Wizofoz, In circumstances where the net climb gradient for the missed approach is not guaranteed, the landing weight is reduced or the minima is higher, we have already stated that. I flew 777 as well, so please advise me when I can't make the gradient taking into account the above.
Balckcoffeenosugar, The missed approach should commence at the MAP. The EO sid commences after take off at the DER. How do you propose to get from the MAP back onto the EO sid. The screen height and terrain clearance from the EO sid is MORE restrictive as it assumes a starting position of zero ft on the runway, not from a MAP height of perhaps 200'.
Looking at typical cases, Geneva, Dalaman,the landing weights are all restricted and there are two minima for different climb gradient, I fail to see where the problem is unless the restrictions have been overlooked.
The 2.5% net climb should be achievable.
In cases where the GA performance is questionable, eg gear no retraction, the approach should not be commenced unless a landing is assured.
The problem with all this stuff is that it is theory and sensible airmanship will prevail, but if you are not following the std missed approach procedure all terms of refference are lost at a time of high workload.
The other consideration here is speed, some missed approach and EO sids, eg CMF are based on a fixed speed to keep the a/c within the protection area, carrying out a missed approach and then trying to get on the E/O sid.. pray tell.
Blackcoffeenosugars, what do your SOPs state?