How the hell do I get out of Tracy, CA IFR?

[MAKG1]

KTCY has several obstacle departure procedures, all of which terminate at Modesto VOR (MOD).

MOD has one airway, and it goes the wrong way. Having tried direct routing before, ATC doesn't seem to do it through clearance (though they do with vectors).

The OROCA at MOD VOR is 9300 feet due to the way they are gridded. Actual terrain in the area is almost completely flat and near sea level. The MVA is probably 2000, based on previous experience with approaches at the co-located airport (KMOD).

So, it's pretty clear that the way I'd get to Livermore (KLVK) IRL is vectors over the whole route, but how would one file this? KTCY MOD PATYY ECA TRACY KLVK? Ouch. Aircraft is equipped /G, so the apparent reception problem on the chart for ECA is not a factor unless the GPS blows up.

 

[Clark1961]

Couple things, what approach are you expecting? have you looked at the towers in the area? 2,900' about as low as you can get (maybe).

Anyway, you're /G so file a route to an IAF using a route that considers the DP and the restricted area. As you said, you won't get TCY LVK direct because of that restricted area. I assume you saw the note on the airway about the restricted area. Looks like they are picky.

 

[MAKG1]

Expecting the ILS 25R for KLVK. TRACY intersection is an IAF.

The restricted airspace is not expected to be a factor. It's over the mountains and has a low ceiling anyway (well below the MEA on that airway!). The ILS is north of there.

If I file to TRACY, I have to do it above the OROCA, right? That's 6600, so the next IFR altitude is 8000. No way I can get anywhere near there without massive circling, since the airport is less than 5 miles from there.

 

[Clark1961]

Looks like at or above 3,300 at TRACY for that approach so I'd bet that's what you would get.

It looks like the DP takes you to 3,000 at MOD if I'm reading it correctly so that's prolly a safe bet. TCY MOD TRACY LVD

Other note is don't get too wrapped up in IFR enroute altitudes on a short flight like this. ATC can approve non-standard altitudes if it suits them. I've gone back and forth FTG GLD FTG all at 8,000

 

[MAKG1]

Thanks. That makes sense.

 

[Palmpilot]

If I file to TRACY, I have to do it above the OROCA, right?

No. OROCA is a convenience, but you can look at a sectional and determine for yourself what altitude will meet the requirements of 91.177 on your filed route.

And of course, on a short flight under radar coverage, you're almost certain to get vectors anyway. Taking that into account, I'd probably just keep it simple, by filing direct ECA V195 TRACY direct. That solves the problem of getting up to a high enough altitude to begin the approach by the time you get to TRACY, so it's a route that would be workable in the event of lost comm.

 

[MAKG1]

OK, I see.

It's not clear if KTCY or TRACY intersection are in "designated mountainous areas" (both are right on the edge of the hole in the FAA's map), but there don't appear to be any charted towers above 600 MSL, so 4000 ought to do it either way.

The approach initial segment is at 3300, so that seems reasonable.

But it begs another question.

If I don't fly the ODP to MOD, how do I prove I have obstacle clearance on departure to a DPE? No, this isn't my check ride, but it's practice for one.

Or does it make more sense to file the ODP and then ask Approach for vectors to final?

Thanks.

 

[Shawn]

If I don't fly the ODP to MOD, how do I prove I have obstacle clearance on departure to a DPE? No, this isn't my check ride, but it's practice for one.

Or does it make more sense to file the ODP and then ask Approach for vectors to final?

ODP...obstacle DEPARTURE procedures keeps you safe on departures only so you would file your first point as MOD. An ODP will be issued as part of your clearance but it does not need to be filed with your IFR flight plan.

The system is based you you being able to go wheels up to wheels down in IMC without talking to anyone and keeping you alive if needed.

Only way outta Tracy IFR is through MOD when you file as I read it according the the ODP. In reality you will get vectors as soon as you establish contact...but remember a big part of the IFR system and procedures is what happens if you loose coms in IMC. You need an "expected" or "filed" route that will keep you alive and ODP to MOD is the only published way.

I get the Watsonville 3 departure outta KWVI which terminates at SNS VOR every time I file. Even though my IFR clearance is filed as KWVI-SNS-Rest of route...I can not remember the last time that as /G I actually flew all the way to SNS VOR. As soon as I have radar contact and am above terrain clearance I get direct to my next fix before I even need to request it.

 

[kevmor99]

Flying under Part 91 you aren't required to fly an ODP, although it is recommended (see below). You should definitely look at the ODP procedures for climb gradients, obstacles, etc. but you can also rely on radar vectors if it's available in the area or use sectionals and other data to determine your own obstacle clearance. Just be sure to have a plan in case of lost comms. I'm surprised Tracy doesn't have a diverse vector area listed in the takeoff minimums since it's so close to the bay area?

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

 

[MAKG1]

ODP...obstacle DEPARTURE procedures keeps you safe on departures only so you would file your first point as MOD. An ODP will be issued as part of your clearance but it does not need to be filed with your IFR flight plan.

Definitely not required, nor always possible.

