(2) Airway Fixes in Russia. Name the several airway fixes in Russia using the four-letter International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) identifier for an airport at the fix.
Clarification will be necessary if the controller refers to a fix using the airport name.
d. Transponder Use. On polar routes beyond areas of radar coverage, squawk 2000.
NOTE: The North Pole is in the FMS database and coded NPOLE.
14-3. POLAR COMMUNICATIONS.
a. ATC Communications. There should be no interruptions over the entire route during ATC communications with ATC on VHF, HF, or High Frequency Data Link (HFDL). For effective communications with ATC, use only standard ICAO terminology. Non-standard terminology or jargon will only cause confusion.
b. Canada Communications. Expect routine VHF communications over Canada with the Winnipeg and Edmonton Centers. On initial contact with Edmonton Center, forward request for future step climbs. The Edmonton Center will begin coordinating the altitude requests. As you progress farther north, expect a frequency change to Arctic Radio; first on VHF 126.7 or 126.9, then on HF. Canada has elected to use 123.45 as its VHF air-to-air frequency. Refer to the CA (H/L) 3 & 4 En Route Chart or Jeppesen Polar Orientation Chart 1AP. On polar routes beyond areas of radar coverage, squawk 2000.
c. Military Communications. The Military Aeronautical Communication System (MACS) has a facility in Edmonton (call sign: Edmonton Military) that may answer your call if Trenton Military does not. Their coverage is excellent throughout the polar region. The MACS communicates with military traffic throughout the polar region as well as the Rescue Coordination Center (RCC). The MACS has Selective Call (SELCAL) and phone patch capability, but they do not have aeronautical fix telecommunications network (AFTN) (Teletype) capability, so they cannot pass teletype messages to ATC facilities. Trenton Military has advised that they are happy to help with emergency or irregular operations.
d. Gander Radio Communications. Gander Radio is a general purpose (GP) operator that handles communications with Edmonton Center and Anchorage Center for the northern flight information regions (FIR) all the way to the Russian FIR boundaries. They operate on the ICAO Family “D” HF frequencies: 2971, 4675, 8891 and 11279 as well as on a number of VHF remote sites on 126.7 or 126.9. Arctic Radio’s HF antennas are at Cambridge Bay on the south coast of Victoria Island. The transmitter antenna is a fixed directional antenna with typical coverage beyond the North Pole, east to Iceland and Norway and south to Churchill. On initial contact, obtain the primary and secondary frequencies and a SELCAL check. If unable to contact Gander Radio on HF, attempt contact with Iceland, Cedar Rapids, Stockholm, Houston, Berna, Speedbird or San Francisco Radio. Refer to the Jeppesen Polar Orientation Chart for frequencies.
Page 160 Par 14-2
• As a standard GP radio service, Gander Radio can pass messages between the aircraft and dispatch. Thus, maintaining communications with ATC through Gander Radio would also satisfy the company communications requirement and serve as an acceptable company communications alternative to data link, SATCOM Voice, and Long Distance Operational Control (LDOC).
• If Gander Radio requests the dispatch AFTN address, it is KCHIUALW. Arctic Radio does not have phone patch capability. If needed, Stockholm, Cedar Rapids, Houston, and San Francisco Radio can provide this service. Arctic Radio has access to current temperature and winds aloft forecast and can pass reports from preceding aircraft.
e. Russian Communications. At approximately 100 NM from the Russian FIR, the crew should call Murmansk or Magadan as appropriate for a clearance to enter Russian airspace. The crew reports its flight number, location, flight level (FL), and the estimated time of arrival (ETA) for crossing the Russian state border (AVERI, DEVID, RAMEL, or ORVIT). This applies to entering Russian airspace for the Far East Routes at LISKI, FRENK, or VALTA.
(1) Changing FL. When there are differences between the FL systems of Russia and adjacent states, the changing of FLs may take place at least 16 NM before crossing the Russian state border, unless otherwise directed by Russian ATC. Anchorage does have an agreement with Russia on the acceptance of the aircraft at the FL system of the U.S. and Canada. In this case, they will change the FL of the aircraft to the metric system.
