ORD 6 Departure CVS vs MAINTAIN

[Kyle Sanders]

The following discussion was inspired by an incident on the network that I was not part of and I am not here to speak about that incident but rather the specifics for interpreting the .65 in a very specific situation.

I would like to know why KORD (even real world) issues Climb Via SID for the O'Hare 6 departure and hopefully learn something.

https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2013/00166OHARE.PDF

https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/2013/00166OHARE_C.PDF.


7110.65 4-3-2.e.4:

Use one of the following when the SID contains published crossing restrictions:
A) Instruct aircraft to “Climb via SID.”"
B) Instruct the aircraft to “Climb via SID except maintain (altitude)” when a top altitude is not published or when it is necessary to issue an interim altitude.


The ORD 6 does have published crossing restrictions, so “Climb Via SID” is used at this moment.
However, if we go down to 7110.65 4-3-2.e.5 right after it:


“When a SID does not contain published crossing restrictions and/or is a SID with a Radar Vector segment or a Radar Vector SID; or a SID is constructed with a Radar Vector segment and contains published crossing restrictions after the vector segment, instruct aircraft to “MAINTAIN (altitude).”

Or simply put:
If "Y' to any of the following, issue: "MAINTAIN"
1) When a SID does not contain published crossing restrictions
2) SID with a Radar Vector segment
3) Radar Vector SID
4) SID is constructed with a Radar Vector segment and contains published crossing restrictions after the vector segment
      

Considering the answer is yes to #'s 2 and 3, I would now think that “Maintain” is now required.

So the way I see it is:

1) Since we came to an answer before getting to paragraph 5, we stop there an use that... so “Climb Via SID”, or...
2) KORD has special authorization to use Climb Via SID, or...
3) I am misunderstanding something.




I am pretty sure that scenario #1 isn't right because that would make the KSLC ARCHZ departure a “Climb VIA SID” yet it is “Maintain” in real world along with the fact that it perfectly fits into the last condition of paragraph 5.

Scenario 2 would be understandable.

Scenario 3 would be likely.

[Kyle Sanders]

Before I even dive into this. I'm curious to how an "incident" occured from climb via SID vs maintain. What exactly happened?

The following discussion was inspired by an incident on the network that I was not part of and I am not here to speak about that incident but rather the specifics for interpreting the .65 in a very specific situation.

I would rather just focus on the intellectual part rather than the drama that originally surrounded it.

[Mike Fries]

The O'Hare DP has crossing restrictions to meet on the initial vector. If you tell someone Maintain they don't have to meet the restrictions. The ARCHZ has restrictions after the vector segment so its Maintain. Yes, the paragraph you reference below with and/or has been the bane of my existence both real world and on here.

[Shane VanHoven]

I am also curious what drama could have possibly come up with this. Because in my experience, albeit limited, I haven't even heard rumors of any crews having problems with the climbing via the ORD6 in real life, let alone seen anything. Its pretty self explanatory. Hit the altitudes, follow the speed, that's it.

Not to sound frank, but I do honestly think that there are several other rules of the book that our energy should be focused on for the purposes of vatsim. But that's just me.

[Daniel Kormendy]

I am honestly a little confused with this one as the SID has published crossing restrictions from the CGO VORTAC as posted in this picture.

https://prnt.sc/1x6uqos

My best guess is to why they assign the "Climb Via Sid" instruction is to provide vertical separation for arrivals and departures. Since it is a radar-nav sid, I am assuming basically the TRACON will vector the aircraft to the applicable DTA to get aircraft on it's assigned route of flight. I also want to assume the TRACON may have aircraft fly over other aircraft that are arriving.

https://prnt.sc/1x6v8s9

In this second picture, at DRSCL the aircraft should meet DRSCL at 2200 feet and will be 6.7 DME from the runway.  In the first picture, aircraft are required to be at or above 3000 feet 5.5 DME from the CGO VORTAC. I hope this helps in a way, but this is why I think that aircraft that fly the ORD6 are assigned climb via sid so they do not conflict with arrivals.

[Ryan Pitt]

I've had to say several times to metering that we are unable to assure the climb restriction (really only off of 22L when its hot and we are heavy). Either they'll put us on 28R or give us RH on 22L instead of the 180 heading.

I am also curious what drama could have possibly come up with this. Because in my experience, albeit limited, I haven't even heard rumors of any crews having problems with the climbing via the ORD6 in real life, let alone seen anything. Its pretty self explanatory. Hit the altitudes, follow the speed, that's it.

Not to sound frank, but I do honestly think that there are several other rules of the book that our energy should be focused on for the purposes of vatsim. But that's just me.