Explain how to depart Ukiah (KUKI) in a 172 IFR, safely. Read the ODPs carefully. An extended Vx climb in IMC is not safe.

 

[Palmpilot]

OK, I see.

It's not clear if KTCY or TRACY intersection are in "designated mountainous areas" (both are right on the edge of the hole in the FAA's map), but there don't appear to be any charted towers above 600 MSL, so 4000 ought to do it either way.

The approach initial segment is at 3300, so that seems reasonable.

But it begs another question.

If I don't fly the ODP to MOD, how do I prove I have obstacle clearance on departure to a DPE? No, this isn't my check ride, but it's practice for one.

Or does it make more sense to file the ODP and then ask Approach for vectors to final?

Thanks.

I've heard that DPE expectations can vary, so for a checkride, I would play it safe by filing direct MOD direct ECA V195 TRACY direct, and plan on flying the ODP. (It's not a charted ODP, so there's no way to file it.)

That greatly simplifies the task of checking the chart for obstacles within four NM of your planned course, since the only place you would need to do that would be the direct leg from MOD to ECA, which is out in the middle of the valley. Although V195 has an MEA of 4100, I would file for 4000, because the AIM says to file the initial requested altitude, which in this case would be the leg from MOD to ECA.

If ATC gives different departure instructions, I would follow those unless it would be unsafe to do so. In the latter case, I would tell ATC what I needed to do to avoid obstacles. (Obstacle avoidance is the pilot's responsibility until the controller says "radar contact" and gives a course instruction).

All this is based on my understanding of the rules, of course. You should pose this question to your CFII as well.

 

[Shawn]

Explain how to depart Ukiah (KUKI) in a 172 IFR, safely.

I though we were talking about Tracy.

Definitely not required, nor always possible

My point was that you do not need to include an ODP in your IFR flight plan to file, only the MOD VOR as your first point but expect vectors once in the air regardless of what you filed.

 

[Palmpilot]

Flying under Part 91 you aren't required to fly an ODP, although it is recommended (see below)...

Correct. 91.175(f) says that it applies only to operations under Part 121, 125, 129, or 135, and that's where the ODP requirement is.

 

[weilke]

Never !

'Hotel California' you can check out any time you want but you can never leave.

 

[Palmpilot]

I though we were talking about Tracy.

Since he's an IFR student, I assume that Tracy is just an example, and that he wants to understand how to plan a safe and legal departure from any airport.

 

[Shawn]

Correct. 91.175(f) says that it applies only to operations under Part 121, 125, 129, or 135, and that's where the ODP requirement is.

But go ahead and try with a DPE: "We are good...I am pretty sure there are no mountains here" as a way to get out on an IFR checkride!

So the current question that evolved is:

If there is an airport without an ODP or with an ODP, published or otherwise with requirements that the aircraft is unable to meet, how does one get out legally and safe?

But to the original question:

but how would one file this? KTCY MOD PATYY ECA TRACY KLVK?

KTCY MOD ECA TRACY KLVK

 

[Old Geek]

Maybe you could take a cab.

 

[Clark1961]

Maybe you could take a cab.

maybe the bus would be cheaper...

 

[Palmpilot]

Definitely not required, nor always possible.

Explain how to depart Ukiah (KUKI) in a 172 IFR, safely. Read the ODPs carefully. An extended Vx climb in IMC is not safe.

According to the way it's written, if conditions are 3100 and 2-1/2 or better, the stated climb gradients do not apply as long as you can climb in visual conditions to the specified altitude. It also gives an alternative to climb over the airport in visual conditions to 3700 MSL with ATC approval.

If the requirements of the ODP are not met, then for a Part 91 flight, it's up to the PIC to determine whether he is able to devise a departure procedure that he is comfortable with.

Note that the minimum climb gradient for Rwy 33 is a lot less than for Rwy 15.

 

[Palmpilot]

But go ahead and try with a DPE: "We are good...I am pretty sure there are no mountains here" as a way to get out on an IFR checkride!

You could be right. That's why I wrote. "...for a checkride, I would play it safe by filing direct MOD direct ECA V195 TRACY direct, and plan on flying the ODP."

 

[Shawn]

You could be right. That's why I wrote. "...for a checkride, I would play it safe by filing direct MOD direct ECA V195 TRACY direct, and plan on flying the ODP."

Yup, that is what I would also file checkride or not then as /G expect vectors.

I guess the question is how can you be sure that there in not a mountain ridge between MOD and ECA that will allow you to fly that direct segment at 3000'...in the pure legal by the book procedures that is?

I guess the answer to that is you would not be issued a clearance from MOD to ECA at 3000' if at that altitude you did not have minimum terrain clearance.

 

[MAKG1]

Note that the minimum climb gradient for Rwy 33 is a lot less than for Rwy 15.

I ran across this example during my IFR cross country.

Rwy 15 is totally impossible in a 172. Rwy 33 is possible, but only with a Vx climb over 3000 feet.

The actual answer we chose was to fly heading 130 off 15 to 6000 then direct ENI VOR (which is where the clearance started), with the CFII acting as terrain safety pilot. Had this been in actual, we would have been stuck. From the ground, we could see there was no terrain in that direction, and that the reason for the big climb gradient was a 2000 foot ridge on the extended centerline (and you can see it on the sectional).

