Why are ODPs not required in IMC?

Not sure why "it's time to reform ODPs". Perhaps it's time for pilots to brush up on them, but they are easily available, all you have to do is look at them. You can rewrite them all you want, but that would have not have changed the CFIT accident the author described if the pilot still didn't look at the reformed ODP.
 
Take the author's logic, and all ODP should become SID and would be required at all airports.
It then would be interesting how the author would handle airports with no approaches....

Basically, I disagree with 99% of the author's position. There is a limit to the total amount information that can be the "priority" and placed in front of the pilot. AT some point, the pilot has to learn to read.

Tim
 
If you get your instrument training someplace with ODPs around they’re probably emphasized a lot more in training. In areas where diverse departures are the norm, you talk about ODPs if the instructor actually has any clue about them, but realize that at 500 ft/min climb you’re exceeding 200 ft/mile by a significant margin and don’t worry about it after that. When you finally end up someplace with an ODP, or a VFR airport where the obstacle clearance surface is twice as steep, you’ve long since forgotten about ODPs, even if you do actually look at your climb capabilities. And if you can “see and avoid”, who cares about those pesky TERPS criteria, since they’re way more conservative than they need to be.

And when you finally start flying places with SIDS, maybe you’re flying a jets that climb like a banshee, but you don’t understand that your required one engine inop planning is has the climb performance of a Cessna 150 on a hot day.

And of course, when do do finally fly someplace where you need the ODP for an IMC departure, you fly a “normal “ approach in, so you don’t even see that there’s terrain that you need to avoid.
 
If they would change the climb rates from 200 ft per nm to 300 per nm it would eliminate most of the ODPs
 
I’m probably missing something obvious here. Our home ‘drome has an ODP and EVERY time I’ve picked up my departure clearance by phone ahead of time the clearance has begun with “fly the XXXX ODP and then, when entering controlled airspace, fly heading…”.

If I can pick up the clearance in the air, it’s VMC enough that the ODP is moot. If the controller says to fly the ODP, it’s no different than them saying to fly the SID: if I know it, good. If I don’t, I’m now cued to look it up.

Seriously, what am I overlooking here? Making more SIDs doesn’t seem like a reliable fix.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
I’m probably missing something obvious here. Our home ‘drome has an ODP and EVERY time I’ve picked up my departure clearance by phone ahead of time the clearance has begun with “fly the XXXX ODP and then, when entering controlled airspace, fly heading…”.

If I can pick up the clearance in the air, it’s VMC enough that the ODP is moot. If the controller says to fly the ODP, it’s no different than them saying to fly the SID: if I know it, good. If I don’t, I’m now cued to look it up.

Seriously, what am I overlooking here? Making more SIDs doesn’t seem like a reliable fix.
Click to expand...
I’ve never had a clearance that included an ODP unless the ODP was the same as the SID assigned.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I’ve never had a clearance that included an ODP unless the ODP was the same as the SID assigned.
Click to expand...
Maybe I’m lucky here. In any case, it sure seems like a simple fix that I actually think would be common sense.

Please don’t misunderstand my words to be argumentative or whatever - I’m just kinda surprised what I experience isn’t the norm.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
I’m probably missing something obvious here. Our home ‘drome has an ODP and EVERY time I’ve picked up my departure clearance by phone ahead of time the clearance has begun with “fly the XXXX ODP and then, when entering controlled airspace, fly heading…”.

If I can pick up the clearance in the air, it’s VMC enough that the ODP is moot. If the controller says to fly the ODP, it’s no different than them saying to fly the SID: if I know it, good. If I don’t, I’m now cued to look it up.

Seriously, what am I overlooking here? Making more SIDs doesn’t seem like a reliable fix.
Click to expand...

You were assigned the ODP by ATC, therefore you’re required to do it. The article is referencing an accident where the pilot wasn’t assigned the ODP so as a Part 91 operator, he wasn’t required to follow it. Basically, the author sounds like he’d like to make ODPs required for all ops.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
Maybe I’m lucky here. In any case, it sure seems like a simple fix that I actually think would be common sense.

