John: Thanks for the info on the 212. Would be interesting to read a more detailed instruction of the recommended procedure.
Perhaps then it was one of the Bell test pilots who developed the original CAT A takeoff?
Originally Posted by
AnFI
seems like dubious maths to expose the aircaft (and it's other sytems) to such a prolonged vunerable state for the theoretical upside of being able to crash gently back on the pad if it's the engine that fails in this time frame.
AnFI: I believe the rationale was that even if it takes longer .. the craft follows a profile in which there is always an 'option'. In the case of McAlpines and the UK CAA (above) and given the TwinEcureuil's power (or rather lack thereof) combined with the departure area being over central London; it seems as if this was the only means of mitigating the risk of recovery from a loss of power immediately following takeoff. But .. I appreciate your point.
I believe 'low level, gain speed, then climb' departures are still used from airports (see below):
But CAT A (reversing style) are carried-out from helipads (from 02:05):