The airport was changed at the last minute because NorCal refused me the ILS into Santa Rosa, so I had to find a localizer somewhere to get my three different approach types.

A downwind departure was not at all an option even with the light winds, as there were air tankers operating continuously at that airport due to the nearby Valley Fire.

Thanks for the advice about TCY. It's for a mock check ride, but it answers a ton of related questions as well. I'm not under the impression that I'm going to get an "easy" airport for my check ride.

 

[Palmpilot]

Yup, that is what I would also file checkride or not then as /G expect vectors.

I guess the question is how can you be sure that there in not a mountain ridge between MOD and ECA that will allow you to fly that direct segment at 3000'...in the pure legal by the book procedures that is?

I guess the answer to that is you would not be issued a clearance from MOD to ECA at 3000' if at that altitude you did not have minimum terrain clearance.

If I didn't know the area well, for direct routes, I would either check the sectional, or I would file an altitude above the OROCA. I would not rely solely on ATC to correct my filed altitude, because a) controllers are human, and b) there could be a comm failure.

 

[Shawn]

If I didn't know the area well, for direct routes, I would either check the sectional, or I would file an altitude above the OROCA. I would not rely solely on ATC to correct my filed altitude, because a) controllers are human, and b) there could be a comm failure.

So speaking in terms of an appropriate answer to a DPE in regard to proper procedures...without utilizing the guaranteed terrain clearance of an MEA on a published airway, is self verifying the terrain and obstacle heights of filing direct between MOD and ECA an acceptable answer as to how you chose that route and altitude?

In this case the OROCA is 9300' which is unrealistic to climb to for his routing.

Or is sticking to published airways as he originally proposed the correct answer?

 

[Palmpilot]

So speaking in terms of an appropriate answer to a DPE in regard to proper procedures...without utilizing the guaranteed terrain clearance of an MEA on a published airway, is self verifying the terrain and obstacle heights of filing direct between MOD and ECA an acceptable answer as to how you chose that route and altitude?

All I can say is that far as I can tell, it meets the requirements of the regulations, but I am neither a CFI nor a DPE, and I can't predict what anyone other than myself would find acceptable. (However, if I were to give this answer to a DPE, I wouldn't be surprised if he/she asked me to explain why it is legal, and under what conditions it would be safe.)

Also, bear in mind that as PIC, you need to assess whether your chart-reading skills are dependable enough to do it safely.

One thing I am sure of is that any local DPE will be well aware that there are no high obstacles between MOD and ECA.

In this case the OROCA is 9300' which is unrealistic to climb to for his routing.

True. If I were not familiar with the area and did not have a VFR chart, I would avoid needing to use the OROCA by filing airways, such as MOD V111 PATYY V109 ECA V195 TRACY. The fact that it is an inefficient route doesn't matter except for fuel planning purposes, because I know that ATC is going to be giving me something more direct.

Or is sticking to published airways as he originally proposed the correct answer?

There's more than one correct answer to his question, IMO.

 

[aterpster]

Tracy to Livermore MVAs:

 

[James331]

Real world, is just file direct and see what I get.

If you need something more for a checkride here's what fltplan has as listed routes.

Another cheat option is file the flight plan, then check on flightaware before your planned time of departure, it'll have all your approved routing listed.

 

[Palmpilot]

I ran across this example during my IFR cross country.

Rwy 15 is totally impossible in a 172. Rwy 33 is possible, but only with a Vx climb over 3000 feet...

I'm surprised by that. The climb gradient for Ukiah's Rwy 33 is only 350 feet per NM (to 5000 feet), which shouldn't require Vx in a 172. I don't know which model of 172 you're flying, but my manual for a 1979 C172N shows that at Vy with no wind, a climb from sea level to 5000 feet at max gross would take ten nautical miles, which would be an average climb gradient of 500 feet per NM.

For Rwy 15, if the wind were too strong for a downwind departure, the climb gradient is beyond the capabilities of a 172 at Vy, and they don't publish climb performance at Vx. However, since a pilot operating under Part 91 is allowed to come up with his own departure procedure, if the ceiling and visibility were sufficient to permit it, he could take off and turn to overfly the runway in the opposite direction to join the Rwy 33 departure procedure. Of course, the pilot would need to make a subtraction from the POH-derived climb gradient to account for the effect of the tailwind.

A downwind departure was not at all an option even with the light winds, as there were air tankers operating continuously at that airport due to the nearby Valley Fire.

I don't know whether air tankers ever conduct their operations at airports that are in IMC, but in a situation where conditions are not good enough for VFR departures, then the air tankers would have to operate IFR too. At uncontrolled fields, I believe that ATC only clears one IFR aircraft in or out at a time, so I would think that would make it possible to use whichever runway you needed.

On a checkride, you'll probably be operating in VFR conditions, so the visual options on the ODP become available. On the other hand, if the DPE asks you to land at an airport that you aren't sure you can depart from, you should probably exercise your PIC authority by declining to do so!

All of this is just my opinion, of course.