.. no ... better than gross (that's gross OEI .. not gross AEO).
Especially once we are a bit down the trail, say at the third segment ... if one is at or near the net calculated flight path .. then one is NOT having a good day .. that's why, pilot wise .. we are normally much more worried about critical obstacles early in the second segment .. as the gross to net fudge factor hasn't had sufficient distance to give one a decent pad.
You don't actually fly 35' above the obstacles once you are getting a little away from the runway .. although you might be quite close to that sort of clearance at the start of the second segment ...
The net profile is degraded to address a range of concerns which can cause the aircraft to perform worse than one might anticipate .. there is NO intention that the aircraft ought to come anywhere near the net profile, although it might well do so if all the adverse things line up against the pilots .... turbulence is a big out of left field thing .. one ought not to expect anything if it is bumpy.
A well-known performance man from years ago used to opine that the net path might be achieved as a 1 in a quarter million chance during a continued OEI takeoff .. I was never too sure where he came up with that figure .. but it gives you some sort of idea of the way things are intended to work ...
Last edited by john_tullamarine; 5th June 2005 at 12:12.