Flight planning

[downscc 1,327]

Glad you guys are sharing all this... very interesting indeed.Are any of the published SIDs for non-turbojet only that we will never use in the 737/747/MD11?

[tango4 4]

Actually, yes, some are, in a way.More than a Jet/Propeller separation, most departures are resticted to aircraft requesting higher than FL195/115 for cruise. But the departure is the same wether it is a jet or a propeller. What will change is the initial flight level (higher for jets , of course).For aircraft requesting lower than FL195, a certain departure must be followed, or radar vectors, depending on the departure.Below Fl115, the departure must be compliant for non RNAV aircraft.We have 4 general directions for departures: North, West, South, East. I'll try to summarize each of them to tell you what you can delete.North departures: -RFL(Requested Flight Level)>115 : 3 Rnav departures (Opale,Atrex,Nurmo) -RFL<115: initial departure(basically, on runway centerline using PGS or CGN VOR's), then Vectors to MTDWest departures: -RFL>115 : 2Rnav departures (EVX,LGL) -RFL<115 : same thing ! Those departures are also conventionalSouth departures:-RFL>195 : 5Rnav departures (Agopa, Erixu,Latra,Okasi, Pilul) (the 1Y deps are for low performance jets facing west for environmental reasons) -RFL<195 AND ALL PROPELLERS (this is an exception, we like being complicated in France !!): 3 conventional departures (DORDI,MONOT,PTV)East Departures:-RFL>195: 3 Rnav Departures (Ranux,Lanvi,Bubli) -115<RFl<195: 2RNAV departures: (Dikol,Baxir) -RFL<115 : basically, initial departures then radar vectors to NIPOR or ALIMOThe other published departures are OL,BVS and are just for Orly or Beauvais airport, so you won't probably use them !I hope I did not forget too many things...Charles

[michal 44]

This make Paris one of the most complex airspace in Europe, together with London and Amsterdam.

I don't think it even compares with complexity around NYC where you not only have 3 mega airports (LGA, JFK and EWR) plus the whole array of very busy general aviation airports - Westchester County, Linden, Essex, Teterboro, all in very close proximity etc. And if you look at all the DPs - their number is definitely quite normal, for example KJFK has less than 20 DPs, LGA less than 5 (!!) and EWR less than 10. So rather than the number of airports in close proximity it must be other reason (too many bureaucrats with nothing to do??) when number of DPs is so high.

[downscc 1,327]

Excuse me, it will take a few minutes to swallow all of this but how exciting to gain this insight.I have also downloaded the ARR DEP info from Eurocontrol via PAMS Light, indeed there is a lot here to read and absorb.Many thanks, Charles.

[downscc 1,327]

I don't think it even compares with complexity around NYC where you not only have 3 mega airports (LGA, JFK and EWR) plus the whole array of very busy general aviation airports - Westchester County, Linden, Essex, Teterboro, all in very close proximity etc. And if you look at all the DPs - their number is definitely quite normal, for example KJFK has less than 20 DPs. So rather than the number of airports in close proximity it must be other reason (too many bureaucrats with nothing to do??) when number of DPs is so high.

I thought the same thing at first but remember the US and Europe have different methods of organizing terminal procedures. Many of our DPs will have one departure gate but multiple transitions and they are not normally associated with specific runways unless they are RNAV and even then all runways are in the same procedure. Just a different way of doing things.You can't point to the FAA and say it doesn't have too many bureaucrats with nothing to do; otherwise we would have RNAV terminal procedures for arrivals/departures for KEWR/KJFK/KLGA instead of thier bickering over individual pieces of airspace.

[tango4 4]

Excuse me, it will take a few minutes to swallow all of this but how exciting to gain this insight.I have also downloaded the ARR DEP info from Eurocontrol via PAMS Light, indeed there is a lot here to read and absorb.Many thanks, Charles.

You're welcome !If you have some questions, no problem, but the answers will most likely be for tomorrow, I'll be going to bed shortly (it's midnight in Paris )!That should give you some time to absorb ;)Charles

[michal 44]

You can't point to the FAA and say it doesn't have too many bureaucrats with nothing to do; otherwise we would have RNAV terminal procedures for arrivals/departures for KEWR/KJFK/KLGA instead of thier bickering over individual pieces of airspace.

Well, FAA bureaucrats certainly exist and are doing well but clearly they get much more done than their European counterparts and abundance of RNAV/WAAS procedures are primary example!! And since RNAV procedures at this point are better suited for GA traffic (aircraft equipment) hence where their development is being concentrated and prioritized - on RNAV approaches, we all know that GA traffic uses DPs and STARs to much lesser extent. At this point if I am not mistaken there are more published RNAV/WAAS approaches in the US than ILS approaches. At my local Hayward airport I have precision RNAV LPV approach when only 2 years ago there was none. The rest will come (like RNAV IFR routes) but clearly no other country at this point is even close behind ...

[trisager 2]

@michal: OK, granted, you have the most complex airspace and the most efficient bureaucrats. Now, can we please get out of kindergarten-mode?Tom

[downscc 1,327]

True, we are lucky in that we have general aviation, whereas the user fees in Europe has all but killed it there.But I have a problem with the inability of the FAA to fix the NJ/NY flow problems... if you read the reports online it almost seems as if there is a turf battle between ARTCC and TRACONs going on there and not enough pressure from above to settle it. Take JFK for example, all traffic flow overflying the US arrives either on LENDY or CAMRN and if there are thunderstorms over central NY state it all has to be rerouted over the southern CAMRN arrival path. Most locations have limits to operations based on runway capacity but JFK is limited by the airspace structure. Center wants to create a "super approach" to facilitate better management of the airspace (think SoCAL Approach) but the NY Approach and surrounding TRACONs are fighting it (the last I researched this was six months ago, so maybe progress has been made).When I was referring to lack of RNAV terminal procedures, I specifically had in mind jet departures. There are good examples of how to do this at KDFW, KATL, KLAS etc., but neither at KEWR/KJFK/KLGA nothing yet. What about KORD? They don't even have a published departure route, every flight has to be individually vectored. Sounds like a save-a-controllers-job strategy to me.EDIT: Apologies to Tom. I will get off my soapbox now. :(

[michal 44]

@michal: OK, granted, you have the most complex airspace and the most efficient bureaucrats.

Loosen up man, this is light conversation about real life aviation and the subject matter is quite legit.

[madtun 2]

KATL took many years since the late 70s and early 80s to come up with a simple parallel runway and perpendicular terminal systems. I know the SIDs out of KATL by heart. There are only 7 SIDs you have to learn and the rest is easy. This is why Atlanta is simple. Here is how I do KATL.Bravs - flights headed towards FloridaCadit - flights headed towards IlliniosGeetk- flights headed towards CaliforniaJCKTS - flights headed towards TexasNovss - flights headed towards state of La.Nuggt - flights heading NorthSummit- flights heading towards BostonThere are different number combinations of the above SIDs but knowing the basics it is even easy to guess the correct SID. Star approaches are not as simple.