SID climb gradient

[chr]

Hello everyone

Just a quick question regarding SID minimum climb gradient required . Let's say Cannes LFMD , there is SID on which is :

15% due to trees at DER RWY 17 and except these trees 7,5% up to 1000 than 6% up to FL 100 ....

Correct me if I'm wrong please , these requirements are for both engine running , but you need to match those criteria also at one engine failure . So when I look at performance charts and it says that on one engine I will have only 8 % gradient I need to have special procedure in case of engine failure ( for ex. immediately left turn or something like that )

BTW 15% climb gradient on one engine - what aircraft can meet those criteria ?

Second question - does your aircraft flight manuals gave you data about climb gradient on both engines ? or it tells only on one engine ?

Thank you
Regards

[SeventhHeaven]

I don't fly professionally I'm afraid, but here's what 'PAN OPS departures' says (paraphrasing):

- all procedures assume all engines running at ISA+15
- it is up to the operator to develop contingencies

Therefore, I assume that the operator would develop (and get approval for) a contingency procedure that allows the aircraft to steer clear of obstacles and return to land, if the single engine climb performance is insufficient to fly the departure?

[CL300]

you are correct, if published SID gradient cannot be met, you need to have a alternate plan, published in your route manual, or performance binder. If not you cannot depart under IFR rules.

[galaxy flyer]

See DOC 8168 2.2.1.3, "gradients to 200' caused by close-in obstacles are not specified". I doubt French trees exceed 60m. Not sure why the designer put in those gradients, it should just note any close in obstacles location referenced to the DER. Any reputable runway analysis will account for the obstacles but not use the PANS-OPS procedure to create gradient.

GF

[CL300]

If you knew the reason, you will be laughing out loud for years....It is highly political. The "technical" part of Cannes is useless, and is putting bandage on a wooden leg. They found (by tweaking on the wrong side) a set of obstacles ( trees) that they first protect from being trimmed, then they published new TODA, then new gradients. In truth, and legally, very few jets can come to Cannes, between LDA, Steep approaches, and take off gradients...Only helicopters can do it..

[His dudeness]

Just put the Sovereign plus through the calculator 15% up to 200ft / 7,5 to 1000ft it can carry 250lbs less than MTOW outta there - at 30°C / 1013 / no wind / Flaps 1. If you can carry that weight out SE, then you do the same all engine, but calculator does only OEI performance. You would need to run an analysis with the Typ A Obst chart. A blunt 15% due to trees is BS. 7.5 % due to ATC / airspace would be all engine perf and as such, my airplane does not have the data available in the AFM for that. In case of emergency, the 7,5 % are not of any concern, as long as you can clear the OBST.

BTW, the straight Sovereign would carry a penalty of 8100 lbs using the same calculator. Using APG and the departure procedure, there is no penalty at all.
Interesting....

[galaxy flyer]

Using APG numbers, I've been in and out with the CL300 and 605. Not hard at all, but do the training first. It is highly political, the neighbor's don't like planes overhead.

GF

[27/09]

If you knew the reason, you will be laughing out loud for years....It is highly political. The "technical" part of Cannes is useless, and is putting bandage on a wooden leg. They found (by tweaking on the wrong side) a set of obstacles ( trees) that they first protect from being trimmed, then they published new TODA, then new gradients. In truth, and legally, very few jets can come to Cannes, between LDA, Steep approaches, and take off gradients...Only helicopters can do it..

So..... it's really a noise abatement issue. :\ Keeping fixed wing aircraft away?