two altitude markings on DP chart

NoHeat

NoHeat

En-Route
Joined
Jul 27, 2009
Messages
4,996
Location
Iowa City, IA
Display Name
Display name:
17
I've only used DPs a few times, because I usually don't go to big airports. Recently, however, I was at KSTL, St. Louis, getting my clearance, and I was told to take the CARDS9 departure, NEENS transition, SID altitude. No numbers were spoken in this clearance for the altitude -- I was just told "SID".

I already had the departure procedure chart, which I understand is the same thing as a "SID", and I had already studied it, but I declined the clearance because I couldn't figure out which altitude I should fly, by looking at the chart.
Screen Shot 2016-10-16 at 8.45.29 AM.png

The problem I faced is that unlike other DP charts I've used in the past, this chart has not just one, but two altitudes printed on each leg. The smaller of the two altitudes is marked with an asterisk, but with no explanation anywhere on the chart what the asterisk means.

Once I got home, I looked in a couple of FAA books, and I still couldn't find any authoritative statement of what that asterisk means on a DP.

This is what I'm guessing -- is it correct?
By analogy to a low en-route chart, the asterisk on a DP indicates a MOCA (minimum obstacle clearance altitude), and I should ignore it and use instead the larger altitude as part of my clearance.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2016-10-16 at 8.45.29 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2016-10-16 at 8.45.29 AM.png
    380.4 KB · Views: 27
When you're issued a climb via, look at page two an you'll see it says climb to 3000.
 
You go to 3,000(assuming you are a prop plane). Read the textual description. Yes, the asterisk is the minimum obstacle clearance.
 
The Instrument Procedures Handbook, page 1-34, Fig. 1-29, has an example of a SID with two altitudes, the plain one (15000) being the minimum enroute altitude (MEA) and the one with the asterisk (*10000) being the minimum obstacle clearance altitude (MOCA).

In your case, the text says,

Climb on assigned heading for vector to appropriate route
Maintain 3000 or assigned altitude...

No real experience, but I'd guess that the MOCA of *2200 is just a minimum altitude should ATC have a reason to assign something other than the default of 3000.
 
Last edited:
register@teamandras.com said:
In your case, the text says,

Climb on assigned heading for vector to appropriate route
Maintain 3000 or assigned altitude...
Click to expand...

Okay, thanks all, now I know to ignore the altitudes with asterisks when the controller gives me a clearance without assigning some other altitude.

Here's another question, about CARDS9 at KSTL. What's the altitude for the SPINNER transition, for a propeller airplane?

Here's why I ask this: On page 1, the chart indicates an altitude 2700 for that specific transition, but the text on page 2 says that non-turbojets should "Maintain 3000 or assigned altitude...", and in doing so, it doesn't distinguish any transitions. So, if you were given a clearance of CARDS9, SPINNER transition, SIDS altitude, with no number otherwise specified for the altitude, would you climb to 2700 or 3000?
 
NoHeat said:
Okay, thanks all, now I know to ignore the altitudes with asterisks when the controller gives me a clearance without assigning some other altitude.

Here's another question, about CARDS9 at KSTL. What's the altitude for the SPINNER transition, for a propeller airplane?

Here's why I ask this: On page 1, the chart indicates an altitude 2700 for that specific transition, but the text on page 2 says that non-turbojets should "Maintain 3000 or assigned altitude...", and in doing so, it doesn't distinguish any transitions. So, if you were given a clearance of CARDS9, SPINNER transition, SIDS altitude, with no number otherwise specified for the altitude, would you climb to 2700 or 3000?
Click to expand...
Maintain 3000. Some SIDs have different instructions for every runway. You lucked out on this one as it's a pretty simple one. If you are still unsure about it, always ask. Also doesn't hurt to brush up on IFR stuff. After not being on instruments for about a year and half, I re read parts of the instrument flying handbook and instrument procedures handbook.
 
NoHeat said:
Why is that?

Are you saying that in case of conflicting numbers on the chart vs text, choose the text?

Or is there some other reason?
Click to expand...
No. Page two gives you the instructions. The numbers in the graphical depiction are MEA and MOCA not your climb instructions.

