Escape routes in Airtaxi

[gigi116]

I have been just employed into Airtaxi operations. Due to the fact that here the flights are scheduled in few hours and airports changes day by day , there is a BIG safety problem :

- There are no pubblished procedures regarding ESCAPE ROUTES to follow with an Engine failure.

I heard some "tricks" used like :

-take off in VMC only,
-use of GA procedure for that runway
-follow the SID if gradient is respected.

but in my opinion none of above , respect the legal requirements.

I would like to know your opinions as I want to develop a safe procedure.

thanks

[CL300]

A lot of providers sell N-1 engine takeOff paths if gradient is not met or else.

Jeppesen, Flygprestanda, Dassault (if you fly on of these)...

Usually web access , including notams, intersection take off, etc..

[theWings]

Excellent topic gigi116, long overdue a good thrashing here on prune!

Yes, variety and short notice mean that GA is on the backfoot when it comes to take-off performance. All too often sums aren't done fully or realistically and the crew don't cover the escape route in the brief before launch. And there's always the 'go anyway' pressure...

So to the solution:

Step 1 - determine whether the aircraft can actually make the required climb gradient for the SID.

- company provides net climb gradient weight/temp limits specific to the airfield along with the flight documents or

- company provides access to online performance software mentioned by CL :ok: or

- crew use a/c manufacturer supplied software on a/c's laptop or

- crew get their head in the ship's library

Step 2 anyone???

ps. take-off in VMC only = get a really good look at the mountain you're about to fly into.:uhoh:

[adverse-bump]

Would this not depend on the type of ac your flying.

If your talking about seneca style ac there is no min climb grad that the a/c is guarantied to make, they only guaranty that it will make a min decent grad whilst single engine...

hope this helps (wont if the engine stops mind!)

[DC9gti]

Use the GA procedure for that runway? In case there is one you can´t be sure if you comply with the required climb gradient. Even if the required climb gradient is the minimum (2%), it is calculated from de DH/MDH and from the missed aproach point, wich is usually located before the runway threshold. You are going to start the take off roll from that threshold, with no speed and at least 100 feet below the DH.

[l8starter]

It's been an awful long time since I did my Perf A exams, and to be honest I didn't understand much about it at the time anyway !

Point is, I went to the airlines, eventually :-), where we were informed we could "forget all about that", and just learn how to use/interpret the performance data provided by the company for the never changing destinations that we flew to. Easy !

Done a bit of corporate since,and with an operator that subscribes to a performance service provider. Easy ! I am wondering though,just what people do who work for companies that don't provide this service (as is the original poster methinks). Afterall, in the corporate world,it's quite possible to operate out of small fields,in exotic locations, with no SID's, and very little in the way of ATC once airborne.

I know you can get balanced field data from the AFM, but that won't help you with escape routes. Also given the potential for a rapidly changing operational environment and 'go now' mentality, the time pressure and (lack of) opportunity to brief properly and agree on a 'plan' in the event of an engine failure, means people could find themselves becoming an accident statistic one day.

Just wondering if anyone who really undersdtands this subject could shed some light, or people who maybe have to operate regularly under these circumstances, could share their experiences ?

L8

[frontlefthamster]

...which is pointless and irrelevant as the missed approach is begun a very significant distance behind the engine failure point.

Why are swung NTOFPs not published in the same way that approaches, MSAs, and so forth are? Why the mystery? If an airport operator can't prove that it's safe to climb out straight ahead, why is it not the responsibility of the airport operator to provide another reliable means of achieving safety?

(Those were rhetorical questions; I know what the answers are, but they are mostly historical and less relevant than they were).

The travelling public are being hazarded (albeit at a very low probability) by the ludicrous fact that every operator has to do these analyses independently. This is an outrageous replication of work...

[Steak&Kidney_Pie]

FLH: An outrageous amount of work.....so you now expect the airport authority to create the necessary performance for each individual aircraft, type and configuration, and environment on the day, if not, do you expect them to bulldoze down mountains (which would only be done once they had worked out the individual aircraft performance)?? :=

Get real, take responsibility as a pilot. Thats what you are paid to do.

I take it gigi that you are flying an aircraft which isn't perf A? Otherwise surely you wouldn't need an escape route? Oh, BTW, i believe you are expected to follow a SID unless otherwise requested in the event of engine problems? Why would that therefore be a "trick?" If you are in a piston aircraft, then as adverse bump says, your aircraft is not certified to achieve a positive rate of climb, and therefore, it makes little difference. As I will explain below, common sense where possible will always help.

Gigi, what do you mean also by "respect the legal requirements?" What is you interpretation of this?

In our company, i examine each airfield seperately, the only major factor in this situation will be terrain, which can be dealt with using a topographical chart eg. Sion, down the valley to Martigny and up to Lake Geneva otherwise climb to FL200 on SID. MSA 17000 due to mountains. (My aircraft can meet the SID with an engine out, however, i always like another way out:ok:)

In the event, before each flight, I brief the copilot of VMC or IMC actions in the event of an engine failure. The performance already proves I can fly second segment safely, therefore if IMC before acceleration altitude, I will continue with the SID until the aircraft is secure and ready to return for a landing under a mayday, otherwise VMC, I will carry out the same procedure as above where appropriate, but will return visually. Common sense has to apply as well!

What would concern me is anyone rushing me to get going, and not briefing properly. What ever happens, these people, no matter how important, are paying good money for you to get them there SAFELY! I have no hesitance in saying NO to hurry-along clients. Why risk my life?

