I was quoting from a ... text which states the end to be at 35ft.
Again one sees things changing over the years .. as I recall, SR-422 had a V2 requirement which changed to VLOF at SR-422A. Strictly, it probably is correct to refer to the first segment's starting at liftoff. However, for the operations engineer producing RTOW data, this is not helpful.
More particularly, that definition you cite fails to accommodate a slow gear retraction sequence ..
Maybe some confusion with FAR 14 CFR 25.111 (b) (2) which mentions the requirement that acceleration to V2 must be completed by 35ft.
At the end of the day there are numerous, and often subtle, differences between what the operations folk say compared to the AFM ... doesn't matter all that much, I guess, providing crews observe the AFM requirements which form the basis for passing certification information to the line folks.
For the preparation of RTOW data, it makes little sense to consider the takeoff flare twice. We are more specifically concerned when the gear retraction sequence extends beyond screen and we have, in effect, that little segment betwixt screen and commencement of the second segment to consider and address .. we can't just ignore it ... Where gear retraction is completed not later than the end of the TOD, it is a moot point and of little interest to the operations engineer and line pilot.
I note that acceleration to V2 must be completed by 35ft isn't the same as gear retraction must be completed by 35ft ..
Certainly concur that the words could be better expressed in the FAR ..
FAR 14 CFR 25.121 state quite clearly that the commencement of the first segment is at the end of the take off roll, VLOF (lift off) however. This opposed to the term 'take off flight path' that refers to a start at 35ft!
Interesting point. Can you actually cite the specific FAR references to "segments" ? I note that AC 25-7C follows the VLOF picture.
The Cornell reference is a copy of the FARs. Cross-references are hyperlinked unlike the FAA site so it is a bit more user friendly but same content I believe.
Very likely. However, one prefers to reference the legal version where feasible ..