[Ryan Pitt]

I'm pretty sure it's for MDW traffic reasons. Shane would probably be able to explain it better than I could.

I am honestly a little confused with this one as the SID has published crossing restrictions from the CGO VORTAC as posted in this picture.

https://prnt.sc/1x6uqos

My best guess is to why they assign the "Climb Via Sid" instruction is to provide vertical separation for arrivals and departures. Since it is a radar-nav sid, I am assuming basically the TRACON will vector the aircraft to the applicable DTA to get aircraft on it's assigned route of flight. I also want to assume the TRACON may have aircraft fly over other aircraft that are arriving.

https://prnt.sc/1x6v8s9

In this second picture, at DRSCL the aircraft should meet DRSCL at 2200 feet and will be 6.7 DME from the runway.  In the first picture, aircraft are required to be at or above 3000 feet 5.5 DME from the CGO VORTAC. I hope this helps in a way, but this is why I think that aircraft that fly the ORD6 are assigned climb via sid so they do not conflict with arrivals.

[Shane VanHoven]

I am honestly a little confused with this one as the SID has published crossing restrictions from the CGO VORTAC as posted in this picture.

https://prnt.sc/1x6uqos

My best guess is to why they assign the "Climb Via Sid" instruction is to provide vertical separation for arrivals and departures. Since it is a radar-nav sid, I am assuming basically the TRACON will vector the aircraft to the applicable DTA to get aircraft on it's assigned route of flight. I also want to assume the TRACON may have aircraft fly over other aircraft that are arriving.

https://prnt.sc/1x6v8s9

In this second picture, at DRSCL the aircraft should meet DRSCL at 2200 feet and will be 6.7 DME from the runway.  In the first picture, aircraft are required to be at or above 3000 feet 5.5 DME from the CGO VORTAC. I hope this helps in a way, but this is why I think that aircraft that fly the ORD6 are assigned climb via sid so they do not conflict with arrivals.

You're on the right track... It's for keep-them-in-the-Bravo reasons. Departures will never be in a position to conflict with the arrivals that are over the Marker. We have procedures that inherently separate departures from that portion of arrival airspace that we call "the dump". At the tower, we vector aircraft on initial headings so that they remain clear of the dump. The west flow dump is a 040 heading to a 140, east flow is 220-320.

The climb restrictions keep the ORD departures inside the Bravo, or even 1000 feet above the floor in come instances. This provides separation from not only MDW, but also PWK, and other satellite airports and satellite airspace.

Sometimes heavies on long flights (and BRICKYARDs ONLY FOR SOME REASON RYAN  ) will notify us that they are unable to make climb restrictions, and we just have to coordinate with the TRACON so they can stop MDW departures and protect a little more airspace than normal.

[Ryan Pitt]

I am honestly a little confused with this one as the SID has published crossing restrictions from the CGO VORTAC as posted in this picture.

https://prnt.sc/1x6uqos

My best guess is to why they assign the "Climb Via Sid" instruction is to provide vertical separation for arrivals and departures. Since it is a radar-nav sid, I am assuming basically the TRACON will vector the aircraft to the applicable DTA to get aircraft on it's assigned route of flight. I also want to assume the TRACON may have aircraft fly over other aircraft that are arriving.

https://prnt.sc/1x6v8s9

In this second picture, at DRSCL the aircraft should meet DRSCL at 2200 feet and will be 6.7 DME from the runway.  In the first picture, aircraft are required to be at or above 3000 feet 5.5 DME from the CGO VORTAC. I hope this helps in a way, but this is why I think that aircraft that fly the ORD6 are assigned climb via sid so they do not conflict with arrivals.

You're on the right track... It's for keep-them-in-the-Bravo reasons. Departures will never be in a position to conflict with the arrivals that are over the Marker. We have procedures that inherently separate departures from that portion of arrival airspace that we call "the dump". At the tower, we vector aircraft on initial headings so that they remain clear of the dump. The west flow dump is a 040 heading to a 140, east flow is 220-320.

The climb restrictions keep the ORD departures inside the Bravo, or even 1000 feet above the floor in come instances. This provides separation from not only MDW, but also PWK, and other satellite airports and satellite airspace.

Sometimes heavies on long flights (and BRICKYARDs ONLY FOR SOME REASON RYAN  ) will notify us that they are unable to make climb restrictions, and we just have to coordinate with the TRACON so they can stop MDW departures and protect a little more airspace than normal.

They really like to derate our engines. We’re a regional after all.

[Chris McGee]

When I noticed new replies to this thread I was like "here we go again". Thank you Shane for taking the time to explain.