Go around climb gradient

[Michalm]

Hi can some body Tell. Me what are requrements regarding go around minima to choose regardit gradient. I am asking regarding twin jet. Which minima should. I choose

[733driver]

If in doubt, use the highest published minima (typically based on, if I remember correctly, a 2.5% approach climb gradient, one engine inoperative). If you can ascertain better than standard (missed) approach climb gradient to the required altitude including gradient loss for any required turns, then use the corresponding lower approach minima.

[Banana Joe]

PANS-OPS state a nominal climb gradient of 2.5%. It can be higher than that for obstacle clearance or airspace structure. Which to pick? Whatever your performance calculations say.
On our Boeing OPT we can select what MACG to base the calculation on when more than one is published. If we don't make it, we take the higher minina.

EDIT
I don't recall PANS-OPS 2,5% MACG considering the engine out scenario. Too many variables, and like for engine failure procedures after take off, operators have to verify their performance capabilities and establish contingency procedures.

[giggitygiggity]

2.5% is standard minima (other options might be available and you might need more than 2.5% eg INN). It must be satisfied until reaching a specifically published acceleration altitude or 1500ft which is the standard ACCEL ALT.

It's calculated OEI, Go-Around flap config, L/G Up and one engine at TOGA.

[Michalm]

Ok So it should be 2.5 % which is required by certufication of the aircraft to be Able to make it?

[FlyingStone]

I don't recall PANS-OPS 2,5% MACG considering the engine out scenario. Too many variables, and like for engine failure procedures after take off, operators have to verify their performance capabilities and establish contingency procedures.

It does consider it. There is a note, however, stating that some aircraft might have problems achieving 2.5% at weights close to MTOW, but this is more problem at heavies where MTOW >> MLW:

6.1.7.3 Special conditions. It is emphasized that a missed approach procedure which is based on the nominal
climb gradient of 2.5 per cent cannot be used by all aeroplanes when operating at or near maximum certificated gross
mass and engine-out conditions. The operation of aeroplanes under these conditions needs special consideration at
aerodromes which are critical due to obstacles on the missed approach area. This may result in a special procedure
being established with a possible increase in the DA/H or MDA/H.

Just food for thought, if it didn't consider OEI scenario: which transport category aircraft in use today can't achieve 5% or even greater MACG in go-around configuration with two (all) engines at TOGA?