15.2 Prior to starting final approach, the pilot will be
advised of the frequency on which the advisories will
be transmitted. If, for any reason, radar advisories
cannot be furnished, the pilot will be so advised.
15.3 Advisory information, derived from radar
observations, includes information on:
15.3.1 Passing the final approach fix inbound
(nonprecision approach) or passing the outer marker
or the fix used in lieu of the outer marker inbound
(precision approach).
15.3.2 Trend advisories with respect to elevation
and/or azimuth radar position and movement will be
provided.
NOTE-
At this point, the pilot may be requested to report sighting
the approach lights or the runway.
NOTE-
Whenever the aircraft nears the PAR safety limit, the pilot
will be advised that he/she is well above or below the
glidepath or well left or right of course. Glidepath
information is given only to those aircraft executing a
precision approach, such as ILS or MLS. Altitude
information is not transmitted to aircraft executing other
than precision approaches because the descent portions of
these approaches generally do not coincide with the
depicted PAR glidepath. At locations where the MLS
glidepath and PAR glidepath are not coincidental, only
azimuth monitoring will be provided.
15.3.3 If, after repeated advisories, the aircraft
proceeds outside the PAR safety limit or if a radical
deviation is observed, the pilot will be advised to
execute a missed approach if not visual.
15.4 Radar service is automatically terminated upon
completion of the approach.
16. ILS Approach
16.1 Communications should be established with the
appropriate FAA control tower or with the FAA FSS
where there is no control tower, prior to starting an
ILS approach. This is in order to receive advisory
information as to the operation of the facility. It is also
recommended that the aural signal of the ILS be
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-42
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
monitored during an approach as to assure continued
reception and receipt of advisory information, when
available.
17. ILS/MLS Approaches to Parallel
Runways
17.1 ATC procedures permit ILS instrument
approach operations to dual or triple parallel runway
configurations. ILS/MLS approaches to parallel
runways are grouped into three classes: Parallel
(dependent) ILS/MLS Approaches; Simultaneous
Parallel (independent) ILS/MLS Approaches; and
Simultaneous Close Parallel (independent) ILS
Precision Runway Monitor (PRM) Approaches. (See
FIG ENR 1.5-25.) The classification of a parallel
runway approach procedure is dependent on adjacent
parallel runway centerline separation, ATC
procedures, and airport ATC radar monitoring and
communications capabilities. At some airports one or
more parallel localizer courses may be offset up to
3 degrees. Offset localizer configurations result in
loss of Category II capabilities and an increase in
decision height (50 feet).
17.2 Parallel approach operations demand heightened pilot situational awareness. A thorough
Approach Procedure Chart review should be
conducted with, as a minimum, emphasis on the
following approach chart information: name and
number of the approach, localizer frequency, inbound
localizer/azimuth course, glide slope intercept
altitude, decision height, missed approach instructions, special notes/procedures, and the assigned
runway location/proximity to adjacent runways.
Pilots will be advised that simultaneous ILS/MLS or
simultaneous close parallel ILS PRM approaches are
in use. This information may be provided through the
ATIS.
17.3 The close proximity of adjacent aircraft
conducting simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS and
simultaneous close parallel ILS PRM approaches
mandates strict pilot compliance with all ATC
clearances. ATC assigned airspeeds, altitudes, and
headings must be complied with in a timely manner.
Autopilot coupled ILS/MLS approaches require pilot
knowledge of procedures necessary to comply with
ATC instructions. Simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS
and simultaneous close parallel ILS PRM approaches
necessitate precise localizer tracking to minimize
final monitor controller intervention, and unwanted
No Transgression Zone (NTZ) penetration. In the
unlikely event of a breakout, a vector off the approach
course prior to the decision altitude (DA), ATC will
not assign altitudes lower than the minimum
vectoring altitude. Pilots should notify ATC
immediately if there is a degradation of aircraft or
navigation systems.
17.4 Strict radio discipline is mandatory during
parallel ILS/MLS approach operations. This includes
an alert listening watch and the avoidance of lengthy,
unnecessary radio transmissions. Attention must be
given to proper call sign usage to prevent the
inadvertent execution of clearances intended for
another aircraft. Use of abbreviated call signs must be
avoided to preclude confusion of aircraft with similar
sounding call signs. Pilots must be alert to unusually
long periods of silence or any unusual background
sounds in their radio receiver. A stuck microphone
may block the issuance of ATC instructions by the
final monitor controller during simultaneous parallel
ILS/MLS and simultaneous close parallel ILS PRM
approaches. For additional communications information, pilots should refer to GEN 3.4, paragraph 4.4,
Radio Communications Phraseology and
Techniques.
17.5 Use of Traffic Collision Avoidance Systems
(TCAS) provides an additional element of safety to
parallel approach operations. Pilots should follow
recommended TCAS operating procedures presented
in approved flight manuals, original equipment
manufacturer recommendations, professional newsletters, and FAA publications.
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-43
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
FIG ENR 1.5-25
Parallel ILS Approaches
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-44
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
FIG ENR 1.5-26
Staggered ILS Approaches
DIAGONAL
SEPARATION
Parallel ILS Approaches
Runway centerlines spaced 2500’ or greater.
Radar monitoring not required.
Staggered Approaches.
18. Parallel ILS/MLS Approaches
(Dependent) (See FIG ENR 1.5-26)
18.1 Parallel approaches are an ATC procedure
permitting parallel ILS/MLS approaches to airports
having parallel runways separated by at least
2,500 feet between centerlines. Integral parts of a
total system are ILS/MLS, radar, communications,
ATC procedures, and required airborne equipment.
18.2 A parallel (dependent) approach differs from a
simultaneous (independent) approach in that, the
minimum distance between parallel runway centerlines is reduced; there is no requirement for radar
monitoring or advisories; and a staggered separation
of aircraft on the adjacent localizer/azimuth course is
required.
18.3 Aircraft are afforded a minimum of 1.5 miles
radar separation diagonally between successive
aircraft on the adjacent localizer/azimuth course
when runway centerlines are at least 2,500 feet but no
more than 4,300 feet apart. When runway centerlines
are more than 4,300 feet but no more than 9,000 feet
apart, a minimum of 2 miles diagonal radar separation
is provided. Aircraft on the same localizer/azimuth
course within 10 miles of the runway end are
provided a minimum of 2.5 miles radar separation. In
addition, a minimum of 1,000 feet vertical or a
minimum of three miles radar separation is provided
between aircraft during turn on to the parallel final
approach course.
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-45
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
FIG ENR 1.5-27
Simultaneous Parallel ILS Approaches
NO TRANSGRESSION ZONE
2200’
2200’
2200’
2200’
OM
OM
INTERCEPT GLIDE
SLOPE AT 2200’
3200’
3200’
EXTEND RADAR MONITORING AND NTZ TO 7NM BEYOND RUNWAY
DEPARTURE END FOR QUADRUPLE SIMULTANEOUS ILS APPROACHES.
7NM
14L
14R
RADAR MONITORING
PROVIDED TO
ENSURE SEPARATION
BETWEEN AIRCRAFT ON
PARALLEL LOCALIZERS.
AIRCRAFT MAY BE
VECTORED TO EITHER
14L OR 14R ILS
FROM OUTER FIX.
MEADOWVIEW INT (NW COURSE OHA ILS &
OBK VOR R-227) ESTABLISHED WHERE
3200’ ALTITUDE INTERCEPTS GLIDE SLOPE.
RADAR MONITORING PROVIDED TO ENSURE SEPARATION
BETWEEN AIRCRAFT ON PARALLEL LOCALIZERS. WHEN GLIDE
SLOPE INOPERATIVE BEGIN DESCENT AT MEADOW INTERSECTION.
(RUNWAY CENTERLINES SPACED 4300’ OR MORE
OR 5000’ OR MORE, - RADAR MONITORING REQUIRED)
18.4 Whenever parallel ILS/MLS approaches are in
progress, pilots are informed that approaches to both
runways are in use. In addition, the radar controller
will have the interphone capability of communicating
with the tower controller where separation responsibility has not been delegated to the tower.
19. Simultaneous Parallel ILS/MLS
Approaches (Independent)
(See FIG ENR 1.5-27)
19.1 System. This approach system permits simultaneous ILS/MLS approaches to parallel runways
with centerlines separated by 4,300 to 9,000 feet, and
equipped with final monitor controllers. Simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS approaches require radar
monitoring to ensure separation between aircraft on
the adjacent parallel approach course. Aircraft
position is tracked by final monitor controllers who
will issue instructions to aircraft observed deviating
from the assigned localizer course. Staggered radar
separation procedures are not utilized. Integral parts
of a total system are ILS/MLS, radar, communications, ATC procedures, and required airborne
equipment. The Approach Procedure Chart permitting simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS approaches will
contain the note “simultaneous approaches authorized RWYS 14L and 14R,” identifying the
appropriate runways as the case may be. When
advised that simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS approaches are in progress, pilots shall advise approach
control immediately of malfunctioning or inoperative
receivers, or if a simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS
approach is not desired.
