Mutt,
One and the same - the loss of signatures means no email address as per days of old (and 500 or so lost posts!)
despegue,
It appears that "the people of DBA, GMI, AB who trained me to do so" may not have the required knowledge to cater for all circumstances.
V2 is established as the minimum speed that will produce the certification gradients and meet the minimum safety margins over Vs, Vmcg etc. It most certainly is not the best rate of climb or best gradient at that point for most aeroplanes - your flight manual should show you that climbing clean at your enroute climb speed with MCT will give better performance than in the second segment, depending on the take-off flap setting.
The key issue was the acceleration altitude.
If the acceleration altitude clears all obstacles for 30-40 km on the departure track, then thrust settings and flap retraction are not much of an issue - they just will not be in accordance with the procedures envisaged by the certification authorities and they will not be particularly efficient. The vast majority of your operations may well be conducted in such benign geography.
However, some airports have significant terrain issues. If there are obstacles down track, then dehavillanddriver is correct in that maximum take-off weight may be achieved by planning an acceleration altitude below the highest obstacle (with appropriate factors added to the third segment length) with obstacle clearance being achieved in the fourth segment. If that is the case, then extending the second segment and consequently the third segment may result in a very noisy reward for remaining ignorant of the whole story!
I think you need to rethink your approach to the issue.
Tambaran,
I reread your initial question and your response. Since it appears that you already knew the answers, I am confused about what question you really wanted to ask.
Stay Alive,