Ok, here is a hypothetical question about departing from Santa Monica
and about IFR departures at uncontrolled fields in general. Suppose it
is after 9pm (the tower is closed) but before 11pm (departures still
permitted). Assuming that the field is IFR, what would be the proper
way to obtain clearance and depart? Is there an RCO on or near the
field to allow communciations with SoCal departure, or does one need to
phone in to get the clearance?

Also, "Takeoff Minimums" are listed as follows:

SANTA MONICA, CA
SANTA MONICA MUNI
TAKE-OFF MINIMUMS: Rwy 3, 700-2 or
climb of 290' per NM to 1000.
DEPARTURE PROCEDURE: Rwy 3, climb
climbing right turn direct SMO VOR/DME.
SMO R-261 to SADDE Int. Rwy 21, climbing
to intercept SMO R-250 and FIM R-148
All aircraft continue climb on course.

My question is twofold:
1. What is the proper procedure for SMO?

2. What would the proper procedure be for an uncontrolled/closed tower
field after hours with such a departure procedure listed, assuming a
clearance with void time, etc? Would I expect ATC to specify this
procedure in my clearance? Would executing this DP be at my
discretion? Obviously for obstacle clearance it might be advisable.
Would I need to inform ATC? What if it conflicted with the clearance I
was issued? How would this work?

Thanks,
Dan

The typical void time clearance for a Class E airport out in the toolies is
"enter controlled airspace on such-and-such heading". How you get there is
up to you.

I've forgotten what the airspace classification is for a Class D airport
with the tower closed that underlies Class B space. Does it revert to E or
what? Is it controlled airpace to the ground?

Anyway, SMO is a special situation, being where it is, and I suspect the
void time clearance will be very specific from the ground up. If nothing
were said, common sense would dictate that the DP be flown. So the
hierarchy would be, whatever was said, or if nothing said, the DP.
"Dan" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Ok, here is a hypothetical question about departing from Santa Monica
> and about IFR departures at uncontrolled fields in general. Suppose it
> is after 9pm (the tower is closed) but before 11pm (departures still
> permitted). Assuming that the field is IFR, what would be the proper
> way to obtain clearance and depart? Is there an RCO on or near the
> field to allow communciations with SoCal departure, or does one need to
> phone in to get the clearance?
>
> Also, "Takeoff Minimums" are listed as follows:
>
> SANTA MONICA, CA
> SANTA MONICA MUNI
> TAKE-OFF MINIMUMS: Rwy 3, 700-2 or
> climb of 290' per NM to 1000.
> DEPARTURE PROCEDURE: Rwy 3, climb
> climbing right turn direct SMO VOR/DME.
> SMO R-261 to SADDE Int. Rwy 21, climbing
> to intercept SMO R-250 and FIM R-148
> All aircraft continue climb on course.
>
> My question is twofold:
> 1. What is the proper procedure for SMO?
>
> 2. What would the proper procedure be for an uncontrolled/closed tower
> field after hours with such a departure procedure listed, assuming a
> clearance with void time, etc? Would I expect ATC to specify this
> procedure in my clearance? Would executing this DP be at my
> discretion? Obviously for obstacle clearance it might be advisable.
> Would I need to inform ATC? What if it conflicted with the clearance I
> was issued? How would this work?
>
> Thanks,
> Dan
>

Dan Thompson wrote:


>
> I've forgotten what the airspace classification is for a Class D airport
> with the tower closed that underlies Class B space. Does it revert to E or
> what? Is it controlled airpace to the ground?
>
> Anyway, SMO is a special situation, being where it is, and I suspect the
> void time clearance will be very specific from the ground up. If nothing
> were said, common sense would dictate that the DP be flown. So the
> hierarchy would be, whatever was said, or if nothing said, the DP.
> "Dan" > wrote in message
> oups.com...