(2) VHF and HF Communications. When operating beyond the VHF range of Russian ATC facilities, communications with ATC are available on HF. The call sign is in the charted communications call-out box and may include the word “radio.” However, “radio” in the call sign does not imply a GP service as in other parts of the world. In Russia, this indicates HF communications with an ATC controller. Russian ATC HF facilities normally show at least two frequencies; use the higher one during the day and the lower at night. No one may be monitoring the unused frequency. Russian HF stations are not SELCAL capable. Therefore, HF frequencies assigned for ATC require a listening watch. If the Russian HF signal appears to be sufficiently strong but distorted, the transmitter may be in the amplitude modulation (AM) mode. If this is the case, select AM on the radio-tuning panel or request the controller to transmit on upper sideband (USB).
(3) Russian FIR Boundary. It is prudent to establish HF contact with the Russian controlling facility well before the Russian FIR boundary: Murmansk Radio on 8950, 11390, 5694 and 4672 for AVERI and DEVID; Magadan Radio on 11390; or 8837 for RAMEL and ORVIT. If unable to establish contact before the FIR boundary or if communications are difficult, pass a request through San Francisco or Gander Radio to Anchorage Center asking them to pass the FIR boundary position report to the appropriate Control, Magadan or Murmansk. Instructions from San Francisco or Gander Radio to contact Magadan or Murmansk Control indicates transfer of control was successful and expects to continue. Continue attempts to contact the Russian Control on HF until successful. Refer to the Polar Orientation Chart for specific ATC procedures and frequencies for each Polar Route. Controller-Pilot Data Link Communication (CPDLC) and Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Contract (ADS-C) are now Par 14-3 Page 161
Page 162 Par 14-3 available with Magadan on Polar 3 and 4. On Russian Far East (RFE) Routes, expect handoffs via VHF.
14-4. POLAR ROUTES.
a. Polar 2. At approximately 63o N., expect a frequency change from Edmonton Center to Gander Radio on 126.7. Leaving VHF range at approximately 80o N., expect to contact Gander Radio on HF. Aircraft equipped with High Frequency Data Link (HFDL) and have operational approval may find this a better medium in some cases. Contact with Murmansk Control on HF 11390 (day) or 4720 (night), well before entering Russian airspace with the FL and an estimate for DEVID intersection. Maintain communications with Gander Radio until in complete contact with Murmansk. Report DEVID intersection (on the Anchorage/Mys Schmidta FIR boundary) to Gander Radio with a request to pass the position report to Anchorage Center.
Expect a handoff to Murmansk Control on HF. Report DEVID intersection to Murmansk Control as well. Expect an ATC route clearance and, if not already received, clearance to a Russian metric cruising level.
b. Polar 3. At approximately 60o N, expect a frequency change from Edmonton Center to Gander Radio on HF. ATC frequency changes include the following:
• Remain with Murmansk Control on HF.
• At TOLIK intersection, expect to contact Khatanga (ha-Tanga) Control on the charted VHF frequency (128.0) to KEMIT intersection.
• At KEMIT, expect to contact Norilsk Control on the charted frequency (132.5).
Expect routine frequency handoffs to charted VHF frequencies from this point on.
c. Polar 4. Contact Magadan Control while maintaining communications with Gander Radio on HF 11390 well before entering Russian airspace with the FL and an estimate for RAMEL at the Anchorage/Mys Schmidta FIR boundary. Frequency 8480 may be available.
d. RAMEL Position Report. Report RAMEL to Arctic Radio with a request to pass the position report to Anchorage Center. Expect a handoff to Magadan Control on HF. Expect an ATC route clearance and, if not already received, clearance to a Russian metric cruising level.
(1) Requesting Clearance to Enter Russian Airspace. Expect ATC frequency changes from Magadan Control on CPDLC and HF. Approximately 200 NM north of Tiksi, contact Tiksi Control on VHF 133.3 and request clearance to enter Russian airspace. This frequency is not charted.
