Just a quick question that maybe someone can help with…
I am putting the final touches to planning my trip from the UK to Greece next week and intending to route to Salzburg and then across the Alps to Losinj.
Looking at the SIDs for Salzburg I’m trying to work out how to get high enough quickly enough to be able to cross the Alps (IFR) – at around FL150. All the SIDs seem to demand a pretty hefty climb rate that may not be possible in my heavily-laden C182.
Question then is how to get the altitude without meeting the SID climb performance requirements in order to complete an IFR crossing. This is especially difficult if they’re using R15 which heads straight towards the mountains and leaves very little time to get clear of them.
Maybe the answer is to file a Z plan and get the heigh VFR before picking up a clearance? I don’t know but I’d be grateful for advice for those who have been there and done it!
Ahhh Losinj I wanna go too ;)
What’s your routing out of LOWS? Which SID?
The non RNAV 15 deps go to the north initially.
NEMAL2V is 5,5% inital gradient, assuming 100kts GS that’s 560 feet per minute up to 3000 feet. Then 350 fpm…
For RNAV1 you could use VERDA1B, 700fpm and then 450fpm.
Any worries let ATC know when you get the clearance. You could request vectors for climb or a holding for climb in case you don’t make it. Better to tell them in advance for their pre planning and make the climb gradients than the other way round.
I previously been offered VFR ETROX GRZ for this, despite having filed a FPL departing initially to the North. They seem quite used to the problem.
A better general procedure for this problem is to depart further back, to give yourself more distance to climb before reaching the terrain. This has the additional benefit of burning off some fuel which improves the ceiling further.
I flew over the Alps 4 days ago and the TB20, at approx MTOW, would not go above FL160, due to the exceptionally high temperatures and possibly some sinking air. At ISA it would have done FL200. Do not underestimate this…
For this reason, departing out of LDLO back home, I normally file a route like this
and if the day is nice wx you can ask for shortcuts on that dogleg (e.g. ADOSA-PIXOS-HR) and usually they give it to you.
Unless winds are very prohibitive, IFR departures are normally on runway 33 for terrain clearance reasons as most of the runway 33 SIDs require a visual segment unless one has permission for a “special performance departure”. In the various times I have been to LOWS on my own and also on commercial flights, departures had always been from runway 33. ATIS normally says “Runway in use 15. IFR departures expect runway 33” or “Runway in use 33. IFR approaches expect runway 15”. I just listened to ATIS on +43 5 1703 6531 and it is currently the former for winds @ 160/8kts.
As Snoopy said, NEMAL3A has a relatively benign climb gradient and so does NEMAL2B (requiring sufficient minimum flight visibility) in the case you get runway 33. The ones that could present a real problem would by VERDA1Y and DETSA1A/1B. In the former case, you could use VERDA1B if sufficient visibility prevailed. In the unlikely case your routing involves the DETSA1A/1B departures (unlikely for destination LDLO), I am sure you could request vectoring from Salzburg Radar upon startup as the Salzburg TMA is not a very busy TMA but, just in case, you might need to have an alternate flight plan in your back pocket which does not use DETSA1A/1B.
Great advice everyone, thanks!
Looking at the LOWS SIDs again another possibility is the SBG 2A off R33 which takes you north away from the high ground and then allows you to climb to the required FL in the hold.
Or – if the wx is good – I’ll just take one of the GAFOR routes and do it VFR!
The problem with flying the Alps IFR in a non-turbo non de-iced aircraft (C182) is that the freezing level at this time of year is quite likely to be below MSA which is a no-no for me unless the visibility is very good and the cloud at best SCT, allowing the option to remain clear and out of potential icing conditions. And even if I had TKS or boots, I personally wouldn’t want to fly in IMC over the Alps for prolonged periods – or even in VMC on top of an OVC layer – where an engine failure would mean descending into clouds with some big mountains hiding inside them! I do have terrain on my GTN 650 but I wouldn’t want to stake my life on that.
Of course these are just my personal minima which others may not share.
If we are talking the central Alpine routings, MSAs are between 10000 and 13000 feet (let’s not even talk about MEAs!…) and thus temperatues up there are below the freezing level in 9 out of 12 months a year.
And in the other three months (beginning of June till beginning of September) any significant cloud over the Alps is usually convective, so no good place to be either.
Therefore, in a light, non de-iced SEP, the rule is actually quite simple: Alps = flight in VMC only.
And since the IFR airports in or very close to the Alps usually require high climb rates (for SEP standards) or even require special crew authorisation for their terminal procedures, they are essentially VFR airports. (Sure, in the first case, you could fly IFR, and then spiral up and down somewhere until you have enough altitude to proceed, but then again, it’s time and fuel wasted, so it’s better to go VFR and be on your way immediately.
So, in the end, in or near the Alps, it’s VFR anyway, or at least VMC only. That’s just the way it is.
Except, I don’t quite understand why they need to be crossed in the center (where altitudes are high), when the destination is the Eastern adriatic sea anyway. Wouldn’t it be easier to fly direction Bratislava/ Slowakia to the north and then cross the Alps in the East where the altitudes are lower ?
