Two engine G/A climb gradient B737Ng

[Pin Head]

Hi

trying to find where I can find this figure to determine what minimums I can use. Checked the FPPM but only found SE figures.
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1500x2000/img_7893_ecabb0bbe6c7e11b72ef4fdffb281863121c33dd.png
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1493/img_7895_4785b9709f5c8b9aa9daf9ebfd5f10dc5f08a2b7.jpg

kind regards

pin

[aterpster]

Helps to have the entire chart:


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/895x1500/vtcc_ils_36_24f31c5c57b4c749dc89c32890a0975555ac9d57.jpg

[Denti]

Dunno about other airlines, i was always trained to only take the one engine out go around climb gradient into account, same as we use one engine out performance as limiting for the take off case. I think i have never seen the all engine go around performance in any of the planes i have flown so far.

Anyway, if we do the landing performance (for the last 15 years on an EFB of course), and do not achieve the required go around gradient, we have the choice of either negotiating with ATC if airspace or ATC structures are the limiting factor, take a higher minimum, or use the take off engine failure procedure as the one engine out go around procedure. The latter being the preferred option.

There are several airports where that is a common thing for us, one example of that is FRA on the northern runway (25R, 5% up to 2000 ft, 07L 4.6% up to 3500 ft). Those rates are usually not achievable in an A319, which would lead us to use the one engine out take off procedure, which of course is not available for that runway as it is a landing only runway. In that case we have to advise ATC that we cannot accept that runway and have to land on a different one.

In the above case, we would be forced to use the higher minimum, which could lead to problems depending on cloud base.

[Pin Head]

Denti - you shoyldmt use the take off emergency turn for the go around. It's take off only

aterpster - correct. But I just photoed te relevant bit

[FlyingStone]

The required missed approach gradient on the approach chart is to be achieved in OEI (one engine inoperative) condition. The edge case scenario is you shoot the approach with AEO and as soon as you reach minimums, one of the engines fails and you have to be able to safely perform a missed approach.

Any half decent airliner will greatly exceed any required missed approach gradients with all engines operating, hence no performance charts published.

[aterpster]

The required missed approach gradient on the approach chart is to be achieved in OEI (one engine inoperative) condition. The edge case scenario is you shoot the approach with AEO and as soon as you reach minimums, one of the engines fails and you have to be able to safely perform a missed approach.
Can only speak to FAA Part 121 ops. Any climb gradient on a missed approach or departure procedure is for all engines operating. With OEI, the operator is required to have a OEI flight path, which may or may not be the same as the published procedure.

[Denti]

Can only speak to FAA Part 121 ops. Any climb gradient on a missed approach or departure procedure is for all engines operating. With OEI, the operator is required to have a OEI flight path, which may or may not be the same as the published procedure.
True for departure, however, could you provide the reference for the missed approach? Because in that case i would be seriously puzzled why we do not get published all engine go around performance values.

Of course it is perfectly possible that EASA requirements in that case differs fundamentally from FAA ones.



Denti - you shoyldmt use the take off emergency turn for the go around. It's take off only


That would depend on the local regulations. As that procedure has been in every EASA compliant OM i have worked with, it seems to be in line with EASA regulations. However, only in the case the normally required minimum (one engine out) go around gradient cannot be achieved.

[aterpster]

True for departure, however, could you provide the reference for the missed approach? Because in that case i would be seriously puzzled why we do not get published all engine go around performance values.
FAA AC 120-91A, Paragraph 20. (Page 15)

[B737900er]

The approach climb gradient is based on OEI (2.1%) and for a two-engined aeroplane its usually the limiting between Approach and landing climb gradients.
You can also find the chart in the FCOM performance Dispatch.

My guess for not publishing a two engine gradient is because it's not the worst-case scenario. On most modern jets, a single-engine go-around is more than capable of doing 2.5% climb gradient.