As per my earlier post, we yet again see the Americans turning this into a peeing contest of how their rules are better and the rest of the world should bow to them.
Most use NADP 2 unless NADP 1 is specified. But hey, lets make up some more rubbish to show how only Americans know how to fly...
No need to feel inferior, you seem to be a little sensitive about Americans for some reason. Lighten up.
Do you ever fly to America? I've been flying to the UK for decades now so I think I can share some thoughts from my perspective. Things are a little different in other countries and the UK has its own peculiarities in ATC just like everywhere else.
NADP 1 has indeed been specified for many international carriers in the UK for a while now as far as I know. Or, maybe I'm just making this up, right?
And sometimes those company notes for a departure noise abatement profile on a particular aircraft type stay in our Jepps long after the requirements have been abolished by local ATC.
Anyway, some of us still have to wait until we hit 3000 AGL to start raising the flaps on those wacky convoluted departure procedures with a low transition altitude.
And yes, there is talk about going back to a lower cleanup height to save fuel and enhance sustainability so I'm sure things will change as they always do in this business.
But the low transition altitude, like the old QFE procedures, is a known gotcha that has been remedied elsewhere in the world.
I have flown with some very professional ex GA pilots. However, from what I saw daily in an airport crammed with G, D and N registered Citations, Lears and Gulfstreams was cringeworthy and infuriating. Lining up on busy runways but not ready, causing landing aircraft to go around, taking incorrect taxy routes, taxying without clearance, pushing back without clearance, level busts, altimetry errors, entering controlled airspace VFR without clearances and generally getting in the way with ridiculous speeds downwind or on base or when taxying... yes, some airlines did it too, and no-one is beyond making mistakes, but with less than 20% of the aircraft at that base being GA but causing 90%+ of the problems, I stand by my remark.
Your observation is consistent with the Pareto principle:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
is the exact wording from the UK AIP - sort of our version of your FAR/AIM. Note the UPPER limit - so in fact you can accelerate and clean up nice and low...
But only if your company procedures permit it. Ours currently do not but as I said, it will probably change, thanks for the cite.
