Obstacle avoidance between take-off and airway

Bill writes:

Contrary to the static you are getting, you asking exactly the right
question. Those who don't investigate such things run into stuff.

Safety first.

A great reference to how the procedures are constructed is
Eckalbar "IFR A Structured Approach" chapter 9. It discuses
what "standard" is. How far is it assumed that you climb straight
ahead when departing? It's all covered.

I was hoping it would be in the books I can download for free from the FAA,
but I haven't found much, and I'm at least as confused now as I was when I
asked the question.

For fun, look at the Sand Point ID approach plate. Can you depart
this place safely with a 900' ceiling in your Bonanza? How would you do
it?

I found the airport, but I'm not sure what you mean by ID approach plate.
There are a couple of approaches listed.

Viperdoc wrote:
He doesn't have a congressman- he lost his job in the States, and now lives
hand to mouth in Paris, where he (not surprisingly) also can't find or hold
a regular job.


I knew that, but forgot. Maybe the U.S. Ambassador to France could help
him out. Big Bear, California Airport is a high-profile location for
U.S.-Franco relationships. ;-)

On Jan 15, 6:20*pm, Sam Spade wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:

.



The procedure has to be published for your runway. So in our sim guys
case he could have made up his own departure because the runway he was
using does not have a published departure procedure. To my knowledge
there are no non-towered airports that prohibit IFR departures from a
certain runway.

-Robert

Sure there are, but for Part 91 it is iffy. *If I am operating Part 135
IFR out of Big Bear, I better damn well not use Runway 26 unless I get a
VFR climb clearance from center.

Part 135 is different. Are you aware of an non-towered airport that
prohibits IFR depatures from a given runway? Can you post the airport
identifier?

-Robert

Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Jan 15, 6:20 pm, Sam Spade wrote:

Robert M. Gary wrote:

.




The procedure has to be published for your runway. So in our sim guys
case he could have made up his own departure because the runway he was
using does not have a published departure procedure. To my knowledge
there are no non-towered airports that prohibit IFR departures from a
certain runway.

-Robert

Sure there are, but for Part 91 it is iffy. If I am operating Part 135
IFR out of Big Bear, I better damn well not use Runway 26 unless I get a
VFR climb clearance from center.


Part 135 is different. Are you aware of an non-towered airport that
prohibits IFR depatures from a given runway? Can you post the airport
identifier?

-Robert
The airport we are discussing is good enough. It doesn't have a tower,
it is an IFR airport, and takeoff minimums are NA for Runway 26.
Without takeoff minimums there cannot be a diverse departure area or
ODP. Now, can you roll your own ODP for Runway 26 as a 91-only
operator? I think that is something only FAA legal could answer with
certainty.

Bill wrote:
Contrary to the static you are getting, you asking exactly the right
question.
Those who don't investigate such things run into stuff.

A great reference to how the procedures are constructed is
Eckalbar "IFR A Structured Approach" chapter 9. It discuses
what "standard" is. How far is it assumed that you climb straight
ahead when departing? It's all covered.

For fun, look at the Sand Point ID approach plate. Can you depart
this
place safely with a 900' ceiling in your Bonanza? How would you do
it?

Bill Hale BPPP instructor

Most light aircraft don't have sufficent performance to use standard
takeoff minimums at Sandpoint.

This is not my understanding. According to old Wally Roberts, who
once published great IFR articles for the IFR Refresher, the TERPS
guys are required to evaluate departures for every runway for any
airport for which an IAP is published, and if obstacles penetrate the
200:1 plane, then an ODP is required.

Therefore if a pilot follows the 200:1 plane in all cases where there
is an IAP published, and no ODP, he is assured of obstacle clearance
(unless the runway is designated NA). There is no need for published
IFR Takeoff Minimums for this to apply, as I understand it.

This has always been my understanding. If there is a source that
proves this to be incorrect, I would appreciate being so enlightened.




On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 06:59:34 -0800, Sam Spade
wrote:

wrote:

I believe the rule is that if there is a departure procedure
published, fly the departure procedure.

If there is an approach chart published, but but no departure
procedure, the rule is no turns before 400' AGL, and maintain 200 FPNM
and you will be clear of obstructions.

Known as a diverse departure area as per the AIM

No approach plate, you are on your own.

Does this not cover everything?

No. The runway has to have published IFR takeoff minimums AND no ODP
for you to make a diverse departure.

wrote:
This is not my understanding. According to old Wally Roberts, who
once published great IFR articles for the IFR Refresher, the TERPS
guys are required to evaluate departures for every runway for any
airport for which an IAP is published, and if obstacles penetrate the
200:1 plane, then an ODP is required.