SoCal TRACON maintains very tight control over that airspace. Although
I have never flown IFR out of KSMO, I am sure they would assign a
heading to maintain for radar vectors. If I am correct, that would
supercede the ODP.

Tim wrote:
> Dan Thompson wrote:

> SoCal TRACON maintains very tight control over that airspace. Although
> I have never flown IFR out of KSMO, I am sure they would assign a
> heading to maintain for radar vectors. If I am correct, that would
> supercede the ODP.

If you actually get a vector, ATC is taking responsibility for obstacle/terrain
clearance. Otherwise, the ODP will keep you out of the dirt. I don't think an
initial instruction like "enter controlled airspace on heading X" qualifies as a
vector for that purpose.

If I thought I couldn't maintain obstacle/terrain clearance visually, and if the
departure clearance conflicted with the ODP, I think I'd have to negotiate a
different clearance.

Dave

There is no "rule," Dan. Some tower-controlled airports revert to Class E,
some to Class G. It's in the A/FD, listed under Airspace.

Bob Gardner

"Dan Thompson" > wrote in message
om...
> The typical void time clearance for a Class E airport out in the toolies
> is "enter controlled airspace on such-and-such heading". How you get
> there is up to you.
>
> I've forgotten what the airspace classification is for a Class D airport
> with the tower closed that underlies Class B space. Does it revert to E
> or what? Is it controlled airpace to the ground?
>
> Anyway, SMO is a special situation, being where it is, and I suspect the
> void time clearance will be very specific from the ground up. If nothing
> were said, common sense would dictate that the DP be flown. So the
> hierarchy would be, whatever was said, or if nothing said, the DP.
> "Dan" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Ok, here is a hypothetical question about departing from Santa Monica
>> and about IFR departures at uncontrolled fields in general. Suppose it
>> is after 9pm (the tower is closed) but before 11pm (departures still
>> permitted). Assuming that the field is IFR, what would be the proper
>> way to obtain clearance and depart? Is there an RCO on or near the
>> field to allow communciations with SoCal departure, or does one need to
>> phone in to get the clearance?
>>
>> Also, "Takeoff Minimums" are listed as follows:
>>
>> SANTA MONICA, CA
>> SANTA MONICA MUNI
>> TAKE-OFF MINIMUMS: Rwy 3, 700-2 or
>> climb of 290' per NM to 1000.
>> DEPARTURE PROCEDURE: Rwy 3, climb
>> climbing right turn direct SMO VOR/DME.
>> SMO R-261 to SADDE Int. Rwy 21, climbing
>> to intercept SMO R-250 and FIM R-148
>> All aircraft continue climb on course.
>>
>> My question is twofold:
>> 1. What is the proper procedure for SMO?
>>
>> 2. What would the proper procedure be for an uncontrolled/closed tower
>> field after hours with such a departure procedure listed, assuming a
>> clearance with void time, etc? Would I expect ATC to specify this
>> procedure in my clearance? Would executing this DP be at my
>> discretion? Obviously for obstacle clearance it might be advisable.
>> Would I need to inform ATC? What if it conflicted with the clearance I
>> was issued? How would this work?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dan
>>
>
>

On 6 Nov 2005 21:17:24 -0800, "Dan" > wrote:

>Ok, here is a hypothetical question about departing from Santa Monica
>and about IFR departures at uncontrolled fields in general. Suppose it
>is after 9pm (the tower is closed) but before 11pm (departures still
>permitted). Assuming that the field is IFR, what would be the proper
>way to obtain clearance and depart? Is there an RCO on or near the
>field to allow communciations with SoCal departure, or does one need to
>phone in to get the clearance?
>
>Also, "Takeoff Minimums" are listed as follows:
>
>SANTA MONICA, CA
>SANTA MONICA MUNI
>TAKE-OFF MINIMUMS: Rwy 3, 700-2 or
>climb of 290' per NM to 1000.
>DEPARTURE PROCEDURE: Rwy 3, climb
>climbing right turn direct SMO VOR/DME.
>SMO R-261 to SADDE Int. Rwy 21, climbing
>to intercept SMO R-250 and FIM R-148
>All aircraft continue climb on course.
>
>My question is twofold:
>1. What is the proper procedure for SMO?
>
>2. What would the proper procedure be for an uncontrolled/closed tower
>field after hours with such a departure procedure listed, assuming a
>clearance with void time, etc? Would I expect ATC to specify this
>procedure in my clearance? Would executing this DP be at my
>discretion? Obviously for obstacle clearance it might be advisable.
>Would I need to inform ATC? What if it conflicted with the clearance I
>was issued? How would this work?