Climb on assigned heading for vector to appropriate route
TURBOJET AIRCRAFT: Maintain 5000 or assigned altitude, thence . . . .
ALL OTHERS: Maintain 3000 or assigned altitude, thence . . . .
. . . . (transition). Expect filed altitude 10 minutes after departure
 
Gucci Pilot said:
You go to 3,000(assuming you are a prop plane). Read the textual description. Yes, the asterisk is the minimum obstacle clearance.
Click to expand...
Maybe this is why a pilot must have in his possession at least the textual description of a DP to accept it in his clearance.
 
iamtheari said:
Maybe this is why a pilot must have in his possession at least the textual description of a DP to accept it in his clearance.
Click to expand...

I don't get why pilots freak out over STARS/DPs. They aren't complicated at all.
 
NoHeat said:
Okay, thanks all, now I know to ignore the altitudes with asterisks when the controller gives me a clearance without assigning some other altitude.

Here's another question, about CARDS9 at KSTL. What's the altitude for the SPINNER transition, for a propeller airplane?

Here's why I ask this: On page 1, the chart indicates an altitude 2700 for that specific transition, but the text on page 2 says that non-turbojets should "Maintain 3000 or assigned altitude...", and in doing so, it doesn't distinguish any transitions. So, if you were given a clearance of CARDS9, SPINNER transition, SIDS altitude, with no number otherwise specified for the altitude, would you climb to 2700 or 3000?
Click to expand...
Here's the error. The SID is the text. The graphical depiction is a visual aid, not the procedure. Do what the text says.
 
NoHeat said:
Okay, thanks all, now I know to ignore the altitudes with asterisks when the controller gives me a clearance without assigning some other altitude.

Here's another question, about CARDS9 at KSTL. What's the altitude for the SPINNER transition, for a propeller airplane?

Here's why I ask this: On page 1, the chart indicates an altitude 2700 for that specific transition, but the text on page 2 says that non-turbojets should "Maintain 3000 or assigned altitude...", and in doing so, it doesn't distinguish any transitions. So, if you were given a clearance of CARDS9, SPINNER transition, SIDS altitude, with no number otherwise specified for the altitude, would you climb to 2700 or 3000?
Click to expand...

The controller DID assign you an altitude. It was 3000. You need to ignore more than just the altitudes with the asterisks, you need to ignore the altitudes without the asterisks also. Just like you ignore the MEA's and MOCA's on an Airway. Unless of course there is a reason not to ignore them, like going NORDO or some other emergency where you need to know what altitude is the lowest you can go to safely.
 
Last edited:
Gucci Pilot said:
I don't get why pilots freak out over STARS/DPs. They aren't complicated at all.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Maybe. They sure have more "parts" than they used to though before the "climb/descend via" and "top altitude" and putting MEA's and MOCA's on them era began.
 
If the controller had used correct phraseology maybe it would have been less confusing. He should have said "CARDS9 departure, NEENS transition. That's all. No mention of altitude was appropriate here. If the CARDS9 contained crossing restrictions, then it would be "Climb Via SID"
 
luvflyin said:
If the controller had used correct phraseology maybe it would have been less confusing. He should have said "CARDS9 departure, NEENS transition. That's all. No mention of altitude was appropriate here. If the CARDS9 contained crossing restrictions, then it would be "Climb Via SID"
Click to expand...
Even most pdc's do it that way. The will usually say altitude via Sid

Bob
 
OP, "climb via SID" is phraseology that became a standard part of IFR operations in recent years. I would suggest reading this: https://www.nbaa.org/ops/cns/pbn/climb-via/

Luvflyin, I disagree that "climb via SID" is only issued if a crossing restriction is published. That is ONE condition for issuing climb via SID, but another equally valid one is if a SID contains a TOP altitude. This top altitude is contained in the textual description, but is also being added to graphical renditions, too. SIDS which have a published top altitude ALSO warrant "climb via SID."

