(This is a useful thread, thanks for the explanations)
I’m looking for clarification on how Boeing expects us to account for missed-approach climb gradient (MACG) during an overweight landing in a non-normal condition.
For example in the 787 the QRH/FCOM, the decision logic is based on approach/landing climb-limited weight, which then drives the landing flap and go-around flap selection (e.g. Flaps 25 / GA Flaps 20 when below the limit, and Flaps 20 / GA Flaps 5 when above it and in case of OEI).
What I don’t see is any explicit requirement to check the MACG (nominal 2.5% per PANS-OPS) as part of this decision. Boeing appears to rely entirely on the climb-limited weight logic and prescribed configurations rather than a separate MACG assessment.
My understanding is that the 2.5% MACG is primarily a procedure-design assumption rather than an aircraft operating requirement, and that obstacle clearance is handled through procedure design.
Is that interpretation correct? Or are crews expected to independently ensure missed-approach climb-gradient compliance during an overweight or OEI go-around, beyond following Boeing’s logic?