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
approval due to the lack of adequate or suitable airports within 60 minutes of the operator’s route. The RFE is an area east of Khabarovsk to Anadyr on the Bering Sea. The lack of airports in the RFE and the polar region may require an ETOPS dispatch. Russian and U.S. authorities require approval for ETOPS. Advisory Circular (AC) 120-42, current edition, provides additional information.
l. Local Navigator Assistance. Navigation within Russia and the CIS is the responsibility of the pilot in command (PIC). Flights operating off of established international routes, or on the domestic route system, usually do not receive permission unless a local navigator is aboard. In unique situations, they will also require a radio operator. With the improvements in communications, the navigator now normally accomplishes this requirement. Flights to or from domestic airports sometime require the assistance of a navigator. Although Russia or the CIS may require navigators, they are not required flightcrew members under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) and are not responsible for the conduct of the flight. The navigator’s purpose is to assist in cross-checking course information en route and to assist in cross-checking information on terminal arrivals, departures and IAPs. U.S. operators must have FAA approval to carry Russian or CIS navigators/radio operators. You should also consider the following information when evaluating these requirements:
• Due to the lack of informational and technical data pertaining to operations in the domestic systems needed to meet requirements of parts 121 and 135, it may not be possible for operators to conduct operations at most Russian and CIS domestic airports.
• Navigators are to use a cockpit jumpseat, which may preclude a FAA inspector from accomplishing a required en route inspection or a validation test on a particular flight or series of flights.
• Some charts for the domestic system may not be available in English.
• The MCA charges a substantial fee for the use of navigators and we expect that other states will do the same.
m. Area of Magnetic Unreliability (AMU). Depending on the latitude of the routes flown, you may conduct operations within the AMU. An AMU in Russia is not formally defined.
However, recognizing that nearly the same effects of magnetic unreliability exist in the Russian far north as in Canada, consider the area north of 74° N. on polar routes in Russian airspace the AMU. Airways in northern Russia, south of 74° N. are referenced to magnetic north.
n. Aeronautical Weather Data and NOTAMs. Aeronautical weather data and NOTAMs should be available in standard ICAO formats through normal channels for all international airports within Russia and the CIS. While this data is also available for all domestic airports, it is not always in English or in the ICAO format.
o. Altimetry. A complete understanding of the altimetry system settings is very important when flying in Russia or the CIS. The altimetry definitions are as follows:
Page 172 Par 15-2
(1) QNH. An altimeter setting equivalent to the barometric pressure measured at an airport altimeter datum and corrected to sea level pressure. At the airport altimeter datum, an altimeter set to QNH indicates airport elevation. Altimeters are set to QNH while operating at and below the transition altitude and below the transition level.
(2) QNE. An altimeter setting equivalent to International Standard Atmosphere (ISA) sea level pressure, 1013.2 hPa or 29.92 inches of mercury. Altimeters are set to QNE while operating at and above the transition level.
(3) QFE. An altimeter setting equivalent to the barometric pressure measured at an airport altimeter datum, usually the approach end of the runway in use. At the airport altimeter datum, an altimeter set to QFE indicates zero altitude.
p. Terminal IAPs. These procedures at international airports within Russia and the CIS are conventional and should not be confusing to foreign operators. Arrival and departure procedures are similar to U.S. STARs and SIDs. Operators do not normally use radar vectoring during normal operations. They use radar normally as a surveillance tool so flightcrew members should expect to fly the full-charted procedures published in the AIP or Jeppesen charts. Flight crewmembers should be aware of the use of atmospheric pressure at airport elevation (QFE) and that transition levels vary from one sector to another. Flight crewmembers require training to use the QFE or QNH procedures with the conversion tables as they will receive all clearances based on QFE below the transition level. IAPs are standard (ILS, VOR and NDB). Due to a lack of vectoring, operators normally fly full approaches (requiring a course reversal). Precision radar approaches are also available in Russia and the CIS. Terminal IAPs at some domestic airports are not in English and are not available to foreign aircraft. Operators must obtain the necessary data and comply with the appropriate CFR concerning routes, airports, weather and communication.