It used to be the case that climb via SID was only used if a SID had crossing restrictions, but its use was updated in the last 12 months or so to cover the case where a top altitude is published as well.
 
coma24 said:
OP, "climb via SID" is phraseology that became a standard part of IFR operations in recent years. I would suggest reading this: https://www.nbaa.org/ops/cns/pbn/climb-via/

Luvflyin, I disagree that "climb via SID" is only issued if a crossing restriction is published. That is ONE condition for issuing climb via SID, but another equally valid one is if a SID contains a TOP altitude. This top altitude is contained in the textual description, but is also being added to graphical renditions, too. SIDS which have a published top altitude ALSO warrant "climb via SID."

It used to be the case that climb via SID was only used if a SID had crossing restrictions, but its use was updated in the last 12 months or so to cover the case where a top altitude is published as well.
Click to expand...

I'm quoting out the Air Traffic Control JO 7110.65W with changes through 5/26/16. The BOLD underlined stuff is my emphasis. I've omitted some stuff about Presidential flights and the Notes, References and Examples. It's an easy document to get, just google 7110.65. My take on this is that altitude may be omitted if there is a Top Altitude but the phraseology is just good old Climb and Maintain etc. "Climb via SID" does not come into play until the SID contains published crossing restrictions. I'll read that NBAA letter later, don't have time right now.



e. Altitude. Use one of the following in the order
of preference listed. Altitude may be omitted if the
top altitude is published in the SID route description.
2. Assign the altitude requested by the pilot.
3. Assign an altitude, as near as possible to the
altitude requested by the pilot, and
(a) Inform the pilot when to expect clearance
to the requested altitude unless instructions are
contained in the specified SID, or
(b) If the requested altitude is not expected to
be available, inform the pilot what altitude can be
expected and when/where to expect it.
PHRASEOLOGY−
CLIMB AND MAINTAIN (the altitude as near as possible
to the pilot’s requested altitude). EXPECT (the requested
altitude or an altitude different from the requested altitude)
AT (time or fix),
and if applicable,
(pilot’s requested altitude) IS NOT AVAILABLE.
4. Use one of the following when the SID
contains published crossing restrictions:
(a) When the top altitude is included in the
SID route description, instruct aircraft to “climb via
SID.”
(b) When a top altitude is not published on a
SID that contains published crossing restrictions, or
when it is necessary to issue an interim altitude
instruct the aircraft to “Climb via SID except (altitude
assignment/ change)”.
 
Very familiar with the .65. There's an inconsistency in the document. If you check 4-3-3 D.(1) (abbreviated departure clearances), it says:
1. Specify the assigned altitude. The altitude may be omitted and pilots instructed to “climb via SID” when a top altitude is published in the SID route description.

There's no reference to the SID needing to have published restrictions to use the climb via SID phraseology. Same thing in 4-3-3 E.(3) which deals with departure clearances with a route amendment.

Not sure why it's inconsistent, my guess is the text in the section you posted wasn't updated when they made the climb via SID changes.

In real world, I've flown the Manchester Seven out of KMHT, a SID with a published top altitude and no other restrictions and have received 'climb via SID' each time.
 
coma24 said:
Very familiar with the .65. There's an inconsistency in the document. If you check 4-3-3 D.(1) (abbreviated departure clearances), it says:
1. Specify the assigned altitude. The altitude may be omitted and pilots instructed to “climb via SID” when a top altitude is published in the SID route description.

There's no reference to the SID needing to have published restrictions to use the climb via SID phraseology. Same thing in 4-3-3 E.(3) which deals with departure clearances with a route amendment.

Not sure why it's inconsistent, my guess is the text in the section you posted wasn't updated when they made the climb via SID changes.

In real world, I've flown the Manchester Seven out of KMHT, a SID with a published top altitude and no other restrictions and have received 'climb via SID' each time.
Click to expand...

Yeah. There are inconsistencies. I'm pretty sure the text is accurate in the copy I have. It comes directly from the FAA source and it's current. This isn't the first time I've seen things be inconsistent in Abreviated Departure Clearance procedures. It's as if there are enough changes to the Route in a flight that it makes more sense to just issue a Full Route Clearance instead of "as filed" except change route to read..., then somehow the rules on the SID should change. Check out the Climb Via News in that NBAA link. It gives a lot of background and 'intent'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top