(2) Instructions and Frequencies. Expect instructions to report TIGLA. TIGLA is an unpublished intersection on G491 at N74o18.1 E131o56.2, north of ASLAR. Make subsequent frequency changes as assigned. Most subsequent ATC VHF frequencies are charted.
e. Russia Mongolia FIR Boundary. Working Chita Control, call ahead to Onan Control on 128.0 approximately 15 minutes before SOLOK. Frequency 128.0 is a temporary frequency and un-published. If unable on this frequency, call Ulaanbaatar Control on the charted VHF
frequency. If unable on VHF, attempt contact on charted HF frequencies and continue attempts on VHF. Pass the present cruising FL and the estimate for SOLOK. From Onan or Ulaanbaatar Control, anticipate a handoff to Shand Control. When established with Shand Control and operating from the SB NDB to the DN NDB, request a radar vector to join airway A575 southeast of DN, thus minimizing the large change of direction at DN. Also, request a change of altitude from Shand Control from a Mongolian westerly standard cruising level to a PRC easterly standard cruising level. Refer to the Cruising Levels tables on the EA (H/L)8 En Route Chart.
Because of the high volume of traffic on A575, it is important to establish the aircraft at the correct cruising level before joining the airway.
14-5. CPDLC.
a. Magadan, Russia. Logon with Magadan (GDXB) 15 to 45 minutes prior to the boundary for CPDLC and ADS operations.
b. Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. Attempt logon with Ulaanbaatar (ZMUB) before entering the Ulaanbaatar FIR for CPDLC demonstration purposes only. Do not accept any ATC clearance via CPDLC from Ulaanbaatar. Confirm by voice any clearance received via CPDLC.
14-6. COMPANY COMMUNICATIONS.
a. SATCOM Voice. SATCOM Voice should be available south of 80o N. on both sides of the North Pole. Primary Company communications in these areas are via Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) data link with SATCOM Voice also available.
b. LDOC. Depending on HF signal propagation characteristics, LDOC communications may be available during the entire flight including polar areas. North of approximately 80o N. on both sides of the pole, LDOC is the only means of Company communications. SATCOM Voice is not available. On initial call to an LDOC station, advise the flight’s approximate latitude and longitude. Once you have established communications, obtain the optimum frequencies and a SELCAL check. Send a message to dispatch advising the monitored LDOC station. Generally, ARINC LDOC frequencies are not actively monitored unless the flightcrew requests a call. To establish LDOC communications with an Aeronautical Radio, Inc. (ARINC) station (San Francisco or New York), call on a GP frequency and request an LDOC frequency.
• Northbound, contact an LDOC station, such as Cedar Rapids, San Francisco or New York Radio.
• Northbound at 80o N., this operation may require a frequency change or contact with another LDOC station. Consider San Francisco, Stockholm Radio, Berna, and Speedbird London.
c. Air-to-Air Frequency in Canada. In Canadian northern domestic airspace, VHF frequency 123.45 is available for communicating operational information between aircraft. Refer to the CA (H/L) 10 En Route Chart.
Par 14-4 Page 163
d. FIR Convergence. Several FIRs converge at the North Pole, including Edmonton, Anchorage and several Russian FIRs. The Edmonton Center normally controls polar flights on Polar 2 to the Russian FIR boundary and Murmansk Control from the boundary southward. The Edmonton Center controls flights on Polar 3, then the Anchorage Center to the Russian FIR boundary and Magadan Control from the boundary southward. Murmansk is the controlling Russian ATC unit for flights on Polar 1 and Polar 2 even though the flight may be operating in other Russian FIRs.
14-7. CRUISING LEVELS IN METERS.
a. Change To Meters (QNE) in Russia. When entering Russian airspace from Edmonton or Anchorage airspace, anticipate clearance from a FL to a Russian metric altitude before crossing or at the Russian FIR boundary.
b. Standard Cruising Levels—Differences. The standard meters cruising levels in Russia and Mongolia are the same. These differ from the standard meters cruising levels in the PRC.
