aterpster

mutt:

I don't think so. Check the topo.

Runway 36 is the calm wind runway. In fact, the airport manager recommends 36 so long as tail wind limitations aren't exceeded.

mutt

[IMG]


Oops, thats the problem of only using Jeppesen for my guesses!

I cant read the heights on the Topo, but it looks like 6900 feet for twin peaks, so that would be an obstacle measured from the adjusted runway end. Then it would depend on how much of an impact it had on the takeoff weight. If the impact was too severe, then i would add the 6400 feet obstacle straight ahead, and define a turning point back to the right that would increase the track distance to the 6900 feet point.

Almost forgot, as i operate under FAR91, all that i legally have to do it look at the obstacle, decide that i can clear it, and yee haw, advance the power


Mutt

FlightPathOBN

"SHOLE"?!?!

Is that pronounced "ESS-HOLE"?

"Ess-HO"

"show-LEI"?

"shhh- OLE'!"

I can just imagine....

(sorry for the interruption)

aterpster

Mutt:

Oops, thats the problem of only using Jeppesen for my guesses!

I cant read the heights on the Topo, but it looks like 6900 feet for twin peaks, so that would be an obstacle measured from the adjusted runway end. Then it would depend on how much of an impact it had on the takeoff weight. If the impact was too severe, then i would add the 6400 feet obstacle straight ahead, and define a turning point back to the right that would increase the track distance to the 6900 feet point.[/quote]

The twin peaks are 6,900, plus vegetation. The ridge line to the west is 7,200, plus vegetation. Byond the 7,200' ridge line is a small lake then the terrain slopes up quite rapidly to almost 10,000.


Exactly!

Pugilistic Animus

Aterpster

ratted out by ATC (Radar)...exclaim over the radio that you were almost killed, something like that...and don't think filing an ASR is fully protective, I know that they have ways to get you despite filing one...

'OEI'

Zeffy
I agree wholeheartedly

Reduce the weight till I make the most limiting gradient, at least it's something proactive ..and frankly I don't care about engine time limitations; it's not as if the thing is just gonna explode ( I hope)...but, I'm not reducing to MCT until I'm sure,...but yeah but that would be a long long climb..you'd definitely can't pretend that's a real OEI procedure that's for sure .....let'em boroscope the engine far cheaper than slamming into a mountain.... yes, I do understand the many differences between a real NTOFP and a DP...

Some FAR 23 jets also use FAR 25 net flight path data, kind of a mixed bag certification...and have the published data...I actually found an interesting article on that particular topic but I can't seem to find it now, if I do I'll link it...

Mutt I know I just wasn't sure how 91.13 plays into it...in fact I learned a great lesson from 'Sully' in that you can't go to the birds to get the answers...
.Although I respect Sully, my real 'heroes' wrt to miracles are Al Haynes and his crew and that DHL Airbus crew

all I do nowadays is show folks how to fly little baby planes-part time... I'm no longer current in anything, and not very 'experienced' comparatively, so I really don't worry anymore about these things, I always used let the captain worry anyway...this markets really sucks, airlines suck... don't wanna fly regional...rather teach...I guess