Originally Posted by
TBL Warrior
Operating below your AFM RTOW for the ambient conditions will guarantee it by virtue, as you need not worry about second and third segments. Hence, no requirement in hardball C400 series ops. Furthermore, considering that Australian airports are at most 3,000ft AMSL, other than being grossly overloaded, your argument is invalid. What next - engine out performance in a 207? Thus, I stand by my opinion expressed previously.
Second and third segments in relation to “hardball C400 series ops” Please explain? Do you mean that there aren’t any, ‘cos that is indeed so and what makes light twins far more hazardous - even at many sea level airports - than jets on wet runways at places like Cuzco (Google earth it, kiddies).
Performance “guarantee by virtue” in relation to C400 series? I would be interested in just what that performance is. My gut tells me that in the conditions 421dog originally described it wouldn’t go anywhere near achieving your 15 ft NET wet runway obstacle clearance. (for the benefit of our newbies, NET clearances are less than what the aeroplane should achieve in the hands of a skilled pilot - they take test results and degrade to account for old airframes and even older, doddery pilots).
Submitted with apologies for thread drift and willy waving