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-46
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
19.2 Radar Monitoring. This service is provided
for each simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS approach to
ensure aircraft do not deviate from the final approach
course. Radar monitoring includes instructions if an
aircraft nears or penetrates the prescribed NTZ (an
area 2,000 feet wide located equidistant between
parallel final approach courses). This service will be
provided as follows:
19.2.1 During turn on to parallel final approach,
aircraft will be provided 3 miles radar separation or
a minimum or 1,000 feet vertical separation. The
assigned altitude must be maintained until intercepting the glide path, unless cleared otherwise by ATC.
Aircraft will not be vectored to intercept the final
approach course at an angle greater than thirty
degrees.
19.2.2 The final monitor controller will have the
capability of overriding the tower controller on the
tower frequency.
19.2.3 Pilots will be instructed to monitor the tower
frequency to receive advisories and instructions.
19.2.4 Aircraft observed to overshoot the turn-on or
to continue on a track which will penetrate the NTZ
will be instructed to return to the correct final
approach course immediately. The final monitor
controller may also issue missed approach or
breakout instructions to the deviating aircraft.
PHRASEOLOGY-
“(Aircraft call sign) YOU HAVE CROSSED THE FINAL
APPROACH COURSE. TURN (left/right) IMMEDIATE-
LY AND RETURN TO THE LOCALIZER/AZIMUTH
COURSE.”
or
“(Aircraft call sign) TURN (left/right) AND RETURN TO
THE LOCALIZER/AZIMUTH COURSE.”
19.2.5 If a deviating aircraft fails to respond to such
instructions or is observed penetrating the NTZ, the
aircraft on the adjacent final approach course may be
instructed to alter course.
PHRASEOLOGY-
“TRAFFIC ALERT (aircraft call sign) TURN (left/right)
IMMEDIATELY HEADING (degrees), (climb/descend)
AND MAINTAIN (altitude).”
19.2.6 Radar monitoring will automatically be
terminated when visual separation is applied, the
aircraft reports the approach lights or runway in sight,
or the aircraft is 1 mile or less from the runway
threshold (for runway centerlines spaced 4,300 feet
or greater). Final monitor controllers will not advise
pilots when radar monitoring is terminated.
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-47
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
FIG ENR 1.5-28
ILS PRM Approaches
(Simultaneous Close Parallel)
20. Simultaneous Close Parallel ILS PRM
Approaches (Independent) and
Simultaneous Offset Instrument
Approaches (SOIA) (See FIG ENR 1.5-28)
20.1 System
20.1.1 ILS/PRM is an acronym for Instrument
Landing System/Precision Runway Monitor.
20.1.1.1 An approach system that permits simultaneous ILS/PRM approaches to dual runways with
centerlines separated by less than 4,300 feet but at
least 3,400 feet for parallel approach courses, and at
least 3,000 feet if one ILS if offset by 2.5 to
3.0 degrees. The airspace between the final approach
courses contains a No Transgression Zone (NTZ)
with surveillance provided by two PRM monitor
controllers, one for each approach course. To qualify
for reduced lateral runway separation, monitor
controllers must be equipped with high update radar
and high resolution ATC radar displays, collectively
called a PRM system. The PRM system displays
almost instantaneous radar information. Automated
tracking software provides PRM monitor controllers
with aircraft identification, position, speed and a
ten-second projected position, as well as visual and
aural controller alerts. The PRM system is a
supplemental requirement for simultaneous close
parallel approaches in addition to the system
requirements for simultaneous parallel ILS/MLS
approaches described in paragraph 19, Simultaneous
Parallel ILS/MLS Approaches (Independent).
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-48
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
20.1.1.2 Simultaneous close parallel ILS/PRM
approaches are depicted on a separate Approach
Procedure Chart titled ILS/PRM Rwy XXX
(Simultaneous Close Parallel).
20.1.2 SOIA is an acronym for Simultaneous Offset
Instrument Approach, a procedure used to conduct
simultaneous approaches to runways spaced less than
3,000 feet, but at least 750 feet apart. The SOIA
procedure utilizes an ILS/PRM approach to one
runway and an offset Localizer Type Directional Aid
(LDA)/PRM approach with glide slope to the
adjacent runway.
20.1.2.1 The ILS/PRM approach plates used in
SOIA operations are identical to other ILS/PRM
approach plates, with an additional note, which
provides the separation between the two runways
used for simultaneous approaches. The LDA/PRM
approach plate displays the required notations for
closely spaced approaches as well as depicting the
visual segment of the approach, and a note that
provides the separation between the two runways
used for simultaneous operations.
20.1.2.2 Controllers monitor the SOIA ILS/PRM
and LDA/PRM approaches with a PRM system using
high update radar and high-resolution ATC radar
displays in exactly the same manner as is done for
ILS/PRM approaches. The procedures and system
requirements for SOIA ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM
approaches are identical with those used for
simultaneous close parallel ILS/PRM approaches
until near the LDA/PRM approach missed approach
point (MAP)---where visual acquisition of the ILS
aircraft by the LDA aircraft must be accomplished.
Since the ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM approaches are
identical except for the visual segment in the SOIA
concept, an understanding of the procedures for
conducting ILS/PRM approaches is essential before
conducting a SOIA ILS/PRM or LDA/PRM
operation.
20.1.2.3 In SOIA, the approach course separation
(instead of the runway separation) meets established
close parallel approach criteria. Refer to
FIG ENR 1.5-28 for the generic SOIA approach
geometry. A visual segment of the LDA/PRM
approach is established between the LDA MAP and
the runway threshold. Aircraft transition in visual
conditions from the LDA course, beginning at the
LDA MAP, to align with the runway and can be
stabilized by 500 feet above ground level (AGL) on
the extended runway centerline. Aircraft will be
“paired” in SOIA operations, with the ILS aircraft
ahead of the LDA aircraft prior to the LDA aircraft
reaching the LDA MAP. A cloud ceiling for the
approach is established so that the LDA aircraft has
nominally 30 seconds to acquire the leading ILS
aircraft prior to the LDA aircraft reaching the LDA
MAP. If visual acquisition is not accomplished, a
missed approach must be executed.
20.2 Requirements.
20.2.1 Besides system requirements as identified in
subpara 20.1 above all pilots must have completed
special training before accepting a clearance to
conduct ILS/PRM or LDA/PRM Simultaneous Close
Parallel Approaches.
20.2.1.1 Pilot Training Requirement. Pilots must
complete special pilot training, as outlined below,
before accepting a clearance for a simultaneous close
parallel ILS/PRM or LDA/PRM approach.
a) For operations under 14 CFR Parts 121, 129,
and 135 pilots must comply with FAA approved
company training as identified in their Operations
Specifications. Training, at a minimum, must require
pilots to view the FAA video “ILS PRM AND SOIA
APPROACHES: INFORMATION FOR AIR CAR-
RIER PILOTS.” Refer to http://www.faa.gov for
additional information and to view or download the
video.
b) For operations under Part 91:
1) Pilots operating transport category aircraft
must be familiar with PRM operations as contained in
this section of the Aeronautical Information
Publication (AIP). In addition, pilots operating
transport category aircraft must view the FAA video
“ILS PRM AND SOIA APPROACHES:
INFORMATION FOR AIR CARRIER PILOTS.”
Refer to http://www.faa.gov for additional
information and to view or download the video.
2) Pilots not operating transport category
aircraft must be familiar with PRM and SOIA
operations as contained in this section of the AIP. The
FAA strongly recommends that pilots not involved in
transport category aircraft operations view the FAA
video, “ILS PRM AND SOIA APPROACHES:
INFORMATION FOR GENERAL AVIATION
PILOTS.” Refer to http://www.faa.gov for additional information and to view or download the video.
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-49
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
FIG ENR 1.5-29
SOIA Approach Geometry
NOTE-
SAP The SAP is a design point along the extended centerline of the intended landing runway on the
glide slope at 500 feet above the landing threshold. It is used to verify a sufficient distance is
provided for the visual maneuver after the missed approach point (MAP) to permit the pilots to
conform to approved, stabilized approach criteria.
MAP The point along the LDA where the course separation with the adjacent ILS reaches 3,000 feet.
The altitude of the glide slope at that point determines the approach minimum descent altitude
and is where the NTZ terminates. Maneuvering inside the MAP is done in visual conditions.
Angle Angle formed at the intersection of the extended LDA runway centerline and a line drawn between
the LDA MAP and the SAP. The size of the angle is determined by the FAA SOIA computer design
program, and is dependent on whether Heavy aircraft use the LDA and the spacing between the
runways.
Visibility Distance from MAP to runway threshold in statute miles (light credit applies).
Procedure LDA aircraft must see the runway landing environment and, if less than standard radar
separation exists between the aircraft on the adjacent ILS course, the LDA aircraft must visually
acquire the ILS aircraft and report it in sight to ATC prior to the LDA MAP.
CC Clear Clouds.
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-50
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
20.2.1.2 ATC Directed Breakout. An ATC
directed “breakout” is defined as a vector off the ILS
or LDA approach course in response to another
aircraft penetrating the NTZ, the 2,000 foot wide area
located equidistance between the two approach
courses that is monitored by the PRM monitor
controllers.
20.2.1.3 Dual Communications. The aircraft flying the ILS/PRM or LDA/PRM approach must have
the capability of enabling the pilot/s to listen to two
communications frequencies simultaneously.
20.3 Radar Monitoring. Simultaneous close parallel ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM approaches require
that final monitor controllers utilize the PRM system
to ensure prescribed separation standards are met.
