Lost comm altitude?

[Roy Smith]

The Dutchess Four Departure has lost comm instructions which read, "If
radio contact is not established/lost for more than two minutes after
departing, proceed on course and climb to 5000 feet. Ten minutes after
departure, climb to requested altitude/flight level".

Let's say my clearance is "Cleared to HPN via Dutchess Four, V157,
HAARP, direct. Maintain 3000, expect 4000 after 10". If I go lost
comm, do they expect me to climb to 5000, stay there for 10 minutes,
then descend back down to 4000? Or stop my climb at 4000? Or climb to
5000 and stay there (which would presumably leave me WAFDOF).

I'm inclined to think stopping my climb at 4000 makes the most sense,
but one could make arguments in support of any of the alternatives.

The OROCA is 4700. 5 miles to the west, the OROCA goes up to 6700. MEA
on V157 is 4000, MOCA is 2700.

[Gary Drescher]

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
> The Dutchess Four Departure has lost comm instructions which read, "If
> radio contact is not established/lost for more than two minutes after
> departing, proceed on course and climb to 5000 feet. Ten minutes after
> departure, climb to requested altitude/flight level".
>
> Let's say my clearance is "Cleared to HPN via Dutchess Four, V157,
> HAARP, direct. Maintain 3000, expect 4000 after 10". If I go lost
> comm, do they expect me to climb to 5000, stay there for 10 minutes,
> then descend back down to 4000? Or stop my climb at 4000? Or climb to
> 5000 and stay there (which would presumably leave me WAFDOF).
>
> I'm inclined to think stopping my climb at 4000 makes the most sense,
> but one could make arguments in support of any of the alternatives.
>
> The OROCA is 4700. 5 miles to the west, the OROCA goes up to 6700. MEA
> on V157 is 4000, MOCA is 2700.

Heh, that's a nice dilemma. The instructions are contradictory enough that
there isn't anything you can do that would assure that you're doing what ATC
expects. So I'd vote for climbing to 5000' (since at least that part of the
directive is unambiguous), and then staying there (since there's no clear
directive to descend, and other things being equal, higher is better). I
would hope and expect that ATC would at least clear a block for you from
3000 to 5000 to cover the plausible interpretations.

--Gary

[Barry]

> The Dutchess Four Departure has lost comm instructions which read, "If
> radio contact is not established/lost for more than two minutes after
> departing, proceed on course and climb to 5000 feet. Ten minutes after
> departure, climb to requested altitude/flight level".
>
> Let's say my clearance is "Cleared to HPN via Dutchess Four, V157,
> HAARP, direct. Maintain 3000, expect 4000 after 10". If I go lost
> comm, do they expect me to climb to 5000, stay there for 10 minutes,
> then descend back down to 4000? Or stop my climb at 4000? Or climb to
> 5000 and stay there (which would presumably leave me WAFDOF).

I would say that the altitudes you were issued constitute an amendment to the
Dutchess Four clearance, so I'd stop at 3000, intercept V157, then climb to
4000 10 minutes after takeoff. If I was nervous about terrain, then I'd use
my emergency authority to go to whatever altitude I felt was necessary, and
then back to 4000 once established on V157.

Related question: looking at the approach plates for POU, I see that the
VOR/DME RNAV or GPS RWY 6 shows no MSA. Does anyone know why? All the other
approaches to POU show an MSA circle.

Barry

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 13:22:09 -0500, "Barry" > wrote:

>Related question: looking at the approach plates for POU, I see that the
>VOR/DME RNAV or GPS RWY 6 shows no MSA. Does anyone know why? All the other
>approaches to POU show an MSA circle.

The Jepp chart states that no MSA is published for this approach.
Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 11:11:33 -0500, Roy Smith > wrote:

>The Dutchess Four Departure has lost comm instructions which read, "If
>radio contact is not established/lost for more than two minutes after
>departing, proceed on course and climb to 5000 feet. Ten minutes after
>departure, climb to requested altitude/flight level".
>
>Let's say my clearance is "Cleared to HPN via Dutchess Four, V157,
>HAARP, direct. Maintain 3000, expect 4000 after 10". If I go lost
>comm, do they expect me to climb to 5000, stay there for 10 minutes,
>then descend back down to 4000? Or stop my climb at 4000? Or climb to
>5000 and stay there (which would presumably leave me WAFDOF).
>
>I'm inclined to think stopping my climb at 4000 makes the most sense,
>but one could make arguments in support of any of the alternatives.
>

I would do exactly as the chart states and not try to second-guess the
reasons. (Except that after ten minutes, to get from 5000 to 4000
obviously requires a descent).

Certainly if you climbed to 5000 when cleared to 4000, that would also
serve to get ATC's attention, and might lead to sooner establishment of
radio contact.


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

[Gary Drescher]

"Barry" > wrote in message
...
> > The Dutchess Four Departure has lost comm instructions which read, "If
> > radio contact is not established/lost for more than two minutes after
> > departing, proceed on course and climb to 5000 feet. Ten minutes after
> > departure, climb to requested altitude/flight level".
> >
> > Let's say my clearance is "Cleared to HPN via Dutchess Four, V157,
> > HAARP, direct. Maintain 3000, expect 4000 after 10". If I go lost
> > comm, do they expect me to climb to 5000, stay there for 10 minutes,
> > then descend back down to 4000? Or stop my climb at 4000? Or climb to
> > 5000 and stay there (which would presumably leave me WAFDOF).
>
> I would say that the altitudes you were issued constitute an amendment to
the
> Dutchess Four clearance, so I'd stop at 3000, intercept V157, then climb
to
> 4000 10 minutes after takeoff.

