Geoff,
you are not an attentive reader of your AW139 Flight Manual.
I explain why.
If you compare the Cat A weights, obtained from the Cat A WAT charts for the procedures you mentioned in your post i.e. Vertical Profile and Short Field, with the weight for which there is no H-V you will see, unbelievable, that the CAT A weights are always lower than the weights for NO H-V.
Some examples.
PA:0ft, OAT=40°C
Cat A weight ( Page S12-A32 and S12-B16 of the Suppl.12 to the 139 RFM):6400 Kg
NO HV weight (Page 1-17 of the basic RFM): HV does not exist
PA:5000 ft, OAT:20°C OAT :0°C
Cat A weight : 5880Kg Cat A weight: 6220 Kg
NO HV weight : below 6000Kg HV weight: HV does not exist
PA :10000ft , OAT:0°C
Cat A weight : 5220Kg
NO HV weight : below 5400Kg
You can continue the exercise by checking different procedures and environmental conditions but the results will be always the same i.e:
Cat A weight are always lower than the NO HV weight.
And this is obvious because this is the prerequisite that makes possible to reject the TO after an engine failure.
If you don’t trust me and you want to know more about the H-V and the way in which is determined I suggest to read the AC29 Page B-92 (it may be downloaded from
http://http://www.faa.gov/regulation...TopicID/107) . You will realize that the HV is not always defined by failing the engine in steady flight.
This is true for the cruise region of the HV envelope.
The Take off region is defined by failing the engine along the TO profile at various height and speed. Therefore in a dynamic condition.
Keep off the HV. Remember its nickname.
gmrwiz