Procedures and communications phraseology are
also described in paragraph 19, Simultaneous Parallel
ILS/MLS Approaches (Independent). A minimum of
3 miles radar separation or 1,000 feet vertical
separation will be provided during the turn-on to
close parallel final approach courses. To ensure
separation is maintained, and in order to avoid an
imminent situation during simultaneous close
parallel ILS/PRM or SOIA ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM
approaches, pilots must immediately comply with
PRM monitor controller instructions. In the event of
a missed approach, radar monitoring is provided to
one-half mile beyond the most distant of the two
runway departure ends for ILS/RPM approaches. In
SOIA, PRM radar monitoring terminates at the LDA
MAP. Final monitor controllers will not notify pilots
when radar monitoring is terminated.
20.4 Attention All Users Page (AAUP). ILS/PRM
and LDA/PRM approach charts have an AAUP
associated with them that must be referred to in
preparation for conducting the approach. This page
contains the following instructions that must be
followed if the pilot is unable to accept an ILS/PRM
or LDA/PRM approach.
20.4.1 At airports that conduct PRM operations,
(ILS/PRM or, in the case of airports where SOIAs are
conducted, ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM approaches)
pilots not qualified to except PRM approaches must
contact the FAA Command Center prior to departure
(1-800-333-4286) to obtain an arrival reservation
(see FAA Advisory Circular 90-98, Simultaneous
Closely Spaced Parallel Operations at Airports Using
Precision Runway Monitor (PRM) Systems). Arriving flights that are unable to participate in ILS/PRM
or LDA/PRM approaches and have not received an
arrival reservation are subject to diversion to another
airport or delays. Pilots en route to a PRM airport
designated as an alternate, unable to reach their filed
destination, and who are not qualified to participate
in ILS/PRM or LDA/PRM approaches must advise
ATC as soon as practical that they are unable to
participate. Pilots who are qualified to participate but
experience an en route equipment failure that would
preclude participation in PRM approaches should
notify ATC as soon as practical.
20.4.2 The AAUP covers the following operational
topics:
20.4.2.1 ATIS. When the ATIS broadcast advises
ILS/PRM approaches are in progress (or ILS PRM
and LDA PRM approaches in the case of SOIA),
pilots should brief to fly the ILS/PRM or LDA/PRM
approach. If later advised to expect the ILS or LDA
approach (should one be published), the ILS/PRM or
LDA/PRM chart may be used after completing the
following briefing items:
a) Minimums and missed approach procedures are
unchanged.
b) PRM Monitor frequency no longer required.
c) ATC may assign a lower altitude for glide slope
intercept.
NOTE-
In the case of the LDA/PRM approach, this briefing
procedure only applies if an LDA approach is also
published.
In the case of the SOIA ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM
procedure, the AAUP describes the weather
conditions in which simultaneous approaches are
authorized:
Simultaneous approach weather minimums are
X,XXX feet (ceiling), x miles (visibility).
20.4.2.2 Dual VHF Communications Required.
To avoid blocked transmissions, each runway will
have two frequencies, a primary and a monitor
frequency. The tower controller will transmit on both
frequencies. The monitor controller’s transmissions,
if needed, will override both frequencies. Pilots will
ONLY transmit on the tower controller’s frequency,
but will listen to both frequencies. Begin to monitor
the PRM monitor controller when instructed by ATC
to contact the tower. The volume levels should be set
about the same on both radios so that the pilots will
be able to hear transmissions on at least one frequency
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-51
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
if the other is blocked. Site specific procedures take
precedence over the general information presented in
this paragraph. Refer to the AAUP for applicable
procedures at specific airports.
20.4.2.3 Breakouts. Breakouts differ from other
types of abandoned approaches in that they can
happen anywhere and unexpectedly. Pilots directed
by ATC to break off an approach must assume that an
aircraft is blundering toward them and a breakout
must be initiated immediately.
a) Hand-fly breakouts. All breakouts are to be
hand-flown to ensure the maneuver is accomplished
in the shortest amount of time.
b) ATC Directed “Breakouts.” ATC directed
breakouts will consist of a turn and a climb or descent.
Pilots must always initiate the breakout in response to
an air traffic controller’s instruction. Controllers will
give a descending breakout only when there are no
other reasonable options available, but in no case will
the descent be below the minimum vectoring altitude
(MVA) which provides at least 1,000 feet required
obstruction clearance. The AAUP provides the MVA
in the final approach segment as X,XXX feet at
(Name) Airport.
NOTE-
“TRAFFIC ALERT.” If an aircraft enters the “NO
TRANSGRESSION ZONE” (NTZ), the controller will
breakout the threatened aircraft on the adjacent approach.
The phraseology for the breakout will be:
PHRASEOLOGY-
TRAFFIC ALERT, (aircraft call sign) TURN (left/right)
IMMEDIATELY, HEADING (degrees), CLIMB/
DESCEND AND MAINTAIN (altitude).
20.4.2.4 ILS/PRM Navigation. The pilot may find
crossing altitudes along the final approach course.
The pilot is advised that descending on the ILS
glideslope ensures complying with any charted
crossing restrictions.
20.4.2.5 SOIA AAUP differences from ILS PRM
AAUP
a) ILS/PRM LDA Traffic (only published on
ILS/PRM AAUP when the ILS PRM approach is
used in conjunctions with an LDA/PRM approach
to the adjacent runway). To provide better
situational awareness, and because traffic on the LDA
may be visible on the ILS aircraft’s TCAS, pilots are
reminded of the fact that aircraft will be maneuvering
behind them to align with the adjacent runway. While
conducting the ILS/PRM approach to Runway XXX,
other aircraft may be conducting the offset
LDA/PRM approach to Runway XXX. These aircraft
will approach from the (left/right)-rear and will
realign with runway XXX after making visual contact
with the ILS traffic. Under normal circumstances
these aircraft will not pass the ILS traffic.
b) SOIA LDA/PRM AAUP Items. The AAUP
for the SOIA LDA/PRM approach contains most
information found on ILS/PRM AAUPs. It replaces
certain information as seen below and provides pilots
with the procedures to be used in the visual segment
of the LDA/PRM approach, from the time the ILS
aircraft is visually acquired until landing.
c) SOIA LDA/PRM Navigation (replaces ILS/
PRM 20.4.2.4 and 20.4.2.5a) above). The pilot may
find crossing altitudes along the final approach
course. The pilot is advised that descending on the
LDA glideslope ensures complying with any charted
crossing restrictions. Remain on the LDA course
until passing XXXXX (LDA MAP name) intersection prior to maneuvering to align with the centerline
of runway XXX.
d) SOIA (Name) Airport Visual Segment
(replaces ILS/PRM 20.4.2.5a) above). Pilot procedures for navigating beyond the LDA MAP are
spelled out. If ATC advises that there is traffic on the
adjacent ILS, pilots are authorized to continue past
the LDA MAP to align with runway centerline when:
1) the ILS traffic is in sight and is expected to
remain in sight,
2) ATC has been advised that “traffic is in
sight.”
3) the runway environment is in sight.
Otherwise, a missed approach must be executed.
Between the LDA MAP and the runway threshold,
pilots of the LDA aircraft are responsible for
separating themselves visually from traffic on the ILS
approach, which means maneuvering the aircraft as
necessary to avoid the ILS traffic until landing, and
providing wake turbulence avoidance, if applicable.
Pilots should advise ATC, as soon as practical, if
visual contact with the ILS traffic is lost and execute
a missed approach unless otherwise instructed by
ATC.
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-52
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
20.5 SOIA LDA Approach Wake Turbulence.
Pilots are responsible for wake turbulence avoidance
when maneuvering between the LDA missed
approach point and the runway threshold.
20.6 Differences between ILS and ILS/PRM
approaches of importance to the pilot.
20.6.1 Runway Spacing. Prior to ILS/PRM and
LDA/PRM approaches, most ATC directed breakouts
were the result of two aircraft in-trail on the same
final approach course getting too close together.
Two aircraft going in the same direction did not
mandate quick reaction times. With PRM approaches, two aircraft could be along side each other,
navigating on courses that are separated by less than
4,300 feet. In the unlikely event that an aircraft
“blunders” off its course and makes a worst case turn
of 30 degrees toward the adjacent final approach
course, closing speeds of 135 feet per second could
occur that constitute the need for quick reaction. A
blunder has to be recognized by the monitor
controller, and breakout instructions issued to the
endangered aircraft. The pilot will not have any
warning that a breakout is eminent because the
blundering aircraft will be on another frequency. It is
important that, when a pilot receives breakout
instructions, he/she assumes that a blundering aircraft
is about to or has penetrated the NTZ and is heading
toward his/her approach course. The pilot must
initiate a breakout as soon as safety allows. While
conducting PRM approaches, pilots must maintain an
increased sense of awareness in order to immediately
react to an ATC instruction (breakout) and maneuver
as instructed by ATC, away from a blundering
aircraft.
20.6.2 Communications. To help in avoiding
communication problems caused by stuck microphones and two parties talking at the same time,
two frequencies for each runway will be in use during
ILS/PRM and LDA/PRM approach operations, the
primary tower frequency and the PRM monitor
frequency. The tower controller transmits and
receives in a normal fashion on the primary frequency
and also transmits on the PRM monitor frequency.