I have no experience with SMO, but lots of experience departing IFR from
uncontrolled fields.

In most instances, ATC will NOT specify a DP. Executing the DP procedure,
at least for Part 91 flights, is pilot option. There is no requirement to
notify ATC.

There should be no conflict with the AIM recommendations:
-----------------------
AIM 5-2-6 ODPs (Obstacle Departure Procedures) 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.
-------------------

If there appears to be a conflict with the AIM recommendations, then you
should clarify that with ATC prior to departure.

It's a good idea to look at a sectional and acquaint yourself with the
obstacles just in case ATC makes an error in your clearance, especially for
a night IFR departure.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

>
> In most instances, ATC will NOT specify a DP. Executing the DP procedure,
> at least for Part 91 flights, is pilot option. There is no requirement to
> notify ATC.
>
SMO lies in critical airspace. There is no way SoCal is going to launch
an IFR departure without very specific instructions.

It is so critical that a few years ago a Kingair elected to
circle-to-land Runway 3 after the tower was closed and they ended up
with a loss of separation with an air carrier departure out of LAX that
had been turned northwest over the ocean but too close to SMO.

On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 06:47:09 -0800, Tim > wrote:

>
>>
>> In most instances, ATC will NOT specify a DP. Executing the DP procedure,
>> at least for Part 91 flights, is pilot option. There is no requirement to
>> notify ATC.
>>
>SMO lies in critical airspace. There is no way SoCal is going to launch
>an IFR departure without very specific instructions.



You've mentioned this a few times.

What are those specific instructions when departing IFR from SMO with the
tower closed?

That was one of the questions the OP posed.

If the TRACON is issuing radar vectors off the ground, then, as I quoted
from the AIM, that would supersede any ODP. But ATC is then responsible
for obstacle clearance, of course.

>
>It is so critical that a few years ago a Kingair elected to
>circle-to-land Runway 3 after the tower was closed and they ended up
>with a loss of separation with an air carrier departure out of LAX that
>had been turned northwest over the ocean but too close to SMO.

What was the KingAir's clearance?

Whether it was a problem (i.e. who buys the 'deal') for the KingAir pilot
would depend on his specific clearance.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Ron Rosenfeld > wrote:
> If the TRACON is issuing radar vectors off the ground, then, as I quoted
> from the AIM, that would supersede any ODP. But ATC is then responsible
> for obstacle clearance, of course.

How can they issue radar vectors before you're in radar contact?

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 06:47:09 -0800, Tim > wrote:
>
>
>>>In most instances, ATC will NOT specify a DP. Executing the DP procedure,
>>>at least for Part 91 flights, is pilot option. There is no requirement to
>>>notify ATC.
>>>
>>
>>SMO lies in critical airspace. There is no way SoCal is going to launch
>>an IFR departure without very specific instructions.
>
>
>
>
> You've mentioned this a few times.
>
> What are those specific instructions when departing IFR from SMO with the
> tower closed?
>
I don't know. I know the airspace constraints of that location but, as
I said in a previous post, I have not flown IFR out of KSMO.

> That was one of the questions the OP posed.

I know. And, he probably would get better information by giving SoCal
TRACON a call.

