@kath . You were looking for stickys awhile back. This one might be a good candidate for this forum. Knowledge about departure procedures are obviously a thing that could use a little more exposure.
Done!
Thanks for the suggestion!
@kath . You were looking for stickys awhile back. This one might be a good candidate for this forum. Knowledge about departure procedures are obviously a thing that could use a little more exposure.
If it's a Bravo based airport, I do. Otherwise, no.Here's an example of a the "no panacea."
How many of us in light GA actually check SIDs and STARs for our departures and destinations? Charted, easy to find, all the good things.
The implication here being that you don’t check ODPs where they exist in flat country?When flying out west I do check the ODPs because of the rocks. I've flown the one out of Logan Utah and the one out of Provo Utah.
I'm certainly not as good at checking them.The implication here being that you don’t check ODPs where they exist in flat country?
I hear that fairly frequently with regard to airport analysis apps. “I use it when I’m in the mountains.” It’s usually pretty easy to come up with non-mountainous airports that they use where they should be using the apps to ensure legal takeoff planning.I'm certainly not as good at checking them.
My 2 most frequented airports have no ODP and no takeoff minimums. Only obstacle notes. Makes it hard to get in the habit. However, if I ever want to go pro, I need to do better at getting outside my narrow paradigm and looking beyond the ease of Part 91 flying.I hear that fairly frequently with regard to airport analysis apps. “I use it when I’m in the mountains.” It’s usually pretty easy to come up with non-mountainous airports that they use where they should be using the apps to ensure legal takeoff planning.
That is exactly my point. FF departure takeoff mins goes to the beginning of the alphabet. If you are unfamiliar and looking for Western Carolina, you wouldn't find it. No reason why FF can't link at least to the page with the airport so you don't have to search forever.Hard to find an ODP for an airport??? Tap Fore Flight-Airport (RHP)-Procedure-Departure-(page 2 Andrews Murphy). Took like 10 seconds.
That is exactly my point. FF departure takeoff mins goes to the beginning of the alphabet. If you are unfamiliar and looking for Western Carolina, you wouldn't find it. No reason why FF can't link at least to the page with the airport so you don't have to search forever.
And do you know the impact, so to speak, of the obstacle notes? Do you need to worry about those?My 2 most frequented airports have no ODP and no takeoff minimums. Only obstacle notes. Makes it hard to get in the habit. However, if I ever want to go pro, I need to do better at getting outside my narrow paradigm and looking beyond the ease of Part 91 flying.
4. Obstacles that are located within 1 NM of the DER and penetrate the 40:1 OCS are referred to as “low, close−in obstacles.” The standard required obstacle clearance (ROC) of 48 feet per NM to clear these obstacles would require a climb gradient greater than 200 feet per NM for a very short distance, only until the aircraft was 200 feet above the DER. 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.And do you know the impact, so to speak, of the obstacle notes? Do you need to worry about those?
Which means what, exactly, to a pilot?4. Obstacles that are located within 1 NM of the DER and penetrate the 40:1 OCS are referred to as “low, close−in obstacles.” The standard required obstacle clearance (ROC) of 48 feet per NM to clear these obstacles would require a climb gradient greater than 200 feet per NM for a very short distance, only until the aircraft was 200 feet above the DER. 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.
(a) Pilots must refer to the TPP booklet or the Graphic ODP for information on these obstacles. These obstacle notes will no longer be published on SIDs. Pilots assigned a SID for departure must refer to the airport entry in the TPP to obtain information on these obstacles.
(b) The purpose of noting obstacles in the “Take−off Minimums and (OBSTACLE) Departure Procedures” section of the TPP is to identify the obstacle(s) and alert the pilot to the height and
location of the obstacle(s) so they can be avoided. This can be accomplished in a variety of ways; for example, the pilot may be able to see the obstruction and maneuver around the obstacle(s) if necessary; early liftoff/climb performance may allow the aircraft to cross well above the obstacle(s); or if the obstacle(s) cannot be visually acquired during departure, preflight planning should take into account what turns or other maneuvers may be necessary immediately after takeoff to avoid the obstruction(s).
1. Where am IWhich means what, exactly, to a pilot?
How do you address this with #3? Do these need to be considered separately from the climb gradient assumed?1. Where am I
2. Where are the rocks/towers/trees/buildings etc.
3. What do I need to do to not hit them
Yes. That's what it says. Pilots gotta apply the survival instinct below 200' above DER.How do you address this with #3? Do these need to be considered separately from the climb gradient assumed?
So how do you apply survival instinct to avoid obstacles that may be in the clouds?Yes. That's what it says. Pilots gotta apply the survival instinct below 200' above DER.
Fly carefully. Fer instance, like not letting the wind be pushin ya around off the extended center line of the runway?So how do you apply survival instinct to avoid obstacles that may be in the clouds?
So you really don’t understand what these close-in obstacles are or why they’re published, do you?Fly carefully. Like not letting the wind be pushin ya around off the extended center line of the runway?
What are these two airports? If they have IAPs they eitherhave to have takeoff minimums or IFR takeoff "NA."My 2 most frequented airports have no ODP and no takeoff minimums. Only obstacle notes. Makes it hard to get in the habit. However, if I ever want to go pro, I need to do better at getting outside my narrow paradigm and looking beyond the ease of Part 91 flying.
They have a takeoff minimums section but only obstacle notes. Feel free to tell me what I'm missing.What are these two airports? If they have IAPs they eitherhave to have takeoff minimums or IFR takeoff "NA."
I don't even see any takeoff minimums in those "Takeoff Minimums" sections.They have a takeoff minimums section but only obstacle notes. Feel free to tell me what I'm missing.