The monitor controller’s transmissions override on
both frequencies. The pilots flying the approach will
listen to both frequencies but only transmit on the
primary tower frequency. If the PRM monitor
controller initiates a breakout and the primary
frequency is blocked by another transmission, the
breakout instruction will still be heard on the PRM
monitor frequency.
20.6.3 Hand-flown Breakouts. The use of the
autopilot is encouraged while flying an ILS/PRM or
LDA/PRM approach, but the autopilot must be
disengaged in the rare event that a breakout is issued.
Simulation studies of breakouts have shown that a
hand-flown breakout can be initiated consistently
faster than a breakout performed using the autopilot.
20.6.4 TCAS. The ATC breakout instruction is the
primary means of conflict resolution. TCAS, if
installed, provides another form of conflict resolution
in the unlikely event other separation standards
would fail. TCAS is not required to conduct a closely
spaced approach.
The TCAS provides only vertical resolution of
aircraft conflicts, while the ATC breakout instruction
provides both vertical and horizontal guidance for
conflict resolutions. Pilots should always immediately follow the TCAS Resolution Advisory (RA),
whenever it is received. Should a TCAS RA be
received before, during, or after an ATC breakout
instruction is issued, the pilot should follow the RA,
even if it conflicts with the climb/descent portion of
the breakout maneuver. If following an RA requires
deviating from an ATC clearance, the pilot shall
advise ATC as soon as practical. While following an
RA, it is extremely important that the pilot also
comply with the turn portion of the ATC breakout
instruction unless the pilot determines safety to be
factor. Adhering to these procedures assures the pilot
that acceptable “breakout” separation margins will
always be provided, even in the face of a normal
procedural or system failure.
20.6.5 Breakouts. The probability is extremely low
that an aircraft will “blunder” from its assigned
approach course and enter the NTZ, causing ATC to
“breakout” the aircraft approaching on the adjacent
ILS course. However, because of the close proximity
of the final approach courses, it is essential that pilots
follow the ATC breakout instructions precisely and
expeditiously. The controller’s “breakout” instructions provide conflict resolution for the threatened
aircraft, with the turn portion of the “breakout” being
the single most important element in achieving
maximum protection. A descending breakout will
only be issued when it is the only controller option. In
no case will the controller descend an aircraft below
the MVA, which will provide at least 1,000 feet
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-53
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
clearance above obstacles. The pilot is not expected
to exceed 1,000 feet per minute rate of descent in the
event a descending breakout is issued.
21. Simultaneous Converging Instrument
Approaches
21.1 ATC may conduct instrument approaches
simultaneously to converging runways; i.e., runways
having an included angle from 15 to 100 degrees, at
airports where a program has been specifically
approved to do so.
21.2 The basic concept requires that dedicated,
separate standard instrument approach procedures be
developed for each converging runway included.
Missed approach points must be at least 3 miles apart
and missed approach procedures ensure that missed
approach protected airspace does not overlap.
21.3 Other requirements are: radar availability,
nonintersecting final approach courses, precision
(ILS/MLS) approach systems on each runway, and if
runways intersect, controllers must be able to apply
visual separation as well as intersecting runway
separation criteria. Intersecting runways also require
minimums of at least 700-foot ceilings and 2 miles
visibility. Straight-in approaches and landings must
be made.
21.4 Whenever simultaneous converging approaches are in progress, aircraft will be informed by
the controller as soon as feasible after initial contact
or via ATIS. Additionally, the radar controller will
have direct communications capability with the tower
controller where separation responsibility has not
been delegated to the tower.
22. Timed Approaches From a Holding Fix
22.1 Timed approaches may be conducted when the
following conditions are met:
22.1.1 A control tower is in operation at the airport
where the approaches are conducted.
22.1.2 Direct communications are maintained
between the pilot and the center/approach controller
until the pilot is instructed to contact the tower.
22.1.3 If more than one missed approach procedure
is available, none requires a course reversal.
22.1.4 If only one missed approach procedure is
available, the following conditions are met.
22.1.4.1 Course reversal is not required.
22.1.4.2 Reported ceiling and visibility are equal to
or greater than the highest prescribed circling
minimums for the instrument approach procedure.
22.1.5 When cleared for the approach, pilots shall
not execute a procedure turn. (See 14 CFR
Section 91.175j.)
22.2 Although the controller will not specifically
state that “timed approaches are in progress,” the
assigning a time to depart the final approach fix
inbound (nonprecision approach) or the outer marker
or the fix used in lieu of the outer marker inbound
(precision approach) is indicative that timed
approach procedures are being utilized, or in lieu of
holding, the controller may use radar vectors to the
final approach course to establish a mileage interval
between aircraft that will insure the appropriate time
sequence between the final approach fix/outer marker
or the fix used in lieu of the outer marker and the
airport.
22.3 Each pilot in an approach sequence will be
given advance notice as to the time he/she should
leave the holding point on approach to the airport.
When a time to leave the holding point has been
received, the pilot should adjust his/her flight path to
leave the fix as closely as possible to the designated
time. (See FIG ENR 1.5-30.)
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-54
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
FIG ENR 1.5-30
Timed Approaches from a Holding Fix
ONE MINUTE
FLYING TIME
APPROXIMATELY 5 MILES
12:03 CLEARANCE RECEIVED
:04 INITIAL TIME
OVER FIX
1000 FT.
1000 FT.
1000 FT.
1000 FT.
:06 1/2
:07 REPORT
LEAVING FINAL
APPROACH TIME
:05 1/2
:05
30 SEC.
REPORT LEAVING
PREVIOUS ALTITUDE FOR
NEW ASSIGNED ALTITUDE
LMM LOM
AIRPORT
EXAMPLE-
At 12:03 local time, in the example shown, a pilot holding, receives instructions to leave the fix inbound at 12:07. These
instructions are received just as the pilot has completed turn at the outbound end of the holding pattern and is proceeding
inbound toward the fix. Arriving back over the fix, the pilot notes that the time is 12:04 and that there are 3 minutes to lose
in order to leave the fix at the assigned time. Since the time remaining is more than two minutes, the pilot plans to fly a race
track pattern rather than a 360 degree turn, which would use up 2 minutes. The turns at the ends of the race track pattern
will consume approximately 2 minutes. Three minutes to go, minus 2 minutes required for the turns, leaves 1 minute for level
flight. Since two portions of level flight will be required to get back to the fix inbound, the pilot halves the 1 minute remaining
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-55
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
and plans to fly level for 30 seconds outbound before starting the turn back to the fix on final approach. If the winds were
negligible at flight altitude, this procedure would bring the pilot inbound across the fix precisely at the specified time of
12:07. However, if expecting headwind on final approach, the pilot should shorten the 30 second outbound course somewhat,
knowing that the wind will carry the aircraft away from the fix faster while outbound and decrease the ground speed while
returning to the fix. On the other hand, compensating for a tailwind on final approach, the pilot should lengthen the
calculated 30 second outbound heading somewhat, knowing that the wind would tend to hold the aircraft closer to the fix
while outbound and increase the ground speed while returning to the fix.
23. Contact Approach
23.1 Pilots operating in accordance with an IFR
flight plan, provided they are clear of clouds and have
at least 1 mile flight visibility and can reasonably
expect to continue to the destination airport in those
conditions, may request ATC authorization for a
“contact approach.”
23.2 Controllers may authorize a “contact approach”
provided:
23.2.1 The contact approach is specifically requested by the pilot. ATC cannot initiate this
approach.
EXAMPLE-
Request contact approach.
23.2.2 The reported ground visibility at the
destination airport is at least 1 statute mile.
23.2.3 The contact approach will be made to an
airport having a standard or special instrument
approach procedure.
23.2.4 Approved separation is applied between
aircraft so cleared and between these aircraft and
other IFR or special VFR aircraft.
EXAMPLE-
Cleared contact approach (and if required) at or below
(altitude) (routing) if not possible (alternative procedures)
and advise.
23.3 A contact approach is an approach procedure
that may be used by a pilot (with prior authorization
from ATC) in lieu of conducting a standard or special
instrument approach procedure (IAP) to an airport. It
is not intended for use by a pilot on an IFR flight
clearance to operate to an airport not having a
published and functioning IAP. Nor is it intended for
an aircraft to conduct an instrument approach to one
airport and then, when “in the clear,” discontinue that
approach and proceed to another airport. In the
execution of a contact approach, the pilot assumes the
responsibility for obstruction clearance. If radar
service is being received, it will automatically
terminate when the pilot is instructed to change to
advisory frequency.
24. Visual Approach
24.1 A visual approach is conducted on an IFR flight
plan and authorizes a pilot to proceed visually and
clear of clouds to the airport. The pilot must have
either the airport or the preceding identified aircraft
in sight. This approach must be authorized and
controlled by the appropriate air traffic control
facility. Reported weather at the airport must have a
ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and visibility 3 miles or
greater. ATC may authorize this type approach when
it will be operationally beneficial. Visual approaches
are an IFR procedure conducted under Instrument
Flight Rules in visual meteorological conditions.
Cloud clearance requirements of 14 CFR Section 91.155 are not applicable, unless required by
operation specifications.
24.2 Operating to an Airport Without Weather
Reporting Service. ATC will advise the pilot when
weather is not available at the destination airport.
ATC may initiate a visual approach provided there is
a reasonable assurance that weather at the airport is a
ceiling at or above 1,000 feet and visibility 3 miles or
greater (e.g., area weather reports, PIREPs, etc.).
