PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Performance capabilities of older generation SEP's
Old 3rd August 2011 | 16:23
  #14 (permalink)  
Pilot DAR
Fleet Manager
Community Builder
50 Countries Visited
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2006
: CPL
Posts: 7,090
Likes: 2,952
From: Ontario, Canada
Is it time to retire some of these older aircraft and put minimum performance requirements in place to ensure that a safety margin exists
What is "older"? The PA-38 is a FAR 23 aircraft, not the "older" CAR 3 certification basis. Interestingly, the CAR 3 climb requirement from 1949, is more rigourous than the FAR23 to which the PA-38 is certified!

So you're asking for more regulation to cover climb performance?

How about the existing regulation to which the PA-38 was certified:

Sec. 23.65

Climb: all engines operating.

.........

(b) Each airplane of 6,000 pounds or less maximum weight must have a steady rate of climb at sea level of at least 300 feet per minute, or [11.5 ] (that is, the number of feet per minute is obtained by multiplying the number of [knots by 11.5),] whichever is greater, with--]
(1) Takeoff power;
(2) The landing gear extended;
(3) The wing flaps in the takeoff position; and
(4) The cowl flaps in the position used in the cooling tests required by Secs. 23.1041 through 23.1047.


Amdt. 23-7, Eff. 09/14/69

The climb performance standard is a major factor in the selection of gross weight for some aircraft, so it is possible that an aircraft being operated within it's weight and balance limits might have performance not much better than this. Add the affect of altitude, and it is even less. The pilot is resonsible for refering to the data contained in the approved flight manual to determine takeoff and climb performance, in the prevailing conditions, for the aircraft they are about to fly.

I have less than 100 hours flying Tomahawks, but recall that they were not star performers in short takeoff and climb. I did fly two from a 1600' turf runway for a year, with no problems though - I just always kept an eye on the wires.

If you're suggesting that airports should regulate the operation of aircraft by type, I will certainly not agree. It is the pilot's reponsibility to operate the aircraft safely, and within it's limitations and capacity - not the airport authority's responsibility. Airports should be responsible for providing a suitable environment for the operation of aircraft, which conforms to the information available to pilots for plannning, and is safe. Nothing more!
Pilot DAR is offline  
Reply