. Frankly, if it weren't an exercise, I'd want vectors to GILRO on departure, not to SUNOL like the exercise says. SUNOL is a nasty convergence area for traffic VFR, and it can only get worse inside Class B. GILRO is not so bad at the MEA, though it's not good much higher due to San Jose traffic.

It looks like there might be some interference between that ODP and the ILS 30 approach into Oakland. The tracks cross, and Oakland traffic must be above 3000 or so there. Seems like it should have a minimum crossing altitude short of DECOT. And the OAK traffic should have a maximum altitude (it doesn't). I guess that means "hold for release" gets kinda common on that ODP.
 
Last edited:
The ODP for Palo Alto never gets used either. Instead, (when departing Runway 31) we always get "Turn right heading 060 within one mile of Palo Alto Airport. Climb and maintain 3000, expect 5000 within five minutes of departure."
 
MAKG1 said:
My CFII made a comment for my flight planning exercise that the ODP was not usable. Still trying to figure out why.
Click to expand...

Only reason I could see it not being usable is if you don't have the required RNAV capability, or you were taking off runway 13 L/R
 
He might have been saying it due to the traffic issues. That's probably the reason the Palo Alto one doesn't get used either.
 
aterpster said:
I would read it that they want you to cross DECOT not less than 4,000. That is way it shows in the Garmin database: 4,000 underscored at DECOT.
Click to expand...
As I said, the ODP says to climb to 4000, and unless you don't comply with the standard climb gradient, you'll be at 4000 before DECOT, so it really doesn't matter.
 
Ron Levy said:
As I said, the ODP says to climb to 4000, and unless you don't comply with the standard climb gradient, you'll be at 4000 before DECOT, so it really doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

That's what Ms Clinton said!:rofl:
 
MAKG1 said:
OK, thanks.

My CFII made a comment for my flight planning exercise that the ODP was not usable. Still trying to figure out why.
Click to expand...
Ask your CFII. Who knows, your CFII might have made the same error about what it meant. If online forums show anything, it's that instructors, examiners and FAA inspectors are not immune from error.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Ask your CFII. Who knows, your CFII might have made the same error about what it meant. If online forums show anything, it's that instructors, examiners and FAA inspectors are not immune from error.
Click to expand...

Or, he could have meant that NorCal provides vectors because the ODP interferes with areas of heavy traffic. If so, they should develop a DVA for that airport.
 
midlifeflyer said:
Ask your CFII. Who knows, your CFII might have made the same error about what it meant. If online forums show anything, it's that instructors, examiners and FAA inspectors are not immune from error.
Click to expand...

I was planning to. Only the instructor knows for sure what he meant.

I'll be seeing him Sunday.
 
aterpster said:
Or, he could have meant that NorCal provides vectors because the ODP interferes with areas of heavy traffic. If so, they should develop a DVA for that airport.
Click to expand...

Looking at it myself, I suspect that is an issue. Whether it is "the" issue remains to be seen.

Flying along on that ODP at 4000 crosses a legal altitude not far above minimum for the Oakland ILS 30 approach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top