>
> If the TRACON is issuing radar vectors off the ground, then, as I quoted
> from the AIM, that would supersede any ODP. But ATC is then responsible
> for obstacle clearance, of course.

Yes, but...there are many worse locations where they vector below the
MVA and do not, in fact, assure any obstacle clearance below MVA. It is
a very obscure area.
>
>
>>It is so critical that a few years ago a Kingair elected to
>>circle-to-land Runway 3 after the tower was closed and they ended up
>>with a loss of separation with an air carrier departure out of LAX that
>>had been turned northwest over the ocean but too close to SMO.
>
>
> What was the KingAir's clearance?

Don't recall the specifics other than the tower was closed and ATC
bought the "deal," but in the press release the FAA claimed that 3 miles
or 1,000 was merely a guideline.
>
>

Roy Smith wrote:

> Ron Rosenfeld > wrote:
>
>>If the TRACON is issuing radar vectors off the ground, then, as I quoted
>>from the AIM, that would supersede any ODP. But ATC is then responsible
>>for obstacle clearance, of course.
>
>
> How can they issue radar vectors before you're in radar contact?

They know they will have radar contact within a "reasonable" period of
time after takeoff. KMRY is the same way with the radar site several
miles from the airport.

It's all a matter of how the region and the facility determine what will
work for their radar coverage and airspace.

On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 23:01:05 -0500, Roy Smith > wrote:

>Ron Rosenfeld > wrote:
>> If the TRACON is issuing radar vectors off the ground, then, as I quoted
>> from the AIM, that would supersede any ODP. But ATC is then responsible
>> for obstacle clearance, of course.
>
>How can they issue radar vectors before you're in radar contact?

This has come up before. If SMO is Class E surface area when the tower is
closed (and it probably is), then the heading to fly after takeoff can be
specified by ATC. Maybe there is a DVA. "After takeoff", of course,
refers to leaving 400' AGL on runway heading.

In previous discussions, there has been some confusion as to how the pilot
knows that the vector should be considered a "radar vector" and I don't
think there's been a real clear-cut answer. Certainly happens at big city
airports; and it wouldn't surprise me if that was in effect at SMO in the
shadow of LAX.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 23:01:05 -0500, Roy Smith > wrote:

>
> This has come up before. If SMO is Class E surface area when the tower is
> closed (and it probably is), then the heading to fly after takeoff can be
> specified by ATC. Maybe there is a DVA. "After takeoff", of course,
> refers to leaving 400' AGL on runway heading.
>
SMO is Class E at 700 feet agl when the tower is closed.

So far as I know there are no DVAs other than at some USAF facilities.
SMO would be "de facto" DVA to the west because of the ocean. To the
east, there are tall buildings and some mountains although the mountains
are easily avoided with a vector.

On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 03:44:39 -0800, Tim > wrote:

>Yes, but...there are many worse locations where they vector below the
>MVA and do not, in fact, assure any obstacle clearance below MVA. It is
>a very obscure area.

Obscure?

7110.65 5-6-1c and 5-6-3 seem pretty clear on when radar vectors below MVA
are allowed.

At which facilities is ATC issuing vectors and NOT assuring obstacle
clearance?

How are they communicating to the pilot that these vectors do not assure
obstacle clearance?

If, in fact, they are issuing vectors without assuring obstacle clearance,
or without actively soliciting the pilot concurrence with these vectors,
then this seems to me to be a dangerous practice, and not in accord with
ATC published procedures. It should be corrected.


=============================
>> You've mentioned this a few times.
>>
>> What are those specific instructions when departing IFR from SMO with the
>> tower closed?
>
> I don't know. I know the airspace constraints of that location but, as
> I said in a previous post, I have not flown IFR out of KSMO.

