The recent thread regarding go around performance and emergency turn has left a few questions in my mind.
The Jepps state that the establishment of emergency turns/special procedures is the responsibility of the operator.
Therefore an operator would employ a third party to survey an airfield and all its associated obstacles to allow a procedure to be
defined.
So:
Are there a set of defined parameters that the design of these procedures must adhere to?
Presumably the designed procedure is such that it avoids the "lumps" and allows the maximum take-off mass (with associated minimum gradient)?
Is the procedure designed with the absolute worse case scenario in mind. ie Max TOW, ISA +35, low QNH etc and the resulting gradient?
Consider the following scenario.
You get airborne and during the climb (well clear of all obstacles) you suffer a fire/failure which requires an immediate return. Under the circumstances, your achievable gradient is only 1.9% so you elect to operate to a (much) higher minima to allow a missed approach to be flown. It's CAVOK
so you continue below minima but then have to go-around
How do you KNOW that the take-off emergency turn is going to be ok for you at your 1.9% gradient? OK, you're in a better position because you're starting the go around at an earlier point than the take-off failure scenario but where's the guarentee? Do all these turns cater for the MINIMUM (worst case) achievable gradient?
One thing I have learned is that emergency turns do not have any leeway for wind effect.....so if you've got strong crosswind blowing you towards that hill, you better make sure your tack is good.......bank angle....climb performance.....?
If you subsequently fly it into the side of a hill, where does the Company/surveyors/your estate
sit.........?
If anyone can point me to a link on the web which discusses these procedures/ design of in detail I'd much appreciate it.
In the mean time, over to you all for your thoughts and opinions!
Fly safe,
A4