ALTERNATE MINIMUMS FOR COMMERCIAL OPERATORS
IFR alternate minimums for Part 121 and 135 operators
are very specific and have more stringent requirements
than Part 91 operators.
Part 121 operators are required by their OpsSpecs and
Parts 121.617 and 121.625 to have a takeoff alternate
airport for their departure airport in addition to their airport
of intended landing if the weather at the departure
airport is below the landing minimums in the certificate
holder’s OpsSpecs for that airport. The alternate must be
within two hours flying time for an aircraft with three or
more engines with an engine out in normal cruise in still
air. For two engine aircraft, the alternate must be within
one hour. The airport of intended landing may be used
in lieu of an alternate providing it meets all the requirements.
Part 121 operators must also file for alternate
airports when the weather at their destination airport,
from one hour before to one hour after their ETA, is
forecast to be below a 2,000-foot ceiling and/or less
than 3 miles visibility.
For airports with at least one operational navigational
facility that provides a straight-in non-precision
approach, a straight-in precision approach, or a circling
maneuver from an instrument approach procedure determine
the ceiling and visibility by:
- Adding 400 feet to the authorized CAT I HAA/HAT for ceiling.
- Adding one mile to the authorized CAT I visibility for visibility minimums.
This is but one example of the criteria required for Part
121 operators when calculating minimums. Part 135
operators are also subject to their own specific rules
regarding the selection and use of alternate minimums
as outlined in their OpsSpecs and Part 135.219 through
Part 135.225, and they differ widely from those used by
Part 121 operators.
Typically, dispatchers who plan flights for these operators
are responsible for planning alternate airports. The
dispatcher considers aircraft performance, aircraft
equipment and its condition, and route of flight when
choosing alternates. In the event changes need to be
made to the flight plan en route due to deteriorating
weather, the dispatcher will maintain contact with the
flight crew and will reroute their flight as necessary.
Therefore, it is the pilot’s responsibility to execute the
flight as planned by the dispatcher; this is especially true
for Part 121 pilots. To aid in the planning of alternates,
dispatchers have a list of airports that are approved as
alternates so they can quickly determine which airports
should be used for a particular flight. Dispatchers also
use flight-planning software that plans routes including
alternates for the flight. This type of software is tailored for individual operators and includes their normal flight
paths and approved airports. Flight planning software
and services are provided through private sources.
Though the pilot is the final authority for the flight and
ultimately has full responsibility, the dispatcher is
responsible for creating flight plans that are accurate and
comply with the CFRs. Alternate minimum criteria are
only used as planning tools to ensure the pilot-in-command
and dispatcher are thinking ahead to the approach
phase of flight. In the event the flight would actually
need to divert to an alternate, the published approach
minimums or lower-than-standard minimums must be
used as addressed in OpsSpecs documents.
DEPARTURE PROCEDURES
Departure procedures are preplanned routes that provide
transitions from the departure airport to the en route
structure. Primarily, these procedures are designed to
provide obstacle protection for departing aircraft. They
also allow for efficient routing of traffic and reductions
in pilot/controller workloads. These procedures come in
many forms, but they are all based on the design criteria
outlined in TERPS and other FAA orders. The A/FD
includes information on high altitude redesign RNAV
routing pitch points, preferred IFR routings, or other
established routing programs where a flight can begin a
segment of nonrestrictive routing.
DESIGN CRITERIA
The design of a departure procedure is based on TERPS,
a living document that is updated frequently. Departure
design criterion assumes an initial climb of 200 feet per
nautical mile (NM) after crossing the departure end of
the runway (DER) at a height of at least 35 feet. [Figure
2-15] The aircraft climb path assumption provides a
minimum of 35 feet of additional obstacle clearance
above the required obstacle clearance (ROC), from the
DER outward, to absorb variations ranging from the
distance of the static source to the landing gear, to differences
in establishing the minimum 200 feet per NM
climb gradient, etc. The ROC is the planned separation
between the obstacle clearance surface (OCS) and the
required climb gradient of 200 feet per NM. The ROC
value is zero at the DER elevation and increases along
the departure route until the appropriate ROC value is
attained to allow en route flight to commence. It is
typically about 25 NM for 1,000 feet of ROC in nonmountainous
areas, and 46 NM for 2,000 feet of ROC
in mountainous areas.