24.3 Operating to an Airport with an Operating
Control Tower. Aircraft may be authorized to
conduct a visual approach to one runway while other
aircraft are conducting IFR or VFR approaches to
another parallel, intersecting, or converging runway.
When operating to airports with parallel runways
separated by less than 2,500 feet, the succeeding
aircraft must report sighting the preceding aircraft
unless standard separation is being provided by ATC.
When operating to parallel runways separated by at
least 2,500 feet but less than 4,300 feet, controllers
will clear/vector aircraft to the final at an angle not
greater than 30 degrees unless radar, vertical, or
visual separation is provided during the turn-on. The
purpose of the 30 degree intercept angle is to reduce
the potential for overshoots of the final and to
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-56
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
preclude side-by-side operations with one or both
aircraft in a belly-up configuration during the
turn-on. Once the aircraft are established within 30
degrees of final, or on the final, these operations may
be conducted simultaneously. When the parallel
runways are separated by 4,300 feet or more, or
intersecting/converging runways are in use, ATC
may authorize a visual approach after advising all
aircraft involved that other aircraft are conducting
operations to the other runway. This may be
accomplished through use of the ATIS.
24.4 Separation Responsibilities. If the pilot has
the airport in sight but cannot see the preceding
aircraft, ATC may clear the aircraft for a visual
approach; however, ATC retains both separation and
wake vortex separation responsibility. When visually
following a preceding aircraft, acceptance of the
visual approach clearance constitutes acceptance of
pilot responsibility for maintaining a safe approach
interval and adequate wake turbulence separation.
24.5 A visual approach is not an IAP and therefore
has no missed approach segment. If a go around is
necessary for any reason, aircraft operating at
controlled airports will be issued an appropriate
advisory/clearance/instruction by the tower. At
uncontrolled airports, aircraft are expected to remain
clear of clouds and complete a landing as soon as
possible. If a landing cannot be accomplished, the
aircraft is expected to remain clear of clouds and
contact ATC as soon as possible for further clearance.
Separation from other IFR aircraft will be maintained
under these circumstances.
24.6 Visual approaches reduce pilot/controller
workload and expedite traffic by shortening flight
paths to the airport. It is the pilot’s responsibility to
advise ATC as soon as possible if a visual approach
is not desired.
24.7 Authorization to conduct a visual approach is
an IFR authorization and does not alter IFR flight plan
cancellation responsibility. See ENR 1.10, paragraph 11.2, Canceling IFR Flight Plan.
24.8 Radar service is automatically terminated,
without advising the pilot, when the aircraft is
instructed to change to advisory frequency.
25. Charted Visual Flight Procedures
(CVFPs)
25.1 CVFPs are charted visual approaches established for environmental/noise considerations, and/
or when necessary for the safety and efficiency of
air traffic operations. The approach charts depict
prominent landmarks, courses, and recommended
altitudes to specific runways. CVFPs are designed to
be used primarily for turbojet aircraft.
25.2 These procedures will be used only at airports
with an operating control tower.
25.3 Most approach charts will depict some
NAVAID information which is for supplemental
navigational guidance only.
25.4 Unless indicating a Class B airspace floor, all
depicted altitudes are for noise abatement purposes
and are recommended only. Pilots are not prohibited
from flying other than recommended altitudes if
operational requirements dictate.
25.5 When landmarks used for navigation are not
visible at night, the approach will be annotated
“PROCEDURE NOT AUTHORIZED AT NIGHT.”
25.6 CVFPs usually begin within 20 flying miles
from the airport.
25.7 Published weather minimums for CVFPs are
based on minimum vectoring altitudes rather than the
recommended altitudes depicted on charts.
25.8 CVFPs are not instrument approaches and do
not have missed approach segments.
25.9 ATC will not issue clearances for CVFPs when
the weather is less than the published minimum.
25.10 ATC will clear aircraft for a CVFP after the
pilot reports siting a charted landmark or a preceding
aircraft. If instructed to follow a preceding aircraft,
pilots are responsible for maintaining a safe approach
interval and wake turbulence separation.
25.11 Pilots should advise ATC if at any point they
are unable to continue an approach or lose sight of a
preceding aircraft. Missed approaches will be
handled as a go-around.
26. Missed Approach
26.1 When a landing cannot be accomplished, advise
ATC and, upon reaching the missed approach point
defined on the approach procedure chart, the pilot
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-57
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
must comply with the missed approach instructions
for the procedure being used or with an alternate
missed approach procedure specified by ATC.
26.2 Obstacle protection for missed approach is
predicated on the missed approach being initiated at
the decision altitude/height (DA/H) or at the missed
approach point and not lower than minimum descent
altitude (MDA). A climb gradient of at least 200 feet
per nautical mile is required, (except for Copter
approaches, where a climb of at least 400 feet per
nautical mile is required), unless a higher climb
gradient is published in the notes section of the
approach procedure chart. When higher than standard
climb gradients are specified, the end point of the
non-standard climb will be specified at either an
altitude or a fix. Pilots must preplan to ensure that the
aircraft can meet the climb gradient (expressed in feet
per nautical mile) required by the procedure in the
event of a missed approach, and be aware that flying
at a higher than anticipated ground speed increases
the climb rate requirement (feet per minute). Tables
for the conversion of climb gradients (feet per
nautical mile) to climb rate (feet per minute), based
on ground speed, are included on page D1 of the U.S.
Terminal Procedures booklets. Reasonable buffers
are provided for normal maneuvers. However, no
consideration is given to an abnormally early turn.
Therefore, when an early missed approach is
executed, pilots should, unless otherwise cleared by
ATC, fly the IAP as specified on the approach plate
to the missed approach point at or above the MDA or
DH before executing a turning maneuver.
26.3 If visual reference is lost while circling to land
from an instrument approach, the missed approach
specified for that particular procedure must be
followed (unless an alternate missed approach
procedure is specified by ATC). To become
established on the prescribed missed approach
course, the pilot should make an initial climbing turn
toward the landing runway and continue the turn until
established on the missed approach course. Inasmuch
as the circling maneuver may be accomplished in
more than one direction, different patterns will be
required to become established on the prescribed
missed approach course depending on the aircraft
position at the time visual reference is lost.
Adherence to the procedure will help assure that an
aircraft will remain laterally within the circling and
missed approach obstruction clearance areas. Refer
to paragraph 26.8 concerning vertical obstruction
clearance when starting a missed approach at other
than the MAP. (See FIG ENR 1.5-31.)
14 FEB 31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-58
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
FIG ENR 1.5-31
Circling and Missed Approach Obstruction Clearance Areas
X
X
CLIMBING TURN
CLIMBING TURN
DECISION TO MISS
HERE
DECISION
TO MISS HERE
VOR
VOR
CIRCLING
MANEUVER
(WHEN
CLEARED IN
RIGHT HAND
TRAFFIC
PATTERN)
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-59
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
FIG ENR 1.5-32
Missed Approach
x
CHANUTE
109.2 CNU
090°
1450
1265
1581
1180
1172
Portion of a Published Procedure
Remain within
10 NM
VOR
MISSED APPROACH
Climbing right turn to
2600 direct to VOR
2600
236°
056°
2500
5.7 NM
R236
056°
011°
191°
FIG ENR 1.5-33
Overhead Maneuver
3 - 5 NM
X X
INITIAL POINT APPROACH INITIAL X
ROLL OUT
BREAK POINT 180° TURN
180° TURN
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-60
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
26.4 At locations where ATC radar service is
provided, the pilot should conform to radar vectors
when provided by ATC in lieu of the published
missed approach procedure.
26.5 Some locations may have a preplanned
alternate missed approach procedure for use in the
event the primary NAVAID used for the missed
approach procedure is unavailable. To avoid
confusion, the alternate missed approach instructions
are not published on the chart. However, the alternate
missed approach holding pattern will be depicted on
the instrument approach chart for pilot situational
awareness and to assist ATC by not having to issue
detailed holding instructions. The alternate missed
approach may be based on NAVAIDs not used in the
approach procedure or the primary missed approach.
When the alternate missed approach procedure is
implemented by NOTAM, it becomes a mandatory
part of the procedure. The NOTAM will specify both
the textual instructions and any additional equipment
requirements necessary to complete the procedure.
Air traffic may also issue instructions for the alternate
missed approach when necessary, such as when the
primary missed approach NAVAID fails during the
approach. Pilots may reject an ATC clearance for an
alternate missed approach that requires equipment
not necessary for the published approach procedure
when the alternate missed approach is issued after
beginning the approach. However, when the alternate
missed approach is issued prior to beginning the
approach the pilot must either accept the entire
procedure (including the alternate missed approach),
request a different approach procedure, or coordinate
with ATC for alternative action to be taken, i.e.,
proceed to an alternate airport, etc.
26.6 When the approach has been missed, request a
clearance for specific action; i.e., to alternative
airport, another approach, etc.
26.7 Pilots must ensure that they have climbed to a
safe altitude prior to proceeding off the published
missed approach, especially in nonradar environments. Abandoning the missed approach prior to
reaching the published altitude may not provide
adequate terrain clearance. Additional climb may be
required after reaching the holding pattern before
proceeding back to the IAF or to an alternate.
