ATR 42-300 CLIMB GRADIENT

[bleeds off]

Hi all,

Do anyone know where to find ATR 42-300 Climb gradient performance rated to weight (two engines alive). I am currently flying both ATR 42-300 and ATR 72-500. I could find the adequate chart in the FCOM (climb chapter) for the 72 but the equivalent one for the 42-300 doesn't even appear in the table of contents.

thx
bleeds off

[Clandestino]

Same problem here, except I only fly 42-300. Couple of years ago my outfit tried to persuade ATR to put all-engine climb gradient tables into FCOM 3. Some time has passed, there was no mail from Tolouse so we went to our performance boys and they've printed out tables from their performance software. So while we're waiting for major FCOM revision, these tables are inserted in FCOM binder behind chapt 3.04.05 as temporary solution.

My guess is that ATR was so embarrased by -300 climb performance that they want to keep it secret. :E

[bleeds off]

ok i'm reassured that my FCOM version is not an out of date one (at least on that issue).
Do u know whether your company perfs software is an ATR designed one? And have you had the occasion to concretely observe the accuracy of its figures? ;)

bleeds off

[Slasher]

There are ATR42s here in Nam.

Locals tell me they use curvature of the Earth data for T/O gradient prediction, and updrafts in large Cu's to get to cruise alt. := ;)

[Clandestino]

Bleeds off

Yup, our tables are generated with ATR's flight ops software and they are slightly optimistic but they were expected to be, as our planes are of early 90s vintage.

Cheers, C.

[Empty Cruise]

Perhaps ATR kept the 2 engine climb performance out of the book so that people only had one option - use the 1 ENG climb performance. And if you cannot make it on 1 engine - you don't need to know if you can make it on two.

This is of course assuming that we are talking about obstacle clearance performance. If we are talking en-route climb, there is no excuse for ATR not to have made that available.

Empty

[bleeds off]

Actually, my concern was about those areas where SID's impose a minimum slope to sustain: I had no clue about how to figure out the max weight available to comply with such constraints. Since the case never apply on my company's network, nobody seems to have cared about it.:rolleyes:

happy landings
bleeds off

[galahad]

I don't think you'll find the adequate page as 72-500 in FCOM.,
but there're one engine out 2nd and final segment gradient in AFM.