....then this is a penalty that many companies are happy to take in the pursuit of simplicity = less chance of silly cock-ups!
Not trying to be provocative or anything, but to me, if we consider a
normal TO with a V1 of 135kts and we have a catastrophic failure/fire at 105kts ( << V1) but went flying anyway and subsequently wind up in the bushes, thats a
silly cock-up isn't it?
The situation with PRG above is the same isn't it? We have our catastrophic failure/fire at V1 = 135kts but could reject anywhere up to 165kts.
In this case, if we wind up in the bushes, we say the guys did the right thing?
Incongruous.
My last performance course was woefully inadequate.
IMHO, we live in a day and age where we shouldn't have to rely on a BFL analysis template for the various fields we operate to. The number-crunching ability of your average desktop is phenomenal. The only reason more don't complain about the implications of the simplifications is probably to do with the fact that not many of us (myself included) fully appreciate how our PERF manuals are compiled.
