Looking at that picture above, what stands out to me is the NAT track is significantly closer to land for the average of the flight. The flight path also crosses the north Atlantic ocean between the two closest points of land from North America to Europe.

 

As a passenger, I wouldn't want to put all my hopes in an ETOPS rated aircraft. Having extra land which = more airfields to land at in case of emergency.

Plus, the NAT tracks are carefully selected to make use of the best winds, which in the end will save on fuel costs. What's sad is I think most companies would rather save the fuel as a priority over having more airports in range for an emergency landing. :P

I am not sure that it is mandatory that you 'have' to file a NAT...but anywho...here is a 'random' route over the pond real world flight plan...EGLL-CYYT.

 

CPT UL9 KENET UN14 MEDOG UN14 PEMOB UN30 BANBA LIMRI 5300N 02000W 5300N 03000W 5200N 04000W 4900N 05000W LOGSU YYT

 

This was for ACA823, departed EGLL at 1300GMT...I am thinking this is scheduled to depart just after the end time for the daily Westbound NATs.

 

Maybe a regular pond hopper can jump in and shed some light?

With my type of flying we regularly have to go against the flow of traffic in the NAT, because of this we end up with one of two routing options... A OFP with the fuel calculated for us to fly below the OTS (NAT tracks) or we would fly a "random route" which may be partially in OTS airspace... Of course with either route we would be in receipt of an oceanic clearence.

 

With regards to your question, I would run two plans one a random route remaining outside of OTS airspace and a route using the most appropriate NAT. See which one is most cost effective for you use.

 

Sometimes you can fly further quicker.. Depending on where the jetsream is on that day... If it is lay to the south you could find yourself with a 100+kt headwind.

 

Also, we would need to start looking at the certification of your 737NG in terms of your approved diversion time. Are you 120, 138 minutes approved etc

 

Are your adequate airports suitable? Ie is the weather above ETOPs planning minima for the flight?

Plus, the NAT tracks are carefully selected to make use of the best winds, which in the end will save on fuel costs. What's sad is I think most companies would rather save the fuel as a priority over having more airports in range for an emergency landing. :P

 

I'm sure they'll reconsider that policy just as soon as people decide which airline to fly on based on the maximum distance to alternate airports, rather than by the ticket price. ;)

Yes if you file a NAT track in your flightplan you must follow it, since you don't really have much communications and traffic awareness (in the real world). But if you look at this flight from Madrid to Miami, it pretty much follows the great circle. http://flightaware.c...1000Z/LEMD/KMIA Also take a look at the route which tells you the coordinates. Unfortunately I couldn't really figure out the routes on flightaware from flights "apparrently" following NAT tracks.

 

None of this is true, no offense. I don't think giving professional advice when you aren't sure yourself is such a good idea. Luckily this is only a simulator.

 

The flight you linked is going from Miami to Madrid, do you see it going in the North Atlantic? NAT stands for "North Atlantic Tracks" not "Atlantic Tracks."

There are routes from Central, South America and the Caribbean that are different from the NATs.

 

Also Flightaware is inaccurate when following airplanes that leave the US mainland, so you will never get accurate flight path lines from any of those flights.

 

Your best bet is to listen into atc in the exit and entry areas, Newfoundland and Shannon on the European side.

 

Hi all,

 

Wishing to fly from EGSS (London Stansted) to CYYT (St Johns, Canada), using NAT TRACK F, entering at MALOT, exiting at YAY.

 

Drawing a single line direct route without any waypoints between these airports result in a distance of 2020 or so NM. However, flying the above NAT TRACK from end-to-end gives a distance of over 2300 NM. An extra distance of 300 or more NM. Mainly, because the last two waypoints (HECKK and YAY) are situated quite off the intended course, and after reaching YAY, a 90 degree left turn, followed by hundreds of miles flying south will take us finally to CYYT.

