PDA

View Full Version : Departure stages in a go around?

bigtallman
30th Jun 2011, 00:12
Hello all! Had my first interview today and was asked about the 4 stages of a departure, no real probs with that, then was asked do any of the departure stages occur in a go around? We all had different answers and I cant find the correct one. Some said the last two affected the go around, ie the level flight accel to clean wing and the climb to a gross height of 1500ft. Others said that was wrong. Whats the general concensus as struggling to find the answer and want a good nights sleep without thinking about it lol:ugh:

Rich

FlightPathOBN
30th Jun 2011, 05:28
2nd is the only critical stage...

Checkboard
30th Jun 2011, 10:09
Take-off segments (the gradient of each segment) are designed to allow for climb after engine failure. Manufacturers need to demonstrate an aircraft has the performance to meet each segment. Missed approach segments are not designed in that way, the gradients are for the go-around configuration.

So the answer would be "no". They are two different things, and the take-off segments don't apply to a missed approach.

7 TAKE-OFF CLIMB PERFORMANCE

7.1 In the take-off configuration assuming failure of the critical engine so that it is recognised at V1, an aeroplane must be able to climb without ground effect at the speed established as the speed at which the aeroplane becomes airborne and in this configuration, without landing gear retraction, achieve a gross gradient of climb which is positive for two-engined aeroplanes, 0.3% for three-engined aeroplanes and 0.5% for four-engined aeroplanes.

7.2 In the take-off configuration that exists with the critical engine inoperative and the landing gear fully retracted, the aeroplane at speed V2 must be able to achieve a gross gradient of climb of at least:
(a) if the aeroplane is a commuter type aeroplane — 2%; and (b) if the aeroplane is not a commuter type aeroplane:
(i) if it has 2 engines — 2.4%; and (ii) if it has 3 engines — 2.7%; and
(iii) if it has 4 engines — 3%.

7.3.1 An aeroplane may be accelerated in level flight from V2 speed to final take-off climb speed at a height above the take-off surface that is the greater of:
(a) 400 feet; or (b) the height necessary to achieve obstacle clearance in accordance with
paragraphs 12.1 and 12.2.

7.3.2 During any such level flight acceleration manoeuvre, an aeroplane with the critical engine inoperative must have an available gross gradient of climb of at least:
(a) for a twin-engined aeroplane — 1.2%; or (b) for a 3-engined aeroplane — 1.4%; or (c) for a 4-engined aeroplane — 1.5%.
Issue 5: 11 June 2005 Amendment No. 227

7.4.1 In the en-route configuration existing at the end of the level flight acceleration manoeuvre, an aeroplane must be able to achieve a gross gradient of climb of at least:
(a) for a twin-engined aeroplane — 1.2%; or (b) for a 3-engined aeroplane — 1.4%; or (c) for a 4-engined aeroplane — 1.5%.

7.4.2 The gradient of climb must be achievable at final take-off climb speed with the critical engine inoperative and the remaining engines at maximum continuous power or thrust.

7.5 In determining the net flight path of an aeroplane to show compliance with subsection 12, the gross gradients of climb achieved in paragraphs 7.2 and 7.4.1 must be reduced by 0.8% for twin-engined aeroplanes, 0.9% for three-engined aeroplanes and 1.0% for four-engined aeroplanes. Similarly the horizontal distance to accelerate in compliance with paragraph 7.3.1 must be increased due to the acceleration reduction equivalent to the climb gradient reductions specified in this paragraph.
Note The net flight path and the gross flight path may be considered identical when the aeroplane is in the take-off configuration described in paragraph 7.1.

... versus:

5 LANDING WEIGHT LIMITATIONS

5.1 For the purposes of paragraph 235 (2) (b) of the Regulations, the maximum weight which an aeroplane to which this section applies may not exceed at landing is the least of the weights determined in accordance with subparagraphs (a) to (c):
(a) a weight at which the landing distance required in accordance with subsection 11 for the aerodrome elevation, wind component along the runway, runway slope (when exceeding 1%) and runway surface conditions at the time of landing, is equal to or less than the landing distance available in the direction of landing;
(b) a weight which will permit compliance with the approach climb requirements specified in subsection 9, taking into account forecast or ambient temperature and aerodrome elevation or approved declared conditions;
(c) a weight which will permit compliance with the landing climb requirements specified in subsection 10 taking into account forecast or ambient temperature and aerodrome elevation or approved declared conditions.

10 LANDING CLIMB PERFORMANCE
10.1 For the purposes of subparagraph 5.1 (c), the landing climb requirements are met if, in the landing configuration an aeroplane has a gross gradient of climb of not less than 3.2% at a climbing speed not in excess of 1.3 VS with all engines operating.

john_tullamarine
30th Jun 2011, 10:31
2nd is the only critical stage

It's probably fair enough to suggest that the second segment often, or even usually, is critical out there in flying land.

However, the takeoff climb limited part of the RTOW can be driven by any of the segments especially due to terrain.

Main thing for folk to keep in mind is that one needs to look at all the constituent limits when figuring the RTOW on the day.

While the rulebook is a bit quiet on how to get from the approach to the cruise it follows that one still needs to look at reconfiguration (third segment equivalent) and obstacle clearance. One is still just as dead after running into the hill regardless of whether the rulebook says this or that.

bigtallman
30th Jun 2011, 12:41
Thanks for the comments guys, very much appreciated! I worded my answer in that I wasnt sure but knew that there must be a similarity between the clean up sections of the departure and the go around, fingers crossed I may be lucky and get an offer, just glad I did good in the sim assessment.

Rich

aterpster
30th Jun 2011, 14:57