26.8 Missed approach obstacle clearance is predicated on beginning the missed approach procedure at
the Missed Approach Point (MAP) from MDA or DA
and then climbing 200 feet/NM or greater. Initiating
a go-around after passing the published MAP may
result in total loss of obstacle clearance. To
compensate for the possibility of reduced obstacle
clearance during a go-around, a pilot should apply
procedures used in takeoff planning. Pilots should
refer to airport obstacle and departure data prior to
initiating an instrument approach procedure. Such
information may be found in the “TAKE-OFF
MINIMUMS AND (OBSTACLE) DEPARTURE
PROCEDURES” section of the U.S. TERMINAL
PROCEDURES publication.
27. Overhead Approach Maneuver
27.1 Pilots operating in accordance with an IFR
flight plan in Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) may request ATC authorization for an
overhead maneuver. An overhead maneuver is not an
instrument approach procedure. Overhead maneuver
patterns are developed at airports where aircraft have
an operational need to conduct the maneuver. An
aircraft conducting an overhead maneuver is
considered to be VFR and the IFR flight plan is
cancelled when the aircraft reaches the initial point on
the initial approach portion of the maneuver. (See
FIG ENR 1.5-33.) The existence of a standard
overhead maneuver pattern does not eliminate the
possible requirement for an aircraft to conform to
conventional rectangular patterns if an overhead
maneuver cannot be approved. Aircraft operating to
an airport without a functioning control tower must
initiate cancellation of an IFR flight plan prior to
executing the overhead maneuver. Cancellation of
the IFR flight plan must be accomplished after
crossing the landing threshold on the initial portion of
the maneuver or after landing. Controllers may
authorize an overhead maneuver and issue the
following to arriving aircraft:
27.1.1 Pattern altitude and direction of traffic. This
information may be omitted if either is standard.
PHRASEOLOGY-
PATTERN ALTITUDE (altitude). RIGHT TURNS.
27.1.2 Request for a report on initial approach.
PHRASEOLOGY-
REPORT INITIAL.
14 FEB 08 31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-61
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
27.1.3 “Break” information and a request for the
pilot to report. The “Break Point” will be specified if
nonstandard. Pilots may be requested to report
“break” if required for traffic or other reasons.
PHRASEOLOGY-
BREAK AT (specified point).
REPORT BREAK.
28. Departure Procedures
28.1 Pre-Taxi Clearance Procedures
28.1.1 Locations where these procedures are in
effect are indicated in the Airport/Facility Directory.
28.1.2 Certain airports have established programs
whereby pilots of departing IFR aircraft may elect to
receive their IFR clearances before they start taxiing
for takeoff. The following provisions are included in
such procedures:
28.1.2.1 Pilot participation is not mandatory.
28.1.2.2 Participating pilots call clearance delivery/
ground control not more than 10 minutes before
proposed taxi time.
28.1.2.3 IFR clearance (or delay information, if
clearance cannot be obtained) is issued at the time of
this initial call-up.
28.1.2.4 When the IFR clearance is received on
clearance delivery frequency, pilots call ground
control when ready to taxi.
28.1.2.5 Normally, pilots need not inform ground
control that they have received IFR clearance on
clearance delivery frequency. Certain locations may,
however, require that the pilot inform ground control
of a portion of the routing or that the IFR clearance
has been received.
28.1.2.6 If a pilot cannot establish contact on
clearance delivery frequency or has not received an
IFR clearance before ready to taxi, the pilot should
contact ground control and inform the controller
accordingly.
29. Pre-departure Clearance Procedures
29.1 Many airports in the National Airspace System
are equipped with the Tower Data Link System
(TDLS) that includes the Pre-departure Clearance
(PDC) function. The PDC function automates the
Clearance Delivery operations in the ATCT for
participating users. The PDC function displays IFR
clearances from the ARTCC to the ATCT. The
Clearance Delivery controller in the ATCT can
append local departure information and transmit the
clearance via data link to participating airline/service
provider computers. The airline/service provider will
then deliver the clearance via the Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System
(ACARS) or a similar data link system or, for nondata
link equipped aircraft, via a printer located at the
departure gate. PDC reduces frequency congestion,
controller workload and is intended to mitigate
delivery/readback errors. Also, information from
participating users indicates a reduction in pilot
workload.
29.2 PDC is available only to participating aircraft
that have subscribed to the service through an
approved service provider.
29.3 Due to technical reasons, the following
limitations currently exist in the PDC program:
29.3.1 Aircraft filing multiple flight plans are
limited to one PDC clearance per departure airport
within a 24-hour period. Additional clearances will
be delivered verbally.
29.3.2 If the clearance is revised or modified prior to
delivery, it will be rejected from PDC and the
clearance will need to be delivered verbally.
29.4 No acknowledgment of receipt or readback is
required for a PDC.
29.5 In all situations, the pilot is encouraged to
contact clearance delivery if a question or concern
exists regarding an automated clearance.
30. Taxi Clearance
30.1 Pilots on IFR flight plans should communicate
with the control tower on the appropriate ground
control/clearance delivery frequency prior to starting
engines to receive engine start time, taxi, and/or
clearance information.
31. Taxi into Position and Hold (TIPH)
31.1 Taxi into position and hold is an air traffic
control (ATC) procedure designed to position an
aircraft onto the runway for an imminent departure.
The ATC instruction “POSITION AND HOLD” is
used to instruct a pilot to taxi onto the departure
runway in takeoff position and hold.
EXAMPLE-
Tower: “N234AR Runway 24L, position and hold.”
31.2 This ATC instruction is not an authorization to
takeoff. In instances where the pilot has been
instructed to “position and hold” and has been
30 AUG 07 14 FEB 31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-62
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
advised of a reason/condition (wake turbulence,
traffic on an intersecting runway, etc.) or the reason/
condition is clearly visible (another aircraft that has
landed on or is taking off on the same runway), and
the reason/condition is satisfied, the pilot should
expect an imminent takeoff clearance, unless advised
of a delay. If you are uncertain about any ATC
instruction or clearance, contact ATC immediately.
31.3 If a takeoff clearance is not received within a
reasonable amount of time after clearance to position
and hold, ATC should be contacted.
EXAMPLE-
Aircraft: Cessna 234AR holding in position Runway 24L.
Aircraft: Cessna 234AR holding in position Runway 24L
at Bravo.
NOTE-
FAA analysis of accidents and incidents involving aircraft
holding in position indicate that two minutes or more
elapsed between the time the instruction was issued to
“position and hold” and the resulting event (e.g., landover
or go-around). Pilots should consider the length of time
that they have been holding in position whenever they
HAVE NOT been advised of any expected delay to
determine when it is appropriate to query the controller.
REFERENCE-
Advisory Circulars 91-73A, Part 91 and Part 135 Single-Pilot
Procedures during Taxi Operations, and 120-74A, Parts 91, 121, 125,
and 135 Flightcrew Procedures during Taxi Operations.
31.4 Situational awareness during position and hold
operations is enhanced by monitoring ATC
instructions/clearances issued to other aircraft. Pilots
should listen carefully if another aircraft is on
frequency that has a similar call sign and pay close
attention to communications between ATC and other
aircraft. If you are uncertain of an ATC instruction or
clearance, query ATC immediately. Care should be
taken to not inadvertently execute a clearance/
instruction for another aircraft.
31.5 Pilots should be especially vigilant when
conducting “position and hold” operations at night or
during reduced visibility conditions. They should
scan the full length of the runway and look for aircraft
on final approach or landing roll out when taxiing
onto a runway. ATC should be contacted anytime
there is a concern about a potential conflict.
31.6 When two or more runways are active, aircraft
may be instructed to “POSITION AND HOLD” on
two or more runways. When multiple runway
operations are being conducted, it is important to
listen closely for your call sign and runway. Be alert
for similar sounding call signs and acknowledge all
instructions with your call sign. When you are
holding in position and are not sure if the takeoff
clearance was for you, ask ATC before you begin
takeoff roll. ATC prefers that you confirm a takeoff
clearance rather than mistake another aircraft’s
clearance for your own.
31.7 When ATC issues intersection “position and
hold” and takeoff clearances, the intersection
designator will be used. If ATC omits the intersection
designator, call ATC for clarification.
EXAMPLE-
Aircraft: “Cherokee 234AR, Runway 24L at November 4,
position and hold.”
31.8 If landing traffic is a factor during position and
hold operations, ATC will inform the aircraft in
position of the closest traffic that has requested a full-
stop, touch-and-go, stop-and-go, or an unrestricted
low approach to the same runway. Pilots should take
care to note the position of landing traffic. ATC will
also advise the landing traffic when an aircraft is
authorized to “position and hold” on the same
runway.
EXAMPLE-
Tower: “Cessna 234AR, Runway 24L, position and hold.
Traffic a Boeing 737, six mile final.”
Tower: “Delta 1011, continue, traffic a Cessna 210
position and hold Runway 24L.”
NOTE-
ATC will normally withhold landing clearance to arrival
aircraft when another aircraft is in position and holding on
the runway.
31.9 Never land on a runway that is occupied by
another aircraft, even if a landing clearance was
issued. Do not hesitate to ask the controller about the
traffic on the runway and be prepared to execute a go-
around.
NOTE-
Always clarify any misunderstanding or confusion
concerning ATC instructions or clearances. ATC should be
advised immediately if there is any uncertainty about the
ability to comply with any of their instructions.