It seems to me that you're just guessing at what might be going on. You
may well be correct, but the information I have gleaned from your posts
does not seem to me to be terribly useful.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

"Dan Thompson" > wrote in message
om...
>
> I've forgotten what the airspace classification is for a Class D airport
> with the tower closed that underlies Class B space. Does it revert to E
> or what? Is it controlled airpace to the ground?
>

Class D airspace can become Class E or Class G when the tower is closed.

A surface area requires:

1.) Communications. Communications capability with aircraft which normally
operate within the surface area must exist down to the runway surface of the
primary airport. This communications may be either direct from the ATC
facility having jurisdiction over the surface area or by rapid relay through
other communications facilities which are acceptable to that ATC facility,
such as a FSS.


2.) Weather Observations. Weather observations must be taken at the
surface area's primary airport during the times the surface area is
designated. The weather observation can be taken by a Federally
certificated weather observer and/or by a Federally commissioned weather
observing system.

If the tower is responsible for taking weather observations, then when the
tower closes the airspace must become Class G. If the tower serves as the
rapid communications relay for the ATC facility having jurisdiction over the
surface area, then the airspace must again become Class G when the tower
closes, even if weather observations are still taken by another entity, such
as an AWOS or ASOS.

If communications still exist and weather observations are still taken after
the tower closes, then the airspace can become Class E or Class G. It will
become Class E if necessary to accommodate instrument procedures if such
action is justified and/or in the public interest. The following factors
are among those that are considered:

1. Type of procedure including decision height or minimum descent
altitude.

2. The actual use to be made of the procedure, including whether it is
used by a certificated air carrier or an air taxi/commuter operator
providing service to the general public.

3. The operational and economic advantage offered by the procedure,
including the importance and interest to the commerce and welfare of the
community derived by the procedure.

4. Any other factors considered appropriate.

"Tim" > wrote in message
news:KRJbf.3346$zu6.1726@fed1read04...
>
> SoCal TRACON maintains very tight control over that airspace. Although I
> have never flown IFR out of KSMO, I am sure they would assign a heading to
> maintain for radar vectors. If I am correct, that would supercede the
> ODP.
>

SMO does not have a surface area when the tower is closed, ATC cannot
specify direction of takeoff or turn after takeoff. If it is necessary to
specify an initial heading to be flown after takeoff, it must be issued so
as
to apply only within controlled airspace. An assigned heading does not
supersede the ODP, compliance with an ODP is the pilot's prerogative.

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
>
> How can they issue radar vectors before you're in radar contact?
>

Why not? The aircraft's position is known to a high degree of accuracy.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

> "Tim" > wrote in message
> news:KRJbf.3346$zu6.1726@fed1read04...
>
>>SoCal TRACON maintains very tight control over that airspace. Although I
>>have never flown IFR out of KSMO, I am sure they would assign a heading to
>>maintain for radar vectors. If I am correct, that would supercede the
>>ODP.
>>
>
>
> SMO does not have a surface area when the tower is closed, ATC cannot
> specify direction of takeoff or turn after takeoff. If it is necessary to
> specify an initial heading to be flown after takeoff, it must be issued so
> as
> to apply only within controlled airspace. An assigned heading does not
> supersede the ODP, compliance with an ODP is the pilot's prerogative.
>

As I said, I haven't done it. I suspect, though, if someone started off
on something other than the assigned heading SoCal would be all over
them as soon as they saw any deviation. By that time, the departure
would almost certainly be above 700 feet, agl, and SoCal would have
absolute control. LA Airport has two ASRs, north and south. The north
side sees secondary targets well below 700 feet, agl, near SMO.

> wrote in message news:DWRcf.331$7A.96@fed1read04...
>
> As I said, I haven't done it. I suspect, though, if someone started off
> on something other than the assigned heading SoCal would be all over them
> as soon as they saw any deviation. By that time, the departure would
> almost certainly be above 700 feet, agl, and SoCal would have absolute
> control.