The PRC has implemented Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (RVSM) altitudes. Refer to the Cruising Level tables shown on the en route charts for Russia, Mongolia and the PRC.
Expect clearance to a PRC standard cruising level from Mongolian ATC before crossing the FIR boundary between Mongolia and the PRC.
14-8. AIRPORT WEATHER REPORTS.
a. Emergency Airport Weather Reports. Weather reports for the following emergency airports are available via ACARS if equipped:
CANADA Yellowknife, NWT YZF/CYZF GREENLAND Thule AFB (Air Force Base) THU/BGTL MONGOLIA Ulaanbaatar ULN/ZMUB NORWAY Svalbard Longyear LYR/ENSB RUSSIA Bratsk BTK/UIBB RUSSIA (continued) Irkutsk IKT/UIII RUSSIA (cont.) Yakutsk YKS/UEEE
b. Russian Emergency Airport Weather Reports. Obtain weather reports for these Russian emergency airports by telephone and make them available to the flightcrew before departure:
Khatanga HTG/UOHH Norilsk NSK/UOOO Tiksi IKS/UEST Page 164 Par 14-6
14-9. OUTSIDE AIR TEMPERATURE (OAT)/FUEL TEMPERATURES/FUEL FREEZE POINTS. Very cold OATs are common during the winter on a number of the routes.
This is particularly true in the polar region. When practical, plan flights around areas of forecast static air temperatures (SAT) below -65°C. If this is not practical, give special attention to fuel freeze data. The minimum operational fuel temperature limit for a fuel type is based on its specification freeze point. Note that the freeze point of a fuel is the point at which the last wax crystal melts in a frozen sample. This value is approximately 2° warmer than the point at which the first wax crystal forms as the fuel cools down. For Jet A, the specification freeze point is -40°C. Provide a 3°C operational margin, which yields an operational limit of -37°C. The first wax crystal would form at -42°C, so provide a margin of 5°.
14-10. FUEL TEMPERATURE OPERATIONAL LIMIT. A Boeing-approved alternate method for determining the minimum fuel temperature operational limit is to apply the 3°C operational margin to the known freezing point of the fuel loaded on the aircraft. Typically, actual fuel freeze values at ORD and JFK average –44°C, yielding a minimum operational limit of –41°C. Again, the first wax crystal would form at –46°C, maintaining a 5°C margin.
a. Low Altitude Routine Clearance. In Russia, routine clearance to a lower altitude may not be available. If the clearance requires a lower altitude to raise the fuel temperature, request the altitude change. If it does not receive approval, call dispatch for assistance and/or consider declaring an emergency.
b. Overburn. If experiencing a significant overburn, consider that Beijing has good fueling capability. Do everything possible to avoid diverting to an emergency airport in Russia or Mongolia for fuel.
14-11. FMS/AUTOPILOT (AP) PERFORMANCE AT THE POLE.
• Changes in FMS updating approaching the pole.
• DEVID intersection on the Polar 1 route is located at 89oN. Be aware that a map shift may occur as the FMS discontinues global positioning system (GPS) updating at
88.5o N. and transitions to the position of the nearest Inertial Reference Unit (IRU).
• Do not fly directly over the pole due to the possibility of the AP reacting aggressively when passing over the pole to the abrupt 180o change in the orientation of the compass.
This may occur in any AP roll mode: Lateral Navigation (LNAV), HDG SEL or HDG HOLD.
14-12. POLAR EMERGENCY/IRREGULAR.
a. Polar Diversion.
Par 14-9 Page 165
(1) QFE/Meters Altimetry. If diverting to any airport in Russia or Mongolia, be prepared to convert QFE heights assigned in meters below the transition level to QNH altitudes if using QNH for approach and landing. Learning to do this after a need for diversion has developed is too late. Have these procedures well in mind before operating in these areas. China has changed to QNH in meters below the transition level at most international airports.
