Originally Posted by DOVES
Dear AirRabbit
Perhaps I didn't understand exactly what YOU meant. YOU will pardon me my less than perfect mastery of your language; and that's one of the reasons why I won't sink in a sterile bickering in answering (without opening the mouth) your last aphorism.
YOU wrote:
..."When I was doing some interesting work with a -10 series DC-9 about a hundred years ago, we made several takeoffs "on one engine." It takes a good deal of nosewheel steering input along with judicial application of the single engine's thrust until the rudder gets aerodynamically effective, but the takeoffs were no problem. Of course we were at the old Clinton-Sherman Air Force Base in Oklahoma, with almost 13,000 feet of concrete and the airplane was at relatively light weight. So, under those circumstances, experiencing an engine failure at V1-10 knots and continuing the takeoff would be no sweat. And, I would suspect that an abort at V1+10 knots wouldn't have been a real sweat either."...
Am I right?
It appears that the “quote” function works correctly, if that is what you are asking.
Originally Posted by DOVES
1) I would only have justified YOU if YOU were in a simulator. I confess that I was taught the same manoevre in the sim. during my last type rating in the 737-300, almost 4 years ago; the Instructor told us: "Who knows? Some day you could face an emergency situation in which this could be the only escape route". I would even have admired YOU if YOU were doing some test flight, alone on board.
Perhaps its because English is not your native language, but I’m not sure what you mean about you “justifying ME if I were in a simulator.” Let me be clear. I was in an airplane, not a simulator. In fact, I WAS doing a flight test. As you probably would recognize, it would be foolish and irresponsible (not to mention illegal) to operate a DC-9 alone. Therefore, we had several folks on board – as you might understand, you typically have a couple of other folks along when doing flight tests.
Originally Posted by DOVES
2) ..."So, under those circumstances, experiencing an engine failure at V1-10 knots and continuing the takeoff would be no sweat."...
But YOU forgot to mention which engine failure: the one kept idle 'cause I'm sure YOU would never had taken off with one engine shut down on a twin'; or the other at full thrust; in which case continuing the takeoff to the rotation would have been very very very difficult.
Well, let me correct my oversight … no, we did not make the takeoffs with one engine shut down. The takeoff tests were done from as close to the approach end of the runway as we could maneuver the airplane, and with brake release, slowly added thrust on one engine until we reached the computed maximum takeoff thrust for that engine. And, yes, it was somewhat difficult. As I mentioned, it took considerable amount of nose wheel steering and forward control column pressure to maintain adequate directional control until the rudder became effective. And full thrust on the one engine was not possible until adequate airflow over the rudder allowed it. But once that occurred, full thrust on the one engine wasn’t much of a problem; and yes, we did continue the takeoff roll through the rotation, and getting airborne. And, each pilot on board did it several times, alternating the engine used, ultimately achieving full thrust on one engine for each takeoff. In each case the other engine was running at forward idle thrust. Pilots made takeoffs from both the right and left seat.
The reason for my example and the point I was making – but apparently not sufficiently well for your understanding – was that if a pilot were to experience an engine failure at V1 –10 knots and have a substantial amount of runway still in front of the airplane, OR to accelerate to a point of V1 +10 knots and experience a serious problem at that point with the same substantial amount of runway still in front of the airplane, the question of whether the takeoff should be continued or the takeoff should be rejected is almost irrelevant. The irrelevancy coming from the fact that there would still be enough runway in front of the airplane to support a continued takeoff or a rejected takeoff decision.
Originally Posted by DOVES
I've always thought that the art of flying is very far from the circus. Fly the numbers, as OLD SMOKEY writes often, and I add: Fly the books.
Perhaps that's the reason why I'm still flying airplanes and not a 6-Drawer Oak Desk. Fly Safe DOVE
Well, there we agree – flying is no circus – and I happen to agree with OLD SMOKEY about flying the numbers. Personally, however, I prefer to fly the airplane not the book. I don’t know very many “books” that have made a good decision or landed any airplane. And, with all due respect sir, if you manage to continue to fly safely for a long enough period, maybe your company will promote you too, and let you do your flight briefings and debriefings at a similar 6-Drawer Oak Desk. They kinda “grow” on you.