Originally Posted by
john_tullamarine
My concern is that the certification requirements cover the enroute terrain consideration, which can be critical for some aircraft and, if one can't meet that, then the plan ought to be looking at a drift down while avoiding hostile terrain by the usual clearance requirement. Heading off with weights which would/might result in gross ceiling, coincident with hostile terrain, probably isn't a really good strategy.
I may have the wrong end of the stick from my reading of the thread .. in which case, I'll go quietly. Concern is to make sure that folks aren't forgetting the terrain and a need to have a bit of fat for the not-so-good days ?
The regulation I posted above is an operating rule that applies to all air carrier flights of turbojet airplanes, and requires the airplane, with the critical engine out, to be able to either (under (a)(1)) climb when at an altitude 1000 feet above all terrain within five miles of the planned track at all points in the flight, allowing for expected fuel burn-off, or (under (a)(2)) have a bail out path at all points in the flight to a diversion airport that similarly ensures terrain clearance. Credit for fuel jettison is allowed under the (a)(2) option. The engine out cruise altitude at maximum continuous thrust will therefore always be at least 1000 feet above all terrain within five miles of the planned or diversion tracks.
Does that address your concern or did I miss your point?