(2) Cold Weather Altitude Corrections. During operations in extreme cold temperatures, the airplane is lower than the indicated altitude. For considerations during low altitude maneuvering and instrument approaches in cold weather, accomplish reference to a Cold Temperature Altimeter Correction table.
b. Emergency Airports. The airports listed in this section below are emergency airports.
We caution pilots that diversion to any one of these airports is an exercise of the captain’s emergency authority and they should consider it only in the event of a true airplane emergency.
While these airports may be adequate for landing in the event the flight is in distress, passenger handling, airplane handling and maintenance facilities may be less than adequate. Passenger and crew safety may be at risk, particularly in extreme weather. The airplane may be on the ground for an indefinite time. Do not divert to one of these airports for fuel if any safer alternative is available such as a regular airport in the PRC (Beijing or Shanghai). The Russian airports with the best services are Novosibirsk or Khabarovsk.
(1) Available Emergency Airports North of 80o North. In the polar area north of 80o north, at least one emergency airport is within 2 hours flying time at all times. When working the “What if … now” scenarios while in the polar area and considering potential diversion airports, there is a tendency to think Canada and Asia. However, diversion contingency planning should include Thule in Greenland, Longyear in Spitzbergen, Norway, and Barrow, Alaska, which are the closest airports to the route for a considerable period of time. At least one runway at each of these emergency airports is 6,500 feet or longer; Thule AFB has one 10,000-foot runway. During the winter, anticipate runways covered with some amount of snow and/or ice and the need for appropriate stopping techniques.
(2) Passenger Safety During and After Recovery Operation. A very important aspect of diversion to an airport in a remote region is the protection of the passengers after landing and the recovery operation. This includes getting the passengers to their destination and the ability to fly the airplane onward. The plan for doing this in a timely and efficient manner will depend in large part on the information provided by the captain on site. It is most important to establish communication with dispatch as soon as possible following a diversion.
Point-to-point communications may be difficult in the SATCOM Voice. Use whatever means are available, including SATCOM Voice or HF from the airplane. Approach charts are available for these emergency airports, some of which may not be in the FMS database:
Page 166 Par 14-12
Alaska Barrow Canada Churchill, Manitoba Iqaluit, Northwest Territories (NT) Resolute Bay, NT (packed gravel) Yellowknife, NT Greenland Thule AFB Mongolia Choibalsan Ulaanbaatar Norway Svalbard (Longyear) Russia Abakan Irkutsk Salekhard Tiksi Russia (cont.)
Khatanga Krasnoyarsk Murmansk Yakutsk Russia (cont.)
Ulan-Ude Mirny Norilsk Russia (cont.)
Bratsk Chita Novosibirsk Khabarovsk
c. Search and Rescue (SAR). SAR efforts in the far north during extreme weather have limited prospects for success, especially if you do not initiate these efforts immediately. One good reason for maintaining a Company communications capability is to assure the routine progress of the flight in remote areas such as the far north and to initiate SAR efforts without delay if the need arises.
(1) Alaska and Western Arctic. The United States Coast Guard (USCG) RCC at Juneau, Alaska coordinates SAR from Alaska north to the pole and south on the Russian side of the pole as far west as 100o east to within 12 miles of the Russian coastline. The Coast Guard has an agreement with the Russian RCC in Vladivostok to assist Russian SAR efforts with U.S. SAR resources from Nome and Anchorage. A Russian representative is attached to the Coast Guard staff in Juneau for liaison purposes and is on call H+24. The USCG considers an aircraft forced to land at an emergency airport in northern Russia (Siberia) a passenger and crew “life at risk” situation. In such an event, the Coast Guard will provide all available assistance. Several large Coast Guard and Air Force aircraft are available in the Anchorage area for SAR efforts. Earliest possible notification through dispatch to the USCG RCC that an emergency diversion is in progress is important to assure the timely dispatch of recovery assistance.
(2) Canada. Canada indicates that SAR service is available in Canadian airspace as far north as the North Pole. Realistically, the far north cannot assure effective SAR service in extreme weather.