Please don’t misunderstand my words to be argumentative or whatever - I’m just kinda surprised what I experience isn’t the norm.
Click to expand...
No argument taken (or intended on my part).
Can I ask what airport?
 
I'm probably an outlier here, but I don't things need to be changed.
 
somorris said:
I'm probably an outlier here, but I don't things need to be changed.
Click to expand...
While charting could be improved, I think it’s more of a training issue. But given the general lack of understanding and the resistance I see to learning anything about aircraft performance, I’m not sure how to resolve it.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
Our home ‘drome has an ODP and EVERY time I’ve picked up my departure clearance by phone ahead of time the clearance has begun with “fly the XXXX ODP and then, when entering controlled airspace, fly heading…”.
Click to expand...
ATC only assigns an ODP in the clearance when that is needed for separation. When they don't assign an existing ODP, which is very common, it is up to the (part 91) pilot to decide if he needs to fly it.
 
MauleSkinner said:
How about the turbines?
Click to expand...
We will often have special engine out procedures which give us a route we can fly to avoid terrain if an engine failures during the departure. Some of them can be quite complex. ATC won't be aware of them so we would declare an emergency and tell them where we are going to fly.
 
Larry in TN said:
We will often have special engine out procedures which give us a route we can fly to avoid terrain if an engine failures during the departure. Some of them can be quite complex. ATC won't be aware of them so we would declare an emergency and tell them where we are going to fly.
Click to expand...
Many operators do, many operators don’t. And, of course, if the FAA adds 100 feet to what’s allowed for obstacles, that will affect those procedures as well.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
I’m probably missing something obvious here. Our home ‘drome has an ODP and EVERY time I’ve picked up my departure clearance by phone ahead of time the clearance has begun with “fly the XXXX ODP and then, when entering controlled airspace, fly heading…”.

If I can pick up the clearance in the air, it’s VMC enough that the ODP is moot. If the controller says to fly the ODP, it’s no different than them saying to fly the SID: if I know it, good. If I don’t, I’m now cued to look it up.

Seriously, what am I overlooking here? Making more SIDs doesn’t seem like a reliable fix.
Click to expand...
What airport is that?
 
MauleSkinner said:
Aspen used to publish an ODP hat was the same as the Lindz SID, but It had a lower climb requirement.
Click to expand...
Ah. When you said "....same as the SID assigned" I thought you meant they were literally assigning both the ODP and SID in the same clearance. Anyway, the ODP there now has the same Minimums as the LINDZ SID. Only difference is after LINDZ the ODP is Proceed on Course and the LINDZ gives you distinct Transitions. The ODP, the SARDD THREE DEPARTURE, is what the guy in the airfactsjournal.com article in the op was talking about. It's a Graphic ODP. Not a lot of those out there. The ones that are, are usually RNAV ODP's. Those are required to be Graphic. I can't recall seeing very many VHF Nav ones, but this one certainly is.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Can I ask what airport?
Click to expand...

luvflyin said:
What airport is that?
Click to expand...
In the KAUS service area.

Man, I never really stopped to think about what they’re doing but I’m glad they do that: it’s a great reminder right before takeoff to consider the tower not far away.

Larry in TN said:
ATC only assigns an ODP in the clearance when that is needed for separation.
Click to expand...

I’m not disagreeing but am surprised by that. By the name and its nature, I had understood it to be about obstacle/terrain clearance without actual regard for other traffic. I had understood SIDs (and initial headings/altitudes) to be more about traffic deconfliction/sequencing. I’m learning!
 
Llewtrah381 said:
In the KAUS service area.

Man, I never really stopped to think about what they’re doing but I’m glad they do that: it’s a great reminder right before takeoff to consider the tower not far away.