 

However, IF it is possible to drop at least the last two waypoints, the distance could be reduced by at least 200 NM. I would like to know if airlines usually fly a NAT TRACK from the very first waypoint to the very last, or is it "possible" to just simply exit the track earlier? Flying from Stansted to St Johns (but in general, from Britain to Newfoundland and Nova Scotia) would not necessaily be that long if some of the last waypoints of the NAT TRACK were simply ignored. My question is, if it's a common practice or not at all.

 

Thanks for your inputs.

 

I am not sure the procedure and if you can request direct to another waypoint without flying into the entry point, you might want to post on pprune or airliners.net to get a professional response.

Not all Aircraft follow NAT Tracks. More than you'd suspect get what they call ''RANDOM ROUTE'' and looking at that route that would definitely be the case. Agree with the person that says find a route of FlightAware as I tend to always use Real World Routes. They base the NAT tracks on Weather normally too. Normally the NAT Tracks going Eastbound they'll try and give them Tailwinds as it gives a Shorter flight time as you know. Lots of factors :)

The only way you don't follow the NATS is if as a poster previously said, you are going against the route traffic. The rush hour each way is designed for one way traffic, if you are corporate or cargo and fly different schedules, you follow different routes but they still go along the similar paths to NATs.

You fly the oceanic part as provided starting at the oceanic entry point to the oceanic exit point. You only fly off the track when you have an emergency.

 

Whether the tracks are daily tracks or custom tracks, you fly them the same.

 

The official tracks are available here. No registration required and are the actual real-world tracks. https://www.notams.faa.gov/common/nat.html

 

Note that due to the fact they are the actual tracks, that you will need to pick your time of day to look them up as they are deleted once they are invalid for that day.

 

The current tracks are always at the top with a white background. The opposite direction tracks for later in the day or the next morning, if available, appear with a blue background underneath. Be sure to check the validity period and direction of flight to ensure you have the correct information. Everything you need is contained there, including the TMI (Track Message Indicator).

 

Best regards,

Robin.

Yes if you file a NAT track in your flightplan you must follow it, since you don't really have much communications and traffic awareness (in the real world). But if you look at this flight from Madrid to Miami, it pretty much follows the great circle. http://flightaware.c...1000Z/LEMD/KMIA Also take a look at the route which tells you the coordinates. Unfortunately I couldn't really figure out the routes on flightaware from flights "apparrently" following NAT tracks.

 

None of this is true, no offense. I don't think giving professional advice when you aren't sure yourself is such a good idea. Luckily this is only a simulator. The flight you linked is going from Miami to Madrid, do you see it going in the North Atlantic? NAT stands for "North Atlantic Tracks" not "Atlantic Tracks." There are routes from Central, South America and the Caribbean that are different from the NATs. Also Flightaware is inaccurate when following airplanes that leave the US mainland, so you will never get accurate flight path lines from any of those flights. Your best bet is to listen into atc in the exit and entry areas, Newfoundland and Shannon on the European side.

 

 

 

None of this is true? If you already know all this, then no offence taken and maybe someone else will learn a thing or two. I might have stepped lightly over the subject making it less correct.

First of all the flight is indeed going from Madrid to Miami. Maybe you looked at flightaware when it was showing something else, but it is a daily flight. But again flightaware is very inaccurate outside of the US as you state.

 

I know what NAT stands for, thank you. But I think you’re incorrect yourself.

 

Turbines are most fuel efficient at the altitude where the air is coldest (densest) for engine performance. The air is coldest at the tropopause but whilst the air above the tropopause is less dense, the temperature remains near constant and therefore there is little advantage to be gained by climbing above the tropopause. Hence, all the traffic flying across the North Atlantic will want to cruise at or just about the tropopause. At 40*N this will be about FL400 whereas at 55*N this will be about FL350. Of course subject to change on a daily basis. This concentrate almost all the traffic at about these latitudes.

