terpster,
I think it is also important to show how the obstacles and terrain are calculated for the procedure design, as well as the design parameters.
Terrain data will have several additives. There will be an automatic add to the elevations of one contour interval, the a canopy add of usually 100 feet for trees.
Obstacle data provided will have accuracy codes per obstacle that must be accounted for. As an example, a wind turbine will typically have a 5E code, which means you have a circle 500' around the point and add 125 feet to the recorded elevation. (iterations around obstacles with different accuracy codes is a pleasure, as well as determining shielding and time of exposure)
For the aircraft, the design will use the max high recorded temperature for that airport, as well as the max low.
Aircraft will use MTOW with all bleeds on, and actual engine parameters, or the worst case in the fleet the procedure is designed for.
Very, very seldom has there been a design that works for both Boeing and Airbus aircraft...
The performance profile for the ac given the above parameters is then used in the procedure path, with additional additives for turns.
Design also assumes that the ac will be crossing the runway end at 35 feet.
Then its up to the people back at Company, to load the ac accordingly, with the real time parameters, and start limiting wt with temp.
When you add up all of these parameters, it becomes easier to understand why there are very few EO procedures in anyones database, and why the procedures are expensive to design.
Last edited by FlightPathOBN; 9th May 2013 at 15:39.