4 Dogs .. I am probably a little more conservative than some. Starting off with a performance background prior to flying heavies, I knew (at that time) that I knew a lot more than I came to realise I knew, if you know what I mean ...... (hopefully this is me talking and not the exquisite red I had for dinner just now).
Looking to your comments ..
(a) one always should structure SOPs so that the AEO case keeps the aircraft above the presumed OEI flightpath - if the two tracks are the same. It is where the OEI heads off down the valley and the AEO keeps going towards the hills that I get worried ...
(b) so far as pushing the second segment up goes, it is largely a matter of preference and standardisation - depending on how hungry the operator is for those last few kilos. I, like you I suspect, don't like the oft seen approach of looking at the V1 failure and leaving the rest to the pilot. In my conservative, and admittedly un-heroic approach to dying - for both me and my buddies, I would far rather see the bumpy bits looked at in detail until the aircraft net path is above the obstacles in the vicinity .. some of the approaches I have seen to the departure analysis have given me considerable food for reserved thought.
Long time now since I looked over the way Jepp does the work .. I was impressed with some aspects, not so much with others. But the attitude seemed fine talking with their specialists at that time.
Mutt ... big problem with pilots, as you would know, is that we all necessarily require a high self confidence in our abilities, knowledge, etc., etc. (otherwise it is forever in the RHS) ... sometimes this creates its own difficulties in getting enough (training) knowledge across in the time available in order to avoid having that very self confidence create its own set of problems ... this is not a criticism .. merely an observation of the animal.
Suggest you tidy my ramblings up a tad before posting to the noticeboard ...
Last edited by john_tullamarine; 24th Aug 2004 at 12:08.