Originally Posted by MD80FO
we use the customized 10-7 (EOSID) plates which include a temperature chart indicating weather the airplane will comply with the published missed approach OEI, but my query is regarding regulated approach weight if you may.
since we are supposed to fly the eosid, the missed approach gradient shouldn't be limiting if i use common sense.
That's different. In your first post you only mentioned "EOSID" which implied you were using the takeoff EOSID and RTOW for the Missed Approach.
If your EOSID charts specifically mention limit weights for the missed approach (on the EOSID track), I'd say that you wouldn't have to worry about the certification missed approach gradient requirements/weights. But, you'd better ask your performance engineers if that really is the case.
The other issue, as Starbear said earlier, is tracking. To use an EOSID for a Missed approach, you'd have to make sure the tracks matched.
FlightPathOBN, I still reckon you've got the wrong end of the stick. That diagram you posted is totally irrelevant with all engines running (even on a 4-holer). The gradients achieved would be far in excess of what you show there. And doesn't matter how many engines are going, if I can make 2.5% I will clear the obstacles. It's up to me to organise my weight to achieve that. Obviously, the OEI is the only case I need to consider.
Originally Posted by OBN
One has to remember that the Missed and EO consider the hottest day of the year for that aerodrome. Many EO procedures in AUS use 60'/nm as climb gradients.
Are you talking about Australia? Can you give an example?