All the best to you all

SKP

[DC9gti]

JAR-OPS 1 and EU-OPS say the OPERATOR must design escape routes in case the aircraft doesn´t comply with the required climb performance for the SIDs.

[mikehammer]

Oh, BTW, i believe you are expected to follow a SID unless otherwise requested in the event of engine problems?

I don't understand, are you asking a question here, or stating something you consider to be fact? Please explain.

[733driver]

Steak&Kidney_Pie, you say:

I take it gigi that you are flying an aircraft which isn't perf A? Otherwise surely you wouldn't need an escape route?

Of course perf A aircraft need escape routes. Everytime the climb gradient required by the SID is higher then the one the aircraftt can do one engine out you need an escape route. Sometimes of course climb gradient requirements are not due to terrain but for noise abatment or airspace structure in which case I am not too woried. But often it's for terrain.

Of course following the SID is the obvious thing to do after an engine failure if you have the performance. But, make sure you have the performance to wherever you need to be to be safe (i.e. SID altitude, MSA or whatever is applicable)

The missed approach as an escape route is not a bad idea. In fact, most escape routes are based on the missed approach procedure since its intention is to return you to the airfield, or close to the airfield as opposed to making you fly away from the field like an SID.

Also, I think it would indeed be nice if airports would publish a one-size-fits all escape route, similar to the missed approach, that guaratees that you can clear all obstacles with a minimum gradient of say 2.4% net, so that every certified transport category aircraft could fly that procedure and be safe. Could be as easy as: climb on runway track to D3.0 "IXYZ"LOC and at least 1500ft, turn right, climbing to 3000ft to "AB" NDB and hold.

I think it would be nice if we could get this from the airport. Then all we would need to make sure is can we make that gradient given today's conditions?

[ECAM_Actions]

* DISCLAIMER: MY ADVICE IS FOR GUIDANCE ONLY AND MAY BE COMPLETELY WRONG *

In the event of an engine failure, you either fly the SID, or the published engine out SID (if one exists).

Beyond that, whilst having a pre-briefed way out is an excellent idea, and helps with situational awareness by making you aware of things such as terrain before you take off, my personal opinion is that do whatever is necessary to keep the thing flying!

As was said above - if you're flying a twin that is only going down on one engine, well, the brown stuff has hit the fan and there is sod all anyone can do about it. Just hope that you can walk away from it.

Personally, I'd throw the book out the window and just fly the thing out of trouble (assuming it climbs). If I survived long enough to face an inquiry about it afterwards, I'd be quite happy. :) Flying a SID or EO procedure would be amongst the last things on my mind.

Don't forget to fly the aircraft! ;) It seems to be a basic error made over and over again.

ECAM Actions.

[CL300]

one size fits all used to exist in the old pan-ops definitions. However your performance would affect your escape route, notwithstanding the margins. On an escape route you need only 35 ft Straight and level and 50 ft in the turn above the highest obstacle with well known formula of the corridor 90+.125d blablabla...

One thing to remember, as per regulation, these routes are drawn on the assumption that you are loosing the engine at V1 and this is it. very rarely are they designed from DER, our FMS are sooooo useless ( General aviation) for these events that this is a joke. Are your escape routes loaded as the secondary flight plan ? Are they activated automatically if predicted performance would not match the SId ?

A long way to go, but in IMC, MAX Gross, Hot and High.....One's has to offset the bets !!:ouch:

[gigi116]

Thanks for your answers and useful considerations !

1) My airplane is JAA performance class A , Hawker 800 Xp operated according to EU OPS.

2) JAA Operators for performance class A are required to develop a contingency procedure when SIDs gradient can not be flown.

3) SIDs are usually intended for all engine operating and reports generic informations about climb reqs. It is very common find gradients more than 7 - 8 % for "ATC or Noise reqs." (I don't think there are a/c able to fly 8% on single engine !)

My opinion is that we always SHOULD WELL KNOW and brief before departure what to do if one engine fail !

It means : gradient required and performed, escape route briefed, depicted on flightlog and loaded into SEC FPL. ATC advised about procedure.

Regardless gradients, GA procedure probably is the best source for indications about track and ATC requirements.

Please tell me "IF and HOW" your Company comply. We all on PPRUNE can find the best way to cope requirements and increase safety !

[CL300]

Gigi,

Netjets Europe does exactly what you are describing using flygprestanda as the provider for airoport/runway analysis, only variation, you cannot recall and activate the secondary fpl manually fast enough on an engine failure path..As a consequence, IF an engine fails at V1 , you will have to fly raw/raw/raw data.
ATC is only advised when you have lost the engine of your intentions, but hey mayday; airspace is yours, even on a left turn out instead of Right turn...
PART C is driving the drill in this case, like CAt B/C airports....
Rememberas well ANY airport with a circle to land minima higher than 1000ft AGL is CAT B therefore briefing is required...

7%, 8%....not on a hawker, but on airplanes yes :-)


If no escape route depicted, a clear segment ending at 1500ft AAL is clear in front of you for 10 km as a minimum up to 25 km...enjoy the ride...

[gigi116]

i am used to put an hold for eng fail on the PREV LEGS pagei (you shoud also have collins FMS) it is faster than SEC FPL but it must be deleted after t/o to have correct figures for alternate fuel remaining.

thanks for understand my questions !