(3) Russia. Russia provides SAR service only within the radius of operations of SAR aircraft based at airports in the Russian far north. This coverage does not extend to the North Pole. The USCG can provide additional SAR resources in the event of a “life at risk” situation in Russian far north. Refer to Alaska and Western Arctic above.
Par 14-12 Page 167 (and 168)
Par 15-1 Page 169 CHAPTER 15. OCEANIC AND OVERFLIGHT OPERATIONS TO THE RUSSIAN REPUBLIC
AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES (CIS)
15-1. INTRODUCTION. This section of the world is undergoing rapid and often unanticipated changes in the field of international and domestic aviation. The modernization of the air traffic systems in Russia, including the CIS, is well underway. They are implementing higher technology and improved procedures based on International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) recommendations. As updated information become available, it will be included in future revisions of this AC. The CIS includes:
Armenia Azerbaijan Belarus Georgia Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Moldavia Russia Tajikistan Turkmenistan Ukraine Uzbekistan
15-2. RUSSIA. We expect a significant increase in air transportation between the United States and Russia due to recent bilateral air transportation agreements between these countries.
Operators of both large and small aircraft are increasing scheduled and chartered air service.
a. Regional Differences. The area comprising Russia and the CIS is more than twice the size of the United States. The aviation infrastructure within Russia and the CIS is diverse and is continually evolving. Flight operations within the western part of the country (generally west of the Ural Mountains) are considerably less challenging than flights within the eastern part of the area. In the east, primarily due to limited facilities and harsh winter weather, routine flight planning can be challenging. Communications, navigation and airport availability require special emphasis when planning flights within this eastern region. While operating aircraft in the western region is generally less demanding, there are many significant operational differences.
b. International Airports and Airways. International routes and airports in Russia and the CIS are generally available for use by foreign aircraft operators, provided the operators have received appropriate flight authorizations. These routes and airports are in the appropriate Aeronautical Information Publication (AIP). Many of the CIS countries are now publishing their AIPs separately from Russia and you should obtain this information before conducting operations. Air traffic control (ATC) communications are in English and airports have customs and immigration services as well as fuel. Jet fuel is known as TS-1 and does contain additives.
However, all western aircraft manufacturers have accepted it. Aviation Gasoline (AVGAS) availability is limited. Instrument approach procedures (IAP) are generally available in the ICAO format and are similar to approach procedures used worldwide.
c. Domestic Airports and Airways. Domestic airports and routes in Russia and the CIS are generally not usable by foreign aircraft operators without authorization and possibly will require a local navigator. Use the navigator to communicate with ATC and to provide instruction to the flightcrew regarding navigation principles and procedures. Accomplish ATC en route and terminal operations within the domestic systems using Russian as the primary language. The weather and Notices to Airmen (NOTAM) information for some of these airports is not in English.
d. General Navigational Considerations. Navigation off established airways is generally not permitted. Because of this, it restricts foreign aircraft operations to published international
routes and airports, even for refueling stops and alternate airports. Appropriate flightcrew member training on metric conversion and the in-flight availability of conversion charts are necessary to enable crewmembers to convert metric altitudes, weights and wind speeds. Russian or CIS military and some domestic operators have permission to fly under visual flight rules (VFR). File a flight plan for instrument flight rules (IFR) or VFR operations and, in most cases, foreign operators will not receive approval for VFR. In some areas, ATC procedures have developed to allow operations off published routings using radar services. If the operator receives clearance to operate off airways, they have the authorization to accept the clearance.
Due to military concerns, it is possible that the radar vectors received may not be the most expeditious for the operator. In the event of an emergency situation, the military, working with the civilian controllers, will radar vector the aircraft to the nearest suitable airport on the request of the pilot.
e. AIP. The Aeronautical Information Service (AIS), which is part of the Ministry of Civil Aviation (MCA) of Russia, publishes the AIP. Most CIS countries also publish the AIP, which is in Russian and English, for their countries separately through AIS. It contains detailed flight operational requirements as well as terminal, airport and instrument approach charts in ICAO format. It is available from the AIS on an annual subscription basis, including monthly revisions.
