Hello Mutt
Same as above, hope you dont mind if I cut and paste your original post.
Firstly, why do you want to rush?
I'm not suggesting you rush. I'm suggesting that, in the same way as we note "positive rate" and call for gear up that we say "V2+20" and call for flaps up. (its V2+20 on my plane). When the PM calls "Positive Rate" you don't wait to climb to 400 (or 800) feet because you might possibly move the wrong lever, you get rid of the drag. Why is the same not true with the flap?
Secondly, how can you prove that you will clear the takeoff obstacles?
I have complied fully with the AFM therefore I will clear the close in obstacles and everything in the net take off flight path. I was all engines operating to V2+20 and continued the climb at a gradient in excess of the PDG. At any point I could have lost an engine and remained above the PDG. I dont think the calculation is as easy if you go busting through the flap up speed and leave them down thus degrading the climb with drag because thats not what the AFM says.
As an airline, we increased the 400 feet to 800 feet and took the associated weight loss, we use 1000 feet for all engine, that philosophy was carried over to the corporate fleet.
On what basis did you do that? Is it in the AFM? Seems amazing to me that operators make these sweeping decisions and there's no basis in aeronautical logic. Which aircraft types is this for? I don't understand how these policies get written and over-ride the manufacturers manuals for the planes.
I'm going to try to arrange a meeting with Flight Safety at some point this week to chat about this. I've also been promised a call back by one of Bombardier's guys tomorrow. How about I report the result of those conversations on here when they happen?