Local navigators, required for foreign aircraft operators within the domestic system, will carry en route, terminal area and instrument approach charts for use within the domestic system. You may obtain STARs, SIDs, en route, terminal, and standard instrument approach (SIA) charts in English from commercial sources and the flightcrew will utilize them during all operations.
q. Training Programs. To adequately address the unique environment of the Russian and CIS airspace, it requires revisions to air carrier training programs and/or international procedures training for flightcrew members prior to the issuance of OpSpecs. All airports in Russia are special qualification airports unless listed as exception airports in Advisory Circular AC 120-45, Airplane Flight Training Device Qualification, current edition. Appropriate information contained in the AIP relative to the country where the operators conduct operations should be in air carrier training programs. Give careful consideration to training programs in the following areas:
(1) Communication Procedures. Include procedures to ensure communications are available between the aircraft and dispatch center.
(2) In-Flight Weather Updates. Flight crewmembers will require training on how to update en route and terminal area forecasts (TAF).
Par 15-2 Page 173
Page 174 Par 15-2
(3) Metric Conversions. Flight crewmembers will require training in procedures to convert to or from the metric system.
(4) Navigation Procedures. Depending on the geographic area of operations and navigation equipment used, flightcrew members may require additional training on unique navigation systems and procedures.
(5) Emergency Procedures. These procedures will require special attention due to airspace restrictions, limited alternate airports in certain locations, limited knowledge of domestic airports, limitations in the ability of the traffic controller’s ability to speak English and in-flight emergency procedures within Russia and the CIS.
r. Flight Approval. According to both the Russian AIP and the International Flight Information Manual (IFIM), an operator must receive written approval from MCA-Moscow before initiating a flight which will enter Russian airspace. Operators will not request flight approval through any regional ministry or Aeroflot office. Do not consider any approval granted by a regional office sufficient unless accompanied by approval from MCA-Moscow. Aircraft operators intending to utilize standard air corridors and international airports in Russia should submit their request via telex directly to the MCA for Russian operations far enough in advance so as to reach the ministry at least 5 working days (3 weeks suggested) before departure.
MCA–Russia Telegraphic Address:
International Department State Civil Aviation Authority Leningradsky Prospect 37 Moscow Telex: 411182 AFL SU Telegraphic Address:
Central Department of Operational Services Telex: 412303 CDS SU ATTN: UUUUYAYW (Central Dispatch) and UUUFYAY SITA: MOWZGYA and MOWYAYA
(1) Non-Standard Routings. Submit operator requests to use non-standard routings and/or land at airports normally serving domestic traffic through the Economic Section of the U.S. Embassy in Moscow, APO NY, 09862 (Telegraphic address: American Embassy Moscow, Telex: 413160 USGSO SU). Information included in the telex is in the AIP and IFIM. Recent operator experience indicates that the communication infrastructure may preclude receiving this authority in a timely manner. Personal presentations, including objectives and justification, may be more effective.
(2) Other Countries. For other CIS countries, use the same procedure if a MCA exists.
We recommend you to contact the embassy of the state in question to obtain the status of their civil aviation control.
s. Validation Flight Requirements. Gaining approval to operate within Russian airspace requires FAA validation flights for U.S. operators. Acquiring significant expansion in service or operating area within the CIS requires validation flights for operators. Some examples of situations requiring validation flights include the following:
• An operator previously serving in the western Russian airspace desires to operate in remote regions.
• An operator that has not operated within Russia or the CIS within the past 6 months.
• Any other situation that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) determines is necessary to ensure a safe operation.
• You may conduct validation flights with revenue passengers or cargo aboard, unless special situations dictate otherwise. Consider the following items during validation flights:
• Flight approval.
• Adequacy of special airport qualification procedures (14 CFR part 121, § 121.445) as revised.
• Flight planning and flight release/dispatch procedures, when applicable.
• Contingency planning—emergency/alternate airports for takeoff, en route and destination.
• Communications with Russia or the CIS (e.g., telex, ATTN, and SITA).
• Weather and NOTAM availability within Russia/CIS.
• Fueling and cargo loading procedure.
Par 15-2 Page 175 (and 176)