737NG Antiskid Inop V1

[mmrassi]

Hello my aviation fellows
Despite we have a clear procedure in calculating the V1 in the MEL for antiskid inop, a friend of mine made his own theory which I like to discuss it with you.
His idea is we only need to calculate the V1 for the max weight at the present condition and if our actual weight is less than that (mostly when we fly with a very light payload) then we dont need to reduce the V1 anymore.
Lets say we put the 8500 correction to a field/obstacle limit of 75000 which gives us 66500 and we reach a corrected V1 of 125, now if our actual takeoff weight is below 66.5 and our V1 is also below 125 (like we are making a ferry flight on short sector) do we need to recalculate and make corrections to our ACTUAL figures? or as long as our V1 stays below 125 we don't need furthure correction?
Well the MEL doesn't say like that ,I know, but in some ways my friend's idea looks right also.
Any ideas?
Thanks

[FlyingStone]

If you will stop with a certain V1 at 66.5 T (long acceleration, long deceleration), I guess you will stop at the same V1 at 64 T or something as well (faster acceleration, shorter deceleration).

To keep it simple and if it's so difficult to recalculate V1, I'd keep the old V1 - if it stays below VR of course.

[de facto]

Follow your MEL guidance step by step.
Tell your colleague that if he wants to change such procedure,he should first meet with your chief pilot,tech pilots,engineers and at last but not least Boeing.
If his "idea" is any good,Perf and Sops will be changed,he will then legally be able to do so.
If some doesnt look right,bring it to light to your managers,in the meanwhile follow given guidance,most of the time those who write have done the research behind.
In case of emergency,he can deviate.
Safe flights.

[mmrassi]

Follow your MEL guidance step by step.
Tell your colleague that if he wants to change such procedure,he should first meet with your chief pilot,tech pilots,engineers and at last but not least Boeing.
If his "idea" is any good,Perf and Sops will be changed,he will then legally be able to do so.
If some doesnt look right,bring it to light to your managers,in the meanwhile follow given guidance,most of the time those who write have done the research behind.
In case of emergency,he can deviate.
Safe flights.

Thanks for reminding us about rule following basics but that was not the answer to my question!
Please share your technical ideas.

[repulo]

Theoretically correct. But let's look a bit deeper into the case. With anti skid inop the assumption is that all main tires will be blown in case of RTO. Since assumed temperature is not approved, there will be plenty of power available, so rather reduve the V1 as much as possible. In case an engine fails just continue and look for a 3000m RWY, don't touch the brakes, just use reverse.

[de facto]

Ok so you want to get an argument against to put it in his face?
So jusk ask him to have a look at the procedure on how to reject a take off with antiskid inop,to make it simple it is in the fctm.
Spooiers come out first then gentle braking with max reverse and as the speed decreases and runway shortens apply gentle but more braking,do not pump the brakes.
So why the :mad: would he reduce his margins if he doesnt have to?is he worried about post v1?thats one of the reasons why the weight correction is taken from the obstacle field limit weight in the first place.