PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - approach climb 2.1% vs MACG 2.5% or greater
Old 2nd March 2026 | 10:07
  #42 (permalink)  
wof
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 51
Likes: 9
From: N/A
Originally Posted by john_tullamarine
Unless the overweight matter is discussed in the AFM/crew operating manual …
Thanks John!

One aspect I’m still trying to reconcile is why Boeing does not explicitly reference MACG in the overweight/NNC landing logic.

For example, at a given landing weight I may be below the approach/landing climb-limited weight, and therefore, per Boeing guidance, select a higher landing flap and corresponding GA flap. However, with that weight and flaps, it seems possible that the aircraft may not achieve the published MACG for a particular procedure.

By the way, this isn’t a question about how MACG can be calculated, the EFB provides that capability and we use it to calculate landing performance.

What I’m trying to understand is whether, in overweight or OEI go-around scenarios, crews are expected to go beyond Boeing’s climb-limited weight and configuration guidance and independently ensure MACG compliance, or whether Boeing’s logic assumes that obstacle clearance is addressed elsewhere?


wof is offline  
Reply