32. Departure Restrictions, Clearance Void
Times, Hold for Release, and Release Times
32.1 ATC may assign departure restrictions, clearance void times, hold for release, and release times,
when necessary, to separate departures from other
traffic or to restrict or regulate the departure flow.
30 AUG 07 14 FEB 08 31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-63
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
32.1.1 Clearance Void Times. A pilot may receive
a clearance, when operating from an airport without
a control tower, which contains a provision for the
clearance to be void if not airborne by a specific time.
A pilot who does not depart prior to the clearance void
time must advise ATC as soon as possible of his or her
intentions. ATC will normally advise the pilot of the
time allotted to notify ATC that the aircraft did not depart prior to the clearance void time. This time cannot
exceed 30 minutes. Failure of an aircraft to contact
ATC within 30 minutes after the clearance void time
will result in the aircraft being considered overdue
and search and rescue procedures initiated.
NOTE-
1. Other IFR traffic for the airport where the clearance is
issued is suspended until the aircraft has contacted ATC or
until 30 minutes after the clearance void time or 30 minutes
after the clearance release time if no clearance void time
is issued.
2. Pilots who depart at or after their clearance void time
are not afforded IFR separation and may be in violation of
14 CFR Section 91.173 which requires that pilots receive
an appropriate ATC clearance before operating IFR in
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace.
EXAMPLE-
Clearance void if not off by (clearance void time) and, if
required, if not off by (clearance void time) advise (facility)
not later than (time) of intentions.
32.1.2 Hold for Release. ATC may issue “hold for
release” instructions in a clearance to delay an aircrafts departure for traffic management reasons (i.e.,
weather, traffic volume, etc.). When ATC states in the
clearance, “hold for release,” the pilot may not depart
utilizing that IFR clearance until a release time or
additional instructions are issued by ATC. This does
not preclude the pilot from cancelling the IFR clearance with ATC and departing under VFR; but an IFR
clearance may not be available after departure. In
addition, ATC will include departure delay information in conjunction with “hold for release” instructions.
EXAMPLE-
(Aircraft identification) cleared to (destination) airport as
filed, maintain (altitude), and, if required (additional
instructions or information), hold for release, expect (time
in hours and/or minutes) departure delay.
32.1.3 Release Times. A “release time” is a
departure restriction issued to a pilot by ATC,
specifying the earliest time an aircraft may depart.
ATC will use “release times” in conjunction with
traffic management procedures and/or to separate a
departing aircraft from other traffic.
EXAMPLE-
(Aircraft identification) released for departure at (time in
hours and/or minutes).
32.1.4 Expect Departure Clearance Time
(EDCT). The EDCT is the runway release time
assigned to an aircraft included in traffic management
programs. Aircraft are expected to depart no earlier
than 5 minutes before, and no later than 5 minutes
after the EDCT.
32.2 If practical, pilots departing uncontrolled airports should obtain IFR clearances prior to becoming
airborne when two-way communication with the
controlling ATC facility is available.
33. Departure Control
33.1 Departure Control is an approach control function responsible for ensuring separation between departures. So as to expedite the handling of departures,
Departure Control may suggest a takeoff direction
other than that which may normally have been used
under VFR handling. Many times it is preferred to offer the pilot a runway that will require the fewest turns
after takeoff to place the pilot on course or selected
departure route as quickly as possible. At many locations particular attention is paid to the use of preferential runways for local noise abatement programs, and
route departures away from congested areas.
33.2 Departure Control utilizing radar will normally
clear aircraft out of the terminal area using instrument
departure procedures (DPs) via radio navigation aids.
When a departure is to be vectored immediately following takeoff, the pilot will be advised prior to takeoff of the initial heading to be flown but may not be
advised of the purpose of the heading. Pilots operating in a radar environment are expected to associate
departure headings with vectors to their planned route
of flight. When given a vector taking the aircraft off
a previously assigned nonradar route, the pilot will be
advised briefly what the vector is to achieve. Thereafter, radar service will be provided until the aircraft has
been reestablished “on-course” using an appropriate
navigation aid and the pilot has been advised of the
aircraft’s position; or, a handoff is made to another radar controller with further surveillance capabilities.
33.3 Controllers will inform pilots of the departure
control frequencies and, if appropriate, the transponder code before takeoff. Pilots should not operate
30 AUG 07 14 FEB 31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-64
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
their transponder until ready to start the takeoff roll,
except at ASDE-X facilities where transponders
should be transmitting “on” with altitude reporting
continuously while operating on the airport surface if
so equipped. Pilots should not change to the departure
control frequency until requested. Controllers may
omit the departure control frequency if a DP has or
will be assigned and the departure control frequency
is published on the DP.
34. Abbreviated IFR Departure Clearance
(Cleared . . . as Filed) Procedures
34.1 ATC facilities will issue an abbreviated IFR
departure clearance based on the ROUTE of flight
filed in the IFR flight plan, provided the filed route
can be approved with little or no revision. These
abbreviated clearance procedures are based on the
following conditions:
34.1.1 The aircraft is on the ground or it has departed
VFR and the pilot is requesting IFR clearance while
airborne.
34.1.2 That a pilot will not accept an abbreviated
clearance if the route or destination of a flight plan
filed with ATC has been changed by him/her or the
company or the operations officer before departure.
34.1.3 That it is the responsibility of the company or
operations office to inform the pilot when they make
a change to the filed flight plan.
34.1.4 That it is the responsibility of the pilot to
inform ATC in the initial call-up (for clearance) when
the filed flight plan has been either:
34.1.4.1 Amended.
34.1.4.2 Canceled and replaced with a new filed
flight plan.
NOTE-
The facility issuing a clearance may not have received the
revised route or the revised flight plan by the time a pilot
requests clearance.
34.2 Controllers will issue a detailed clearance when
they know that the original filed flight plan has been
changed or when the pilot requests a full route
clearance.
34.3 The clearance as issued will include the
destination airport filed in the flight plan.
34.4 ATC procedures now require the controller to
state the DP name, the current number and the DP
Transition name after the phrase “Cleared to
(destination) airport,” and prior to the phrase, “then
as filed,” for ALL departure clearances when the DP
or DP Transition is to be flown. The procedure applies
whether or not the DP is filed in the flight plan.
34.5 Standard Terminal Arrivals (STARs), when
filed in a flight plan, are considered a part of the filed
route of flight and will not normally be stated in an
initial departure clearance. If the ARTCC’s jurisdictional airspace includes both the departure airport and
the fix where a STAR or STAR Transition begins, the
STAR name, the current number, and the STAR
Transition name MAY be stated in the initial
clearance.
34.6 “Cleared to (destination) airport as filed” does
NOT include the en route altitude filed in a flight plan.
An en route altitude will be stated in the clearance or
the pilot will be advised to expect an assigned/filed
altitude within a given time frame or at a certain point
after departure. This may be done verbally in the
departure instructions or stated in the DP.
34.7 In a radar and a nonradar environment, the
controller will state “Cleared to (destination) airport
as filed” or:
34.7.1 If a DP or DP Transition is to be flown,
specify the DP name, the current DP number, the DP
Transition name, the assigned altitude/flight level,
and any additional instructions (departure control
frequency, beacon code assignment, etc.) necessary
to clear a departing aircraft via the DP/DP Transition
and the route filed.
EXAMPLE-
National Seven Twenty cleared to Miami Airport
Intercontinental one departure, Lake Charles transition
then as filed, maintain Flight Level two seven zero.
34.7.2 When there is no DP or when the pilot cannot
accept a DP, specify the assigned altitude/flight level,
and any additional instructions necessary to clear a
departing aircraft via an appropriate departure
routing and the route filed.
NOTE-
A detailed departure route description or a radar vector
may be used to achieve the desired departure routing.
34.7.3 If necessary to make a minor revision to the
filed route, specify the assigned DP/DP Transition (or
departure routing), the revision to the filed route, the
assigned altitude/flight level, and any additional
instructions necessary to clear a departing aircraft.
30 AUG 07 14 FEB 08 31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-65
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
EXAMPLE-
Jet Star One Four Two Four cleared to Atlanta Airport,
South Boston two departure then as filed except change
route to read South Boston Victor 20 Greensboro, maintain
one seven thousand.
34.7.4 Additionally, in a nonradar environment,
specify one or more fixes as necessary to identify the
initial route of flight.
EXAMPLE-
Cessna Three One Six Zero Foxtrot cleared to Charlotte
Airport as filed via Brooke, maintain seven thousand.
34.8 To ensure success of the program, pilots should:
34.8.1 Avoid making changes to a filed flight plan
just prior to departure.
34.8.2 State the following information in the initial
call-up to the facility when no change has been made
to the filed flight plan: Aircraft call sign, location,
type operation (IFR), and the name of the airport (or
fix) to which you expect clearance.
EXAMPLE-
“Washington clearance delivery (or ground control if
appropriate) American Seventy Six at gate one, IFR Los
Angeles.”
34.8.3 If the flight plan has been changed, state the
change and request a full route clearance.
EXAMPLE-
“Washington clearance delivery, American Seventy Six at
gate one. IFR San Francisco. My flight plan route has been
amended (or destination changed). Request full route
clearance.”
34.8.4 Request verification or clarification from
ATC if ANY portion of the clearance is not clearly
understood.