No they wouldn't. If a published IFR departure procedure is not included in
an ATC clearance, compliance with such a procedure is the pilot's
prerogative.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

> > wrote in message news:DWRcf.331$7A.96@fed1read04...
>
>>As I said, I haven't done it. I suspect, though, if someone started off
>>on something other than the assigned heading SoCal would be all over them
>>as soon as they saw any deviation. By that time, the departure would
>>almost certainly be above 700 feet, agl, and SoCal would have absolute
>>control.
>
>
> No they wouldn't. If a published IFR departure procedure is not included in
> an ATC clearance, compliance with such a procedure is the pilot's
> prerogative.
>
>
I accept that, for sake of discussion. But, once the aircraft enters
Class E airspace, and the TRACON sees it on radar, are you telling me
that the TRACON does not have absolute control over the aircraft at that
point in time?

> wrote in message news:nTScf.603$7A.44@fed1read04...
>
> I accept that, for sake of discussion. But, once the aircraft enters
> Class E airspace, and the TRACON sees it on radar, are you telling me that
> the TRACON does not have absolute control over the aircraft at that point
> in time?
>

Yes, that's what I'm telling you. Controllers provide ATC services in
accordance with the procedures and minima in FAA Order 7110.65. That
weighty tome tells them if a published IFR departure procedure is not
included in an ATC clearance, compliance with such a procedure is the
pilot's prerogative. See the note following subparagraph 4-3-2.c.3.

http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp4/atc0403.html#4-3-2

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

> > wrote in message news:nTScf.603$7A.44@fed1read04...
>
>>I accept that, for sake of discussion. But, once the aircraft enters
>>Class E airspace, and the TRACON sees it on radar, are you telling me that
>>the TRACON does not have absolute control over the aircraft at that point
>>in time?
>>
>
>
> Yes, that's what I'm telling you. Controllers provide ATC services in
> accordance with the procedures and minima in FAA Order 7110.65. That
> weighty tome tells them if a published IFR departure procedure is not
> included in an ATC clearance, compliance with such a procedure is the
> pilot's prerogative. See the note following subparagraph 4-3-2.c.3.
>
> http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/ATC/Chp4/atc0403.html#4-3-2
>
>
So, let me ask it again: I elect to use the ODP at KSMO because the
tower is closed and I am in Class G airspace. I am told to contact
SoCal on 123.45. I takeoff flying the ODP and establish radio contact
with SoCal. Leaving 700 feet, agl (entering Class E) SoCal just has to
sit on their hands and let me do my thing until I complete the ODP even
though they can't maintain separation unless they start vectoring me?

> wrote in message news:c_0df.648$7A.600@fed1read04...
>
> So, let me ask it again: I elect to use the ODP at KSMO because the tower
> is closed and I am in Class G airspace. I am told to contact SoCal on
> 123.45. I takeoff flying the ODP and establish radio contact with SoCal.
> Leaving 700 feet, agl (entering Class E) SoCal just has to sit on their
> hands and let me do my thing until I complete the ODP even though they
> can't maintain separation unless they start vectoring me?
>

Ask the same question, get the same answer. The controller is expected to
know that an aircraft departing SMO is entitled to fly the ODP. If there is
a loss of separation because the controller issued clearances that allow two
aircraft to occupy the same airspace at the same time then the controller
has made a separation error.

Steven, I"ve noticed that ATC is always very interested in which runway
you will use when you call for your release. In fact, I believe my
clearances have always included the use of a certain runway (after they
first ask me which one I want). Does that assume I won't do a 180 after
take off???

-Robert

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> I"ve noticed that ATC is always very interested in which runway
> you will use when you call for your release. In fact, I believe my
> clearances have always included the use of a certain runway (after they
> first ask me which one I want). Does that assume I won't do a 180 after
> take off???

Depends on the airspace. If it's really busy and you pick runway 35
then your clearance will be tailored for that runway and probably
wouldn't work off rwy 17 for example. If you tell us a runway that you
will use ATC can then issue a clearance that requires the use of that
runway.