Originally Posted by Junkflyer
Click the link and go to paragraph 2.3.1.2. It is an FAA publication defining V-1.
Yes, Mr. Junkflyer – I am fully aware of what this reference is … and the document to which you are referring is the same document to which I have been referring, the Takeoff Safety Training Aid. And, in reading the paragraph you’ve referenced, it seems to me that is saying just exactly what I’ve been saying all along. You can reject a takeoff at any point prior to V1 and stop safely within the remaining runway. In fact, you can “call” V1 at any point prior to the “actual” V1 speed, and any abort initiated prior to that newly defined point will allow the airplane to be safely stopped in the remaining runway. And I’ve not argued against that fact.
However, if you read the very next section in that same document, you will read the concerns I’ve been describing for not continuing the takeoff after passing what is called “V1.” If you understand the caveats in that next paragraph and you continue to desire to call “V1” at a reduced point … you should be able to see that there now is a confusion regarding how to recognize the point at which the takeoff would be assured even the experiencing a failure - even an engine failure - which has been identified as "V1." But if this definition has now been modified to allow a "reduced V1" the question remains, should we develop a requirement to generate a “second” call-out - where one would be for the “reduced V1” and the second one for the “real V1” - if so, certainly we would have do so without confusing the issue. The first “V1” would be for helping to ensure stopping distance (that is if you choose to stop before you hear “the first V1" (or whatever we determine to call it), you are safe to stop. The “2nd V1" call-out would be for helping to ensure that sufficient performance has been achieved to allow a safe takeoff, even if there were an engine failure AT or AFTER that point. BUT – NOW we have a problem in understanding what to do if an abort-worthy event occurs BETWEEN those two call-outs … go? Or stop? Here’s a suggestion … why not select an airspeed where any abort worthy event occurring prior to that airspeed will ensure sufficient runway to stop AND if that speed is reached prior to any abort-worthy event occurring, we can be assured that sufficient airplane performance has been achieved to allow a safe takeoff – even if the failure was an engine failure. Hmm… wait … don’t we already HAVE that?