A few more COP problems

[Eivind Fosse 818131]

Hi again,

 

I've run into a few more problems regarding the Cooperation Section of the ESE file.

 

1 - Should the altitude be written as FL when above the TA?

 

Example: Transition altitude at ENAT is 7000 ft. Should I use:

COPX:ENAT:29:HTK:*:*:ENAT TMA:ENBD 4R:19000:*:HTK

or

COPX:ENAT:29:HTK:*:*:ENAT TMA:ENBD 4R:FL190:*:HTK

 

2 - The actual LoA for many Norwegian airports state that the aircraft should be climbed to FL130, or cruising altitude if lower.

 

When I write the following in the COP:

COPX:ENCN:*:OSLOX:*:*:ENCN TMA:ENOS RR:13000:*:OSLOX

 

What will happen to an aircraft that has filed FL100 via OSLOX?

 

3 - Many LoA also only specify that the aircraft should be climbed to an even or odd level (not a specific level) before handoff. Is there any way to code this into the COP?

 

4 - Some LoA specify altitude only, but no fix where the altitude is to be applied. For example "Aircraft is to be descended to FL110 before handoff".

 

Is this a valid way to code such LoA for an aircraft from ENBD sector 4R to ENBS via Area Varanger?:

COPX:*:*:*:ENBS:*:ENBD 4R:Area Varanger:*:11000:

 

Thank you!

[Martin Loxbo]

Hi Eivind,

 

For clarification, COP stands for Coordination Point. COPs are normally on the border between ATC sectors, but not necessarily - they can also be within one of the sectors.

 

I'm no expert on this but I'll try to answer your questions:

 

1. No. FL190 should be written as 19000.

 

2. If we [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume that the ENCN departure that has filed FL100 will still enter the ENOS sector, the XFL for the ENCN controller will be FL100, and correspondingly the PEL for the ENOS controller will also be FL100.

 

3. Not that I'm aware of. You need to actually think for yourself here and make sure that aircraft are transferred on correct levels according to the LoA.

 

4. In this case, the altitude in the ESE should still be connected to the relevant COP. For example, the COP for aircraft from ESOS to ENOS on UN623 is SUMAK, and the LoA states that aircraft with destination in Oslo TMA shall be cleared by ESOS to FL250, or cruise level if lower, before transfer to ENOS. So the COPX altitude from ESOS to ENOS for aircraft with destination in Oslo TMA will be FL250 (written as 25000).

 

Similarly, the COP for aircraft from ENOS to ESOS on UP607 is SUTOK, and ENOS shall climb Oslo TMA departures to FL290, or cruise level if lower. Here again, the COPX altitude at SUTOK will be 29000.

[Eivind Fosse 818131]

Martin,

 

Regarding issue number 4:

 

I can see that SUTOK is a COP, but that is also specified in the LoA between Oslo and Stockholm.

 

"Flights via P/UP607 shall be established on the ATS-route when entering Stockholm AoR. Departing traffic from ENGM, ENSN, ENTO or ENRY via P/UP607 with planned cruising levels above FL 290 will be cleared, by ATCC Oslo, to FL 290. ACT/EST for these flights shall contain CFL 290.Traffic is considered to be climbing."

 

And among many other special conditions: "Flights with destination ENGM, ENSN, ENRY or ENTO are released to ATCC Oslo for descent and turn at long. 0133000E. Such flights conducted above FL 250 are given descend clearance to FL 250 by ATCC Stockholm before transfer of communication.."

 

But for flights inbound ENKR, Kirkenes, the following LoA is valid:

 

"Descent to FL110, or crusing level if lower, or to a level specified by Kirkenes TWR/APP. Kirkenes TWR/APP specifies route and means of approach for each aircraft"

 

As you can se there are no fixes for an approach to Kirkenes. Only the FL110...