I’m not disagreeing but am surprised by that. By the name and its nature, I had understood it to be about obstacle/terrain clearance without actual regard for other traffic. I had understood SIDs (and initial headings/altitudes) to be more about traffic deconfliction/sequencing. I’m learning!
Click to expand...
ODP's primary function is Obstacle avoidance. SIDS to reduce verbiage. Lot easier to say the GOODY 6 departure than fly rw heading until, then turn to, and join that radial, then this one, cross this at that and that at this etc etc. And unless they are using a different frequency that day they don't gotta say departure frequency will be. When SIDS were first made they didn't have Obstacle clearance criteria. That didn't last long. Now they do. It's the same criteria used for ODP's. ODP's being used by ATC for traffic separation is a thing because the aircraft will be flying a predictable flight path and they can just keep other airplanes clear of it. But the Controller has to assign it if that's what they are going to do. They cannot just assume the pilot will fly it. That's because it is optional to the pilot to use an ODP. Unless of course they've been assigned a DP or Heading to fly.
 
Llewtrah381 said:
In the KAUS service area.

I’m not disagreeing but am surprised by that. By the name and its nature, I had understood it to be about obstacle/terrain clearance without actual regard for other traffic. I had understood SIDs (and initial headings/altitudes) to be more about traffic deconfliction/sequencing. I’m learning!
Click to expand...
Sounds like maybe you’re getting a void time clearance. The ODP is probably a good way to limit the airspace they have to shut down for you.
 
Ok, maybe I'm missing something, but every private pilot in the US has to demonstrate an ability to fly an aircraft at night. Part of flying at night, at least how I learned, was to avoid flying into a f&*ng mountain. That means if you can't SEE the mountain, you better have an alternative way to make sure you don't fly into it. It's basic situational awareness.

In my less than humble opinion, if you're an instrument rated pilot, and you fly a functional aircraft into a mountain, absent a blatantly incorrect published procedure, you screwed up. If "avoiding flying into a mountain" isn't enough incentive to understand and get the procedures right, I don't think a re-write is going to fix anything. Flying an aircraft, especially at night or in poor weather, requires more than a little bit of personal responsibility.

We need to hand a card to everyone ready to graduate kindergarten, that says "when things go wrong, most of the time it's your fault", and not let them get to 1st grade until they realize that it's true.
 
One lesson from the accident is that if you're not going to fly a published departure procedure, you'd better have a bullet-proof plan.
 
Last edited:
Palmpilot said:
One lesson from the accident is that if you're not going to fly a published departure procedure, you'd better have a bullet-proof plan.
Click to expand...

Or that when you're taking responsibility for obstacle clearance, you really need to be on top of it.

The safe bet is probably a circling climb over the airport. It wastes fuel, but you're not going to hit anything.
 
I've worked with this stuff for years. My view is that the FAA shares no small part of the blame. Industry got the FAA to change the departure order years ago to require charting of complex ODPs and all RNAV OPDs. The RNAV ODP sticks out at you because it is on a chart, not buried (especially buried with FAA charts). But, if all full-route ODPs had to be charted, the system would be safer. No new regulation is required, just more diligence on the part of the FAA's procedures designers. The author is spot-on on that aspect.

One that I like to point out is the OPD at KPUC. It that isn't complex, I don't know what is.

PUC ODP.jpg
 
The one at Tahoe was a wake-up call for me:

SOUTH LAKE TAHOE, CA
LAKE TAHOE (TVL)
TAKEOFF MINIMUMS AND (OBSTACLE) DEPARTURE PROCEDURES
AMDT 8 13SEP18 (18256) (FAA)
TAKEOFF MINIMUMS:
Rwy 18, std. w/min. climb of 810’ per NM to 10800, or alternatively, 1600-3 w/min. climb of 765’ per NM to 10800, or 5100-
5 for VCOA.
Rwy 36, 300-1⅜ or std. w/min. climb of 755’ per NM to 6500.
DEPARTURE PROCEDURE:
Rwy 18, climb heading 177° to 7900 then climbing right turn to intercept and climb on SWR R-133 to SWR VOR/DME
thence...
Rwy 36, climb heading 357° to intercept and climb on SWR R-113 to SWR VOR/DME thence...
...Proceed on course.
VCOA:
Rwy 18, obtain ATC approval for VCOA when requesting IFR clearance. Climb in visual conditions to cross South
Lake Tahoe Airport at or above 11200’ MSL then intercept and proceed on SWR R-127 to SWR VOR/DME.
CON’T​

...followed by half a page of obstacle notes.
 
aterpster said:
I've worked with this stuff for years. My view is that the FAA shares no small part of the blame. Industry got the FAA to change the departure order years ago to require charting of complex ODPs and all RNAV OPDs. The RNAV ODP sticks out at you because it is on a chart, not buried (especially buried with FAA charts). But, if all full-route ODPs had to be charted, the system would be safer. No new regulation is required, just more diligence on the part of the FAA's procedures designers. The author is spot-on on that aspect.