Therefore if a pilot follows the 200:1 plane in all cases where there
is an IAP published, and no ODP, he is assured of obstacle clearance
(unless the runway is designated NA). There is no need for published
IFR Takeoff Minimums for this to apply, as I understand it.

This has always been my understanding. If there is a source that
proves this to be incorrect, I would appreciate being so enlightened.



The TERPS guys are indeed required to evaluate every qualified runway
for an IFR airport (an airport with one, or more IAPs).

In some unusual situations a runway, such as a secondary dirt or turf
runway may not be approved by the regional Airports Division. But, this
is unusual.

So, for every qualified runway the evaluation will be made. If the
TERPS folks decide it would require an excessive climb gradient for the
aircraft that typically use the airport they will NA it. If they do not
NA it, then they must provide Part 97 takeoff minimums in order to have
a diverse departure area or an ODP. They go hand in glove. If you find
an exception, let us know.

On Jan 16, 8:43*am, Sam Spade wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Jan 15, 6:20 pm, Sam Spade wrote:

Robert M. Gary wrote:

.

The procedure has to be published for your runway. So in our sim guys
case he could have made up his own departure because the runway he was
using does not have a published departure procedure. To my knowledge
there are no non-towered airports that prohibit IFR departures from a
certain runway.

-Robert

Sure there are, but for Part 91 it is iffy. *If I am operating Part 135
IFR out of Big Bear, I better damn well not use Runway 26 unless I get a
VFR climb clearance from center.

Part 135 is different. Are you aware of an non-towered airport that
prohibits IFR depatures from a given runway? Can you post the airport
identifier?

-Robert

The airport we are discussing is good enough. *It doesn't have a tower,
it is an IFR airport, and takeoff minimums are NA for Runway 26.
Without takeoff minimums there cannot be a diverse departure area or
ODP. *Now, can you roll your own ODP for Runway 26 as a 91-only
operator? *I think that is something only FAA legal could answer with
certainty.- Hide quoted text -

But there is no requirement for part 91 to have published takeoff
mins. Many of us depart IFR from airports that do not have terminal
procedures published of any kind. There is no restrictions on part 91
to have an ODP. Note that 91.175 (f) (depature mins) says "This
paragraph applies to persons operating an aircraft under part 121,
125, 129, or 135 of this chapter.".

So the only requirement under part 91 is what you do not hit anything.

-Robert

Robert M. Gary wrote:

On Jan 16, 8:43 am, Sam Spade wrote:

Robert M. Gary wrote:

On Jan 15, 6:20 pm, Sam Spade wrote:

Robert M. Gary wrote:

.

The procedure has to be published for your runway. So in our sim guys
case he could have made up his own departure because the runway he was
using does not have a published departure procedure. To my knowledge
there are no non-towered airports that prohibit IFR departures from a
certain runway.

-Robert

Sure there are, but for Part 91 it is iffy. If I am operating Part 135
IFR out of Big Bear, I better damn well not use Runway 26 unless I get a
VFR climb clearance from center.

Part 135 is different. Are you aware of an non-towered airport that
prohibits IFR depatures from a given runway? Can you post the airport
identifier?

-Robert

The airport we are discussing is good enough. It doesn't have a tower,
it is an IFR airport, and takeoff minimums are NA for Runway 26.
Without takeoff minimums there cannot be a diverse departure area or
ODP. Now, can you roll your own ODP for Runway 26 as a 91-only
operator? I think that is something only FAA legal could answer with
certainty.- Hide quoted text -


But there is no requirement for part 91 to have published takeoff
mins. Many of us depart IFR from airports that do not have terminal
procedures published of any kind. There is no restrictions on part 91
to have an ODP. Note that 91.175 (f) (depature mins) says "This
paragraph applies to persons operating an aircraft under part 121,
125, 129, or 135 of this chapter.".

So the only requirement under part 91 is what you do not hit anything.

-Robert
I agree that Part 91 can roll your own at VFR airports. I also agree
that takeoff minimums do not legally apply to Part 91 only. My question
is about an IFR airport where takeoff minimums are denied altogther for
a particular runway. I think the "hazards of litigation" exist for that
circumstance.

It certainly is not clear cut, of course, but if something goes wrong it
would become a factor.

On Jan 16, 3:45*pm, Sam Spade wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:

I agree that Part 91 can roll your own at VFR airports. *I also agree
that takeoff minimums do not legally apply to Part 91 only. *My question
is about an IFR airport where takeoff minimums are denied altogther for
a particular runway. *I think the "hazards of litigation" exist for that
circumstance.

It certainly is not clear cut, of course, but if something goes wrong it
would become a factor.- Hide quoted text -

Possible but I know of no precedent set where a court held a pilot to
135 standards when operating under 91. Even for part 135 the procedure
does not say you cannot take off from runway 20, it just says that the
given ODP is not authorized for runway 20.

-Robert