It now includes the navigation charts and standard instrument approach procedures (SIAP) for Russia and the other CIS domestic systems, which are usually available in English. You may obtain further information from the following:
The Russian Embassy 2650 Wisconsin Avenue Washington, D.C. 20007
(202) 939-8907
f. ATC Communications. The ATC communication system in Russia and the CIS is adequate, and in some cases, very good. Operators commonly use very high frequency (VHF) for en route communications and some routes require high frequency (HF). Communication equipment requirements are in the AIP of each country. Air traffic controllers in Russia and the CIS have access to weather and NOTAM information, but they must call the local office if they do not have direct computer access.
g. Aeronautical Fixed Telecommunications Network (AFTN) or Societe International de Télécommunications Aeronautique (SITA) Networks. Accomplish data transmission and reception using the AFTN or SITA networks even though AFTN may only be available in remote areas. Transmitting or receiving messages using the AFTN system to and from many remote areas, especially in the Russian Far East (RFE), may be less timely than desirable.
h. Telephone Service. For telephone services, they use a variety of systems, including satellite. The new communications companies and their joint venture partners have put in place new modern systems in most of the regions. While in the past the telephone systems required the use of an operator to place many of the long distance calls, now most of the major airports have direct dial capability equal to Europe.
Page 170 Par 15-2
i. Navigation. International routes permit navigation using Class I or Class II navigation systems. On some domestic routes, they may require long-range navigation systems (LRNS).
Route widths vary from 8 km to 20 km as indicated in the Russian AIP. It is the pilots’ responsibility to keep the aircraft within established airway boundaries. Available altitudes also vary from one route to another as identified in the AIP. When planning flights, operators must ensure that the desired and required altitudes are available for particular routes. This is especially important in the RFE as there is usually only one route available for flights. Magadan flight information region (FIR) in the RFE now receives the latest technology of communication, navigation, surveillance and air traffic management (CNS/ATM) operations. Magadan has data link capabilities for aircraft that are equipped with data link and Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Contract (ADS-C). They now control Polar 3 and 4 routes and utilize Controller-Pilot Data Link Communications (CPDLC) and ADS-C on those routes. They also control A-218, which is restricted to aircraft approved for required navigation performance 4 (RNP-4) navigation using CPDLC for position reporting. Operators primarily accomplish Class I navigation on some of the other routes using non-directional radio beacons (NDB). However, some compatible VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) transmitters have been installed recently.
Western Russia uses compatible VOR transmitters to define international routes.
(1) Use of Operators during Class II and Class I Navigation. In certain situations, especially in the RFE, it may be necessary to require operators to use Class II navigation to supplement Class I navigation due to the distance between Navigational Aids (NAVAID) and the limited width of airways.
(2) Class II En Route Navigation on International Routes. Class II en route navigation on international routes should be relatively simple, provided that the operator properly address two conditions.
(a) The first condition is that, depending on the published route widths, length of flight and type of Class II navigation equipment used, it may not be possible for an operator to maintain the course centerline (CL) accuracy required by the Russian AIP.
(b) The second condition concerns the lack of VOR/distance measuring equipment (DME) transmitters, especially in the eastern region. Operators must give special consideration regarding navigation accuracy requirements when using inertial reference systems (IRS) such as B-757, B-767 and A-310. It may not be possible to obtain the required navigation accuracy unless, considering the specific route and length of flight, you provide VOR/DME updates to the IRSs.
j. Alternate Airports. For flight planning purposes, especially in the RFE (Polar and Siberian regions), operators must give careful consideration to the location of, and routing to, suitable alternate airports. Carefully consider fuel planning due to potential difficulties with communications, diversion airport routings and suitable airports due to weather conditions. It is not uncommon for the nearest alternate airport to be over 500 NM when making a diversion decision.
k. Extended-Range Operations (ER-OPS) with Two-Engine Airplanes (Extended Operations (ETOPS)). Operations in the RFE with two-engine aircraft may require ETOPS Par 15-2 Page 171