PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Approach Climb Gradient vs EOSID
View Single Post
Old 10th Apr 2011, 12:18
  #130 (permalink)  
Zeffy
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Suposing that your SID has a climb gradient you can not comply with , your operator must have an EOSID available for the EO case.
The implication that a SID can provide protection for performance losses with one engine inop is not always correct.

SID's do not take into account low, close-in obstacles in the Initial Climb Area. Those obstacles may be a threat to a WAT-limited airplane with one engine inop.




The case of low, close-in obstacles is one of the reasons that paragraph 7 of AC 120-91 states:

...Further, compliance with TERPS all-engines-operating climb gradient requirements does not necessarily assure that one-engine-inoperative obstacle clearance requirements are met.

Procedure designers also have options to publish ceiling and visibility minimums for the purpose of avoiding obstacles within 3 miles of the departure end of the runway.




However, the operating rules (14 CFR 121.189 and equivalent) make no exceptions for weather conditions.

Thus, reliance on a SID or published (all engines) Obstacle Departure Procedure may not adequately protect for the loss of an engine during takeoff.

`

Last edited by Zeffy; 10th Apr 2011 at 12:37. Reason: added "not always" in first paragraph
Zeffy is offline