One that I like to point out is the OPD at KPUC. It that isn't complex, I don't know what is.
Click to expand...

Wally, I agree that charting all departure procedures would enhance safety. No argument.

But the example at PUC I think is only really "complex" if looking at the whole thing all at once. For any given runway, it's not near as complicated, and most of the complexity is eliminated during preflight planning. The DP boils down to:

"Okay, I want to go south, but I'll be departing on runway 1. So the DP is climb to 6400 then turn right to heading 180, continuing my climb as cleared. Make the turn at less than 210 knots. No problem on the speed, I can't go that fast."

Mental or shorthand note - "6400, turn right 180".

The preflight planning may take a little thought, but the flying part is pretty straightforward.

I fully accept I may have a bias caused by my particular background, though.

I do not like the DP in @Palmpilot 's TVL example, though.
 
Last edited:
Llewtrah381 said:
I’m not disagreeing but am surprised by that. By the name and its nature, I had understood it to be about obstacle/terrain clearance without actual regard for other traffic.
Click to expand...
An ODP is about obstacle and terrain clearance without regard for other traffic. That's why ATC doesn't assign them unless they need you to fly it for separation purposes.

When an ADP not part of the ATC clearance, it's up to the (Part 91) pilot to decide if he needs to use the ODP to ensure obstacle and terrain clearance or if he can do so another way.

Many pilots who've trained, and fly, in non-mountainous areas have a weak understanding of ODPs, IMO. That's likely because their CFIIs, who also trained and fly in non-mountainous areas, are also weak on ODPs. There is a common misconception that ATC is always providing terrain and obstruction separation but the situations where they are are limited.
 
OK - have had a little time to do some homework (which may have been better than just responding right away...)

First, yes, as Larry just posted, ODPs are only for terrain and obstacle clearance (which is what I always understood) - not aircraft separation. Per the Instrument Procedures Handbook, "The term ODP is used to define procedures that simply provide obstacle clearance. ODPs are only used for obstruction clearance and do not include ATC-related climb requirements. In fact, the primary emphasis of ODP design is to use the least restrictive route of flight to the en route structure or to facilitate a climb to an altitude that allows random (diverse) IFR flight, while attempting to accommodate typical departure routes."

I just called the head of QA, Plans, and Procedures at AUS TRACON to get some clarification. He said they're required (by something "deep in a book") to state PRIOR to issuing a clearance that we're reminded to fly the ODP when there is one (there are apparently only two cases in their area, so they only do it for two runways; not even the reciprocal of ours). It's not actually part of the clearance but is more of a reminder right before issuing one. "We don't want to assume the pilot read it" and "it's easier to explain why we were being redundant vs. why we didn't say it if something bad happened" were his comments. They hadn't always been doing it but, when someone came from another site where it was done, a research of their procedures resulted in the change. The statement is only made when giving a clearance on the ground, from what I gather.

Back to the accident in the OP, my guess is the pilot was going to try and pick up the clearance in the air. Had he picked it up on the ground, at least if the controller issuing the clearance had followed the guidance cited by the AUS TRACON, he would have at least been reminded there was an ODP in play. That may not have happened but there's no indication in the story that the clearance was picked up on the ground and didn't include the pre-clearance statement.

We're all obligated as IFR pilots to know about an ODP before departing, no question. Having ATC remind us before launching into IMC seems like a good added safety measure, but it shouldn't substitute for us doing our homework. In fact, the other accident discussed here recently in Medford, OR shows that even having a tower repeatedly tell the pilot to fly the SID won't solve everything (Navajo crash - Medford OR | Pilots of America).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top