 

IBE6123 is flying within the NAT region, but not on an organised track. The OTS (Organised Tracks System) is established in order to permit the optimum use of the NAT region airspace. The area control centres serving Gander Oceanic, New York Oceanic, Santa Maria Oceanic and Shanwick Oceanic control areas may, subject to coordination with each other and, when appropriate, with Reykjavik Area Control Centre, establish an organized track system, creating the so called (NAT tracks). Generally, an organised track is a great circle track with the most favorable wind. Within the NAT region, the area over the ocean and northwards towards the North Pole is designated as MNPS airspace (Minimum Navigation Performance Specification) and certain minimum standards are expected from the aircrafts flying within that airspace. RNP requirement is RNP20. In order to achieve RNP20, aircraft have to be fitted with two approved long-range navigation equipments in case of a navigation system failure. Approved LRNSs are: GPS, INS/IRS, and LORAN C (whoever flies with that?!). The airspace is also RVSM but since the OTS are designed to make one-way tracks more flight levels can be assigned going in the same direction.

 

The ‘tidal flow’ occurs generally because of the flights leaving Europe in the morning or around noon to take advantage of the daylight. A return flight from North America to Europe during the daytime would be wasteful as it would arrive in the evening instead as in early morning as they usually do. There has to be some order as well on how to manage the traffic going eastwards and that going westwards. So a OTS changeover is established in order not to make conflicts with aircraft flying towards each other on the same flight level. Therefore the OTS period is defined at 30*W (where Gander Oceanic and Shanwick Oceanic meets). So an aircraft that wish to fly on the OTS must plan to cross 30*W within the period of the valid OTS time to be able to fly the entire route as a NAT track. But conflicts could still happen. That’s why a buffer period is established to allow a flight to complete its planned route before another flight is going to fly in the opposite direction. OTS Daytime (westbound) are valid between 1130z to 1900z at 30*W. And nighttime OTS (eastbound) are valid between 0100z to 0800z at 30*W.

 

Routing can be done differently. You can either follow an OTS or you can follow a Random Route. If you follow on OTS the first position after the identifier is the entry point. (A SUNOT 58/20). So this is an example of OTS track A and the entry point is SUNOT followed by 58N20W. This can be either a Lat/Long and can be written as 58/20 meaning 5800N02000W or it can be a named position, like SUNOT. However flying an OTS is not mandatory. Operators may plan to use other routes. Those are called Random Routes. A Random Route could be the reciprocal of an OTS track, part of an OTS track, a track that crosses 30*W outside of the OTS valid times, a track that is completely outside of the OTS or it could pass one or more OTS tracks. However the OACCs (Oceanic Area Control Centres) may apply any restrictions to a random route in order to protect the OTS tracks. Planning to use a FL not applicable to an OTS tracks would be appropriate.

 

If an airplane flying in the NAT MNPS airspace encounters wake turbulence and the pilot considers it necessary, it is allowed to chance the aircrafts track to be offset from that of the aircraft causing the turbulence. That’s called Standard Lateral Offset Procedure or SLOP. It allows the commander to offset his track alongside the cleared track by either 1nm or 2nm to the right, from the centreline of the cleared track.

 

There are routes from Central, South America and the Caribbean that are different from the NATs.

 

Yes. Those are outside of the NAT region. And none of this really apply there.

 

Hope this clarifies some things. :Peace:

That was pretty much his point:

The linked flight from South America didn't relate directly to NATs, therefore it doesn't really fit within the question posed in the original post.

 

And I'm not sure if you meant to do it or not, but the bold text really makes it difficult to read. Just sayin'. Personal opinion, that's all.

That was pretty much his point:

The linked flight from South America didn't relate directly to NATs, therefore it doesn't really fit within the question posed in the original post.

 

And I'm not sure if you meant to do it or not, but the bold text really makes it difficult to read. Just sayin'. Personal opinion, that's all.

 

No, the bold text was unintentional. I dunno why it did that. It annoys me as well :Waiting: Just changed it. :Peace:

 

Ohh and btw. There are much more valuable information in ICAO Doc 7030 NAT SUPPs.

No, the bold text was unintentional.

 

Figured it was. The new editor does some weird things with me and Chrome, so I feel ya.