Recent changes in TERPS criteria make the OCS lower
and more restrictive. [Figure 2-16 on page 2-14]
However, there are many departures today that were
evaluated under the old criteria [Figure 2-15] that
allowed some obstacle surfaces to be as high as 35 feet
at the DER. Since there is no way for the pilot to determine
whether the departure was evaluated using the previous or current criteria and until all departures have
been evaluated using the current criteria, pilots need to
be very familiar with the departure environment and
associated obstacles especially if crossing the DER at
less than 35 feet.
Assuming a 200-foot per NM climb, the departure is
structured to provide at least 48 feet per NM of clearance
above objects that do not penetrate the obstacle
slope. The slope, known as the OCS, is based on a 40 to
1 ratio, which is the equivalent of a 2.5 percent or a 152-
foot per NM slope. As a result, a departure is designed
using the OCS as the minimum obstacle clearance, and
then by requiring a minimum climb gradient of 200 feet
per NM, additional clearance is provided. The departure
design must also include the acquisition of positive
course guidance (PCG) typically within 5 to 10 NM of
the DER for straight departures and within 5 NM after
turn completion on departures requiring a turn. Even
when aircraft performance greatly exceeds the minimum
climb gradient, the published departure routing must
always be flown.
Airports declaring that the sections of a runway at one
or both ends are not available for landing or takeoff publish
the declared distances in the A/FD. These include takeoff runway available (TORA), takeoff distance
available (TODA), accelerate-stop distance available
(ASDA), and landing distance available (LDA). These
distances are calculated by adding to the full length of
paved runway, any applicable clearway or stopway, and
subtracting from that sum the sections of the runway
unsuitable for satisfying the required takeoff run, takeoff,
accelerate/stop, or landing distance, as shown in
Figure 2-16 on page 2-14.
In a perfect world, the 40 to 1 slope would work for
every departure design; however, due to terrain and manmade
obstacles, it is often necessary to use alternative
requirements to accomplish a safe, obstacle-free departure
design. In such cases, the design of the departure
may incorporate a climb gradient greater than 200 feet
per NM, an increase in the standard takeoff minimums
to allow the aircraft to “see and avoid” the obstacles,
standard minimums combined with a climb gradient of
200 feet per NM or greater with a specified reduced runway
length, or a combination of these options and a specific
departure route. If a departure route is specified, it
must be flown in conjunction with the other options. A
published climb gradient in this case is based on the
ROC 24 percent rule. To keep the same ROC ratio as
standard, when the required climb gradient is greater
than 200 feet per NM, 24 percent of the total height above the starting elevation gained by an aircraft departing
to a minimum altitude to clear an obstacle that penetrates
the OCS is the ROC. The required climb gradient
depicted in ODPs is obtained by using the formulas:
These formulas are published in TERPS Volume 4 for
calculating the required climb gradient to clear obstacles.
The following formula is used for calculating climb gradients
for other than obstacles, i.e., ATC requirements:
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 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 TPP booklet.
The purpose of this note is to identify the obstacle and
alert the pilot to the height and location of the obstacle
so they can be avoided. [Figure 2-17]
Departure design, including climb gradients, does not
take into consideration the performance of the aircraft; it
only considers obstacle protection for all aircraft. TERPS
criteria assumes the aircraft is operating with all available
engines and systems fully functioning. When a climb gradient
is required for a specific departure, it is vital that
pilots fully understand the performance of their aircraft
and determine if it can comply with the required climb.
The standard climb of 200 feet per NM is not an issue for
most aircraft. When an increased climb gradient is specified
due to obstacle issues, it is important to calculate aircraft
performance, particularly when flying out of airports
at higher altitudes on warm days. To aid in the calculations,
the front matter of every TPP booklet contains a
rate of climb table that relates specific climb gradients
and typical airspeeds. [Figure 2-18 on page 2-16]
A visual climb over airport (VCOA) is an alternate
departure method for aircraft unable to meet required
climb gradients and for airports at which a conventional
instrument departure procedure is impossible to design
due to terrain or other obstacle hazard. The development of this type of procedure is required when obstacles
more than 3 SM from the DER require a greater than
200 feet per NM climb gradient. An example of this procedure
is visible at Nervino Airport in Beckwourth,
California. [Figure 2-19]
The procedure for climb in visual conditions requires
crossing Nervino Airport at or above 8,300 feet before
proceeding on course. Additional instructions often
complete the departure procedure and transition the
flight to the en route structure. VCOA procedures are
available on specific departure procedures, but are not
established in conjunction with SIDs or RNAV obstacle
departure procedures. Pilots must know if their specific
flight operations allow VCOA procedures on IFR departures.
|