PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Post V1 rejected take off...yeah or neah?
Old 18th Jul 2010, 20:39
  #39 (permalink)  
Pugilistic Animus
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: The No Transgression Zone
Posts: 2,483
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
well one thing, with the crappy payload/range, especially with the STC'd belted potty seat of most smaller corporate equipment you have to use full power; limiting TO's are more common, if you want to carry any substantial fuel of payload

love the ads for them carries 8 pax 500mn has a range of 1200NM with four occupants
the whole thing deals with cost/benefits and risk/benefits the safety criteria performance criteria, still have to be met...but on the whole how many engine failures are there a critical moments? the Thomson incident made famous by youtube shows that the criteria work..also thrust generally does not just cut out, engines will produces something until they are shut down at the appropriate height. they just produces too much power to use it all all of the time, and it's a real benefit for 'on-condition' engine appliances..but you don't have to use it as there seems to be no such pressure in your operation

also, MCT ,is rarely used in the airlines these days fuel saving depending on the CI analysis, as GF mentioned

LR meteor

oh I forgot

Last edited by Pugilistic Animus; 19th Jul 2010 at 02:33.
Pugilistic Animus is offline