Sure the altitudes amend the Dutchess Four clearance itself, but not the
clearence's explicit lost-comm procedure. That would only be amended if ATC
issued explicit lost-comm altitudes too.

--Gary

> If I was nervous about terrain, then I'd use
> my emergency authority to go to whatever altitude I felt was necessary,
and
> then back to 4000 once established on V157.
>
> Related question: looking at the approach plates for POU, I see that the
> VOR/DME RNAV or GPS RWY 6 shows no MSA. Does anyone know why? All the
other
> approaches to POU show an MSA circle.
>
> Barry
>
>

[Barry]

> Sure the altitudes amend the Dutchess Four clearance itself, but not the
> clearence's explicit lost-comm procedure. That would only be amended if ATC
> issued explicit lost-comm altitudes too.

But when ATC tells you "Maintain 3000, expect 4000 after 10," isn't "expect
4000" explicitly for lost-comm? From the AIM:

EXPECT (ALTITUDE) AT (TIME) or (FIX)- Used under certain conditions to provide
a pilot with an altitude to be used in the event of two-way communications
failure. It also provides altitude information to assist the pilot in
planning.

Barry

[Gary Drescher]

"Barry" > wrote in message
...
> > Sure the altitudes amend the Dutchess Four clearance itself, but not the
> > clearence's explicit lost-comm procedure. That would only be amended if
ATC
> > issued explicit lost-comm altitudes too.
>
> But when ATC tells you "Maintain 3000, expect 4000 after 10," isn't
"expect
> 4000" explicitly for lost-comm? From the AIM:

Hm, yes, that's a good point. But then "maintain 3000" isn't for lost comm.
So I guess the most literal (but not the most sensible) interpretation would
be to climb to 5000' as per the explicit Dutchess Four lost-comm procedure,
then descend to 4000' as per the overriding "expect 4000 after 10". Or
something like that. :)

[Teacherjh]

I'd climb to 5000, then MEAs permitting) descend to 4000. In no case would I
stop before 5000. The (explicit) instructions to do so on lost comm may be to
get you high enough to receive a different outlet, or to be picked up on a
better radar sweep. Who knows... they asked me to do that, I do that.

Jose


--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Gary Drescher]

"Ron Rosenfeld" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 11:11:33 -0500, Roy Smith > wrote:
>
> >The Dutchess Four Departure has lost comm instructions which read, "If
> >radio contact is not established/lost for more than two minutes after
> >departing, proceed on course and climb to 5000 feet. Ten minutes after
> >departure, climb to requested altitude/flight level".
> >
> >Let's say my clearance is "Cleared to HPN via Dutchess Four, V157,
> >HAARP, direct. Maintain 3000, expect 4000 after 10". If I go lost
> >comm, do they expect me to climb to 5000, stay there for 10 minutes,
> >then descend back down to 4000? Or stop my climb at 4000? Or climb to
> >5000 and stay there (which would presumably leave me WAFDOF).
> >
> >I'm inclined to think stopping my climb at 4000 makes the most sense,
> >but one could make arguments in support of any of the alternatives.
> >
>
> I would do exactly as the chart states and not try to second-guess the
> reasons. (Except that after ten minutes, to get from 5000 to 4000
> obviously requires a descent).

Well, descending when told to climb is itself a kind of second-guessing of
the chart's intent--and to me it waves a rather bright red flag!

--Gary

> Certainly if you climbed to 5000 when cleared to 4000, that would also
> serve to get ATC's attention, and might lead to sooner establishment of
> radio contact.
>
>
> Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Ron Natalie]

"Teacherjh" > wrote in message ...
> I'd climb to 5000, then MEAs permitting) descend to 4000. In no case would I
> stop before 5000. The (explicit) instructions to do so on lost comm may be to
> get you high enough to receive a different outlet, or to be picked up on a
> better radar sweep. Who knows... they asked me to do that, I do that.

Is this one of those Radar Vectors departures? 5000 feet might be required
to allow you to get "on course" via your own navigation in lieu of radar vectors.

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:40:23 GMT, "Gary Drescher" >
wrote:

>Well, descending when told to climb is itself a kind of second-guessing of
>the chart's intent--and to me it waves a rather bright red flag!


How long do you think you would have to climb to get from 5,000' MSL to
4,000' MSL? <g>

It probably depends in part on your theory of the universe.


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

[Gary Drescher]

"Ron Rosenfeld" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:40:23 GMT, "Gary Drescher" >
> wrote:
>
> >Well, descending when told to climb is itself a kind of second-guessing
of
> >the chart's intent--and to me it waves a rather bright red flag!
>
> How long do you think you would have to climb to get from 5,000' MSL to
> 4,000' MSL? <g>
>
> It probably depends in part on your theory of the universe.

Yup. The mathematician in me wants to regard a descent as just a
negative-rate climb, but the pilot in me balks. :)

--Gary

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