Originally Posted by Sillypeoples
Bottom line you can't fly all problems into the air at V1 like they would have you believe...so it's nice to have some runway ahead in the event you don't have a flyable plane.
So let me get this straight. Doing an assumed temperature takeoff with TOM x and PLTOM y, which gives you the same performance as the aircraft would have if it's TOM was y is
BAD, even if you can push TO/GA once more (Boeing) and get
full rated take-off thrust.
But, being employed by beancounters who will sell the aircraft before engines have to go to overhaull and they regularly fill the aircraft so that TOM = PLTOM is
the best job ever? In theory, if the s**t hits the fan at V1 (above Vef, just to be clear), in both cases you end up past the runway if you abort and the reversers don't deploy - the only difference is that with assumed temperature you can still get that extra performance you would normally have, should you decide to continue the takeoff.
Given that I myself fall into the group of people mistakenly thinking assumed temperature is a relatively safe and proven method of prolonging engine life, I have a suggestion. ALL airports involving operations of aircraft, certified under Part-25 (FAR/JAR/CS) shall be at -2000ft MSL, Siberian-like climate (max. -30°C in the summer), QNH shall never be below 1060 hPa and minimum runway length is 20 kilometers, so you can do a few touch and goes when you're deciding whether to
really take the aircraft into the air.