34.8.5 When requesting clearance for the IFR
portion of a VFR-IFR flight, request such clearance
prior to the fix where IFR operation is proposed to
commence in sufficient time to avoid delay. Use the
following phraseology:
EXAMPLE-
“Los Angeles center, Apache Six One Papa, VFR
estimating Paso Robles VOR at three two, one thousand
five hundred, request IFR to Bakersfield.”
35. Instrument Departure Procedures (DP) -
Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODP) and
Standard Instrument Departures (SID)
35.1 Instrument departure procedures are preplanned instrument flight rule (IFR) procedures
which provide obstruction clearance from the terminal area to the appropriate en route structure. There
are two types of DPs, Obstacle Departure Procedures
(ODPs), printed either textually or graphically, and
Standard Instrument Departures (SIDs), always
printed graphically. All DPs, either textual or graphic
may be designed using either conventional or RNAV
criteria. RNAV procedures will have RNAV printed
in the title, e.g., SHEAD TWO DEPARTURE
(RNAV). ODPs provide obstruction clearance via the
least onerous route from the terminal area to the appropriate en route structure. 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. Graphic ODPs will have (OB-
STACLE) printed in the procedure title, e.g., GEYSR
THREE DEPARTURE (OBSTACLE), or, CROWN
ONE DEPARTURE (RNAV)(OBSTACLE). Standard Instrument Departures are air traffic control
(ATC) procedures printed for pilot/controller use in
graphic form to provide obstruction clearance and a
transition from the terminal area to the appropriate
en route structure. SIDs are primarily designed for
system enhancement and to reduce pilot/controller
workload. ATC clearance must be received prior to
flying a SID. All DPs provide the pilot with a way to
depart the airport and transition to the en route structure safely. Pilots operating under 14 CFR Part 91 are
strongly encouraged to file and fly a DP at night, during marginal Visual Meteorological Conditions
(VMC) and Instrument Meteorological Conditions
(IMC), when one is available. The following paragraphs will provide an overview of the DP program,
why DPs are developed, what criteria are used, where
to find them, how they are to be flown, and finally pilot and ATC responsibilities.
35.2 Why are DPs necessary? The primary reason is
to provide obstacle clearance protection information
to pilots. A secondary reason, at busier airports, is to
increase efficiency and reduce communications and
departure delays through the use of SIDs. When an instrument approach is initially developed for an airport, the need for DPs is assessed. The procedure designer conducts an obstacle analysis to support
departure operations. If an aircraft may turn in any
direction from a runway within the limits of the
assessment area (see paragraph 35.3.2) and remain
clear of obstacles, that runway passes what is called
a diverse departure assessment and no ODP will be
30 AUG 07 14 FEB 31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-66
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
published. A SID may be published if needed for air
traffic control purposes. However, if an obstacle
penetrates what is called the 40:1 obstacle identification surface, then the procedure designer chooses
whether to:
35.2.1 Establish a steeper than normal climb
gradient; or
35.2.2 Establish a steeper than normal climb
gradient with an alternative that increases takeoff
minima to allow the pilot to visually remain clear of
the obstacle(s); or
35.2.3 Design and publish a specific departure route;
or
35.2.4 A combination or all of the above.
35.3 What criteria is used to provide obstruction
clearance during departure?
35.3.1 Unless specified otherwise, required obstacle
clearance for all departures, including diverse, is
based on the pilot crossing the departure end of the
runway at least 35 feet above the departure end of
runway elevation, climbing to 400 feet above the
departure end of runway elevation before making the
initial turn, and maintaining a minimum climb
gradient of 200 feet per nautical mile (FPNM), unless
required to level off by a crossing restriction, until the
minimum IFR altitude. A greater climb gradient may
be specified in the DP to clear obstacles or to achieve
an ATC crossing restriction. If an initial turn higher
than 400 feet above the departure end of runway
elevation is specified in the DP, the turn should be
commenced at the higher altitude. If a turn is
specified at a fix, the turn must be made at that fix.
Fixes may have minimum and/or maximum crossing
altitudes that must be adhered to prior to passing the
fix. In rare instances, obstacles that exist on the
extended runway centerline may make an “early
turn” more desirable than proceeding straight ahead.
In these cases, the published departure instructions
will include the language “turn left(right) as soon as
practicable.” These departures will also include a
ceiling and visibility minimum of at least 300 and 1.
Pilots encountering one of these DPs should preplan
the climb out to gain altitude and begin the turn as
quickly as possible within the bounds of safe
operating practices and operating limitations. This
type of departure procedure is being phased out.
NOTE-
“Practical” or “feasible” may exist in some existing
departure text instead of “practicable.”
35.3.2 The 40:1 obstacle identification surface (OIS)
begins at the departure end of runway (DER) and
slopes upward at 152 FPNM until reaching the
minimum IFR altitude or entering the en route
structure. This assessment area is limited to 25 NM
from the airport in nonmountainous areas and 46 NM
in designated mountainous areas. Beyond this
distance, the pilot is responsible for obstacle
clearance if not operating on a published route, if
below (having not reached) the MEA or MOCA of a
published route, or an ATC assigned altitude. See
FIG ENR 1.5-34. (Ref 14 CFR 91.177 for further
information on en route altitudes.)
NOTE-
ODPs are normally designed to terminate within these
distance limitations, however, some ODPs will contain
routes that may exceed 25/46 NM; these routes will insure
obstacle protection until reaching the end of the ODP.
35.3.3 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. The purpose of this note 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, e.g.,
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 maneuver may be necessary
immediately after takeoff to avoid the obstruction(s).
30 AUG 07 14 FEB 08 31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-67
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration Nineteenth Edition
FIG ENR 1.5-34
Diverse Departure Obstacle Assessment to 25/46 NM
35.3.4 Climb gradients greater than 200 FPNM are
specified when required for obstacle clearance and/or
ATC required crossing restrictions.
EXAMPLE-
“Cross ALPHA intersection at or below 4000; maintain
6000.” The pilot climbs at least 200 FPNM to 6000. If 4000
is reached before ALPHA, the pilot levels off at 4000 until
passing ALPHA; then immediately resumes at least
200 FPNM climb.
35.3.5 Climb gradients may be specified only to an
altitude/fix, above which the normal gradient applies.
EXAMPLE-
“Minimum climb 340 FPNM to ALPHA.” The pilot climbs
at least 340 FPNM to ALPHA, then at least 200 FPNM to
MIA.
35.3.6 Some DPs established solely for obstacle
avoidance require a climb in visual conditions to
cross the airport or an on-airport NAVAID in a
specified direction, at or above a specified altitude.
These procedures are called Visual Climb Over the
Airport (VCOA).
EXAMPLE-
“Climb in visual conditions so as to cross the McElory
Airport southbound, at or above 6000, then climb via
Keemmling radial zero three three to Keemmling
VORTAC.”
35.4 Who is responsible for obstacle clearance? DPs
are designed so that adherence to the procedure by the
pilot will ensure obstacle protection. Additionally:
35.4.1 Obstacle clearance responsibility also rests
with the pilot when he/she chooses to climb in visual
conditions in lieu of flying a DP and/or depart under
increased takeoff minima rather than fly the climb
gradient. Standard takeoff minima are one statute
mile for aircraft having two engines or less and
one-half statute mile for aircraft having more than
two engines. Specified ceiling and visibility minima
(VCOA or increased takeoff minima) will allow
visual avoidance of obstacles until the pilot enters the
standard obstacle protection area. Obstacle avoidance is not guaranteed if the pilot maneuvers farther
from the airport than the specified visibility minimum
prior to reaching the specified altitude. DPs may also
contain what are called Low Close in Obstacles.
These obstacles are less than 200 feet above the
departure end of runway elevation and within
one NM of the runway end, and do not require
increased takeoff minimums. These obstacles are
identified on the SID chart or in the Take-off
Minimums and (Obstacle) Departure Procedures
section of the U. S. Terminal Procedure booklet.
These obstacles are especially critical to aircraft that
do not lift off until close to the departure end of the
runway or which climb at the minimum rate. Pilots
should also consider drift following lift-off to ensure
sufficient clearance from these obstacles. That
segment of the procedure that requires the pilot to see
and avoid obstacles ends when the aircraft crosses the
specified point at the required altitude. In all cases
continued obstacle clearance is based on having
31 JULY 08
AIP ENR 1.5-68
United States of America 15 MAR 07
Federal Aviation Administration
Nineteenth Edition
climbed a minimum of 200 feet per nautical mile to
the specified point and then continuing to climb at
least 200 foot per nautical mile during the departure
until reaching the minimum enroute altitude, unless
specified otherwise.
35.4.2 ATC may assume responsibility for obstacle
clearance by vectoring the aircraft prior to reaching
the minimum vectoring altitude by using a Diverse
Vector Area (DVA). The DVA has been assessed for
departures which do not follow a specific ground
track. ATC may also vector an aircraft off a
previously assigned DP. In all cases, the 200 FPNM
climb gradient is assumed and obstacle clearance is
not provided by ATC until the controller begins to
provide navigational guidance in the form of radar
vectors.
NOTE-
When used by the controller during departure, the term
“radar contact” should not be interpreted as relieving
pilots of their responsibility to maintain appropriate
terrain and obstruction clearance which may include
flying the obstacle DP.