KPIA
3MY
They have a takeoff minimums section but only obstacle notes. Feel free to tell me what I'm missing.
KPIA
3MY
I’m not seeing obstacle notes.I don't even see any takeoff minimums in those "Takeoff Minimums" sections.
Jepp let me down!
I think I do. I know what the AIM says they are and why they're published. AIM 5-2-9 e. 4. But maybe the AIM is wrong. If so, then I'm wrong. Is there something the AIM, and therefore me are missing? I got my pen and paper out and am ready to take notes. Tell me all about it.So you really don’t understand what these close-in obstacles are or why they’re published, do you?
If it passes the Diverse Departure Assessment why would there need to be Takeoff Minimums? There are many airports that don't have them. May be they should change what they call theWhat are these two airports? If they have IAPs they eitherhave to have takeoff minimums or IFR takeoff "NA."
They’re obstacles that, more often than not, don’t affect light GA airplanes.I think I do. I know what the AIM says they are and why they're published. AIM 5-2-9 e. 4. But maybe the AIM is wrong. If so, then I'm wrong. Is there something the AIM, and therefore me are missing? I got my pen and paper out and am ready to take notes. Tell me all about it.
My favorite is that they call out an object from my airport that is 15 feet AGL. If I hit that, I should never have had a license.They’re obstacles that, more often than not, don’t affect light GA airplanes.
Picking a specific example, Runway 14 at KSTP has obstacles beginning 190 feet from the DER, up to 129 feet, 1 foot right of centerline. Doing the math on that, it’s just over a 2700 ft/nm climb gradient, just slightly more than the 148 ft/mile normally allowed. Staying on the extended centerline of the runway isn’t a good avoidance technique, and an early turn is going to point you toward other high terrain. You pretty much need to go over it.
but since most of us don’t use all of the runway, the runway remaining can be used to flatten the required gradient. If I need, say, 2500 feet of distance to get to 50 feet, I extend my climb distance by almost 4000 feet (roughly 1300%), flattening the climb required to clear the obstacle to less than 200 ft/nm. So no additional climb or maneuvering is required.
They’re also only obstacles that penetrate the 40:1 surface, but are often less than a higher required gradient. Runway 36 at KTVL, for instance, requires a whopping 755 ft/nm climb gradient for the ODP. There are some significant close-in obstacles published, but meeting the 755 ft/mile exceeds what is needed to clear them.
So the bottom line is that yes, they need to be considered, but more often than not they aren’t a factor for pilots who have to do their own obstacle analysis.
Gotcha. I was a little snarky, thanks for replying. Just like the AIM says:They’re obstacles that, more often than not, don’t affect light GA airplanes.
Picking a specific example, Runway 14 at KSTP has obstacles beginning 190 feet from the DER, up to 129 feet, 1 foot right of centerline. Doing the math on that, it’s just over a 2700 ft/nm climb gradient, just slightly more than the 148 ft/mile normally allowed. Staying on the extended centerline of the runway isn’t a good avoidance technique, and an early turn is going to point you toward other high terrain. You pretty much need to go over it.
but since most of us don’t use all of the runway, the runway remaining can be used to flatten the required gradient. If I need, say, 2500 feet of distance to get to 50 feet, I extend my climb distance by almost 4000 feet (roughly 1300%), flattening the climb required to clear the obstacle to less than 200 ft/nm. So no additional climb or maneuvering is required.
They’re also only obstacles that penetrate the 40:1 surface, but are often less than a higher required gradient. Runway 36 at KTVL, for instance, requires a whopping 755 ft/nm climb gradient for the ODP. There are some significant close-in obstacles published, but meeting the 755 ft/mile exceeds what is needed to clear them.
So the bottom line is that yes, they need to be considered, but more often than not they aren’t a factor for pilots who have to do their own obstacle analysis.
Here's an example of a the "no panacea."
How many of us in light GA actually check SIDs and STARs for our departures and destinations? Charted, easy to find, all the good things.
In the NavCanada procedures, they're included with each airport's approach plates, typically as notes at the bottom of the airport diagram (see example below). When I first started flying to the U.S., I didn't even realise that I had to look somewhere else for them, but fortunately I was usually flying to airports with SIDs, so I didn't end up as an NTSB report.https://airfactsjournal.com/2021/11/its-time-to-reform-obstacle-departure-procedures/
Guys got a point. Not sure why ODPs are basically footnotes to IFR flying?!
I love this new feature, flipping through 30 pages to get to an airport is a pia.Getting to Takeoff Minimums in Foreflight just got easier. With the latest version, v14.0, it takes you to the entry for an Airport in the TPP directly to the page it is on instead of page one and making you scroll to the Airport you want. Slight glitch is it might take you to the second page of that entry instead of the first if it is one that spans two pages. No real biggie though, it does say (CON'T). You just swipe to get to the start.
In the NavCanada procedures, they're included with each airport's approach plates, typically as notes at the bottom of the airport diagram (see example below). When I first started flying to the U.S., I didn't even realise that I had to look somewhere else for them, but fortunately I was usually flying to airports with SIDs, so I didn't end up as an NTSB report.
This can be accomplished in a variety of ways; for example, the pilot may be able to see the obstruction and maneuver around the obstacle(s) if necessary; early liftoff/climb performance may allow the aircraft to cross well above the obstacle(s); or if the obstacle(s) cannot be visually acquired during departure, preflight planning should take into account what turns or other maneuvers may be necessary immediately after takeoff to avoid the obstruction(s).
That could be a bad idea on an IMC day even in flat country, which I believe is what you were suggesting, right?The implication here being that you don’t check ODPs where they exist in flat country?