DJ 419 ADL SYD 1500/10th Nov
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DJ 419 ADL SYD 1500/10th Nov
Captain
Given that the preceeding QF had not even lined up when you arrived at the holding point, what did you save by taking the significantly shorter intersection departure. The time to taxy to full length (23) would be about as long as the minute and a half you had to wait at the HP.
GG
Given that the preceeding QF had not even lined up when you arrived at the holding point, what did you save by taking the significantly shorter intersection departure. The time to taxy to full length (23) would be about as long as the minute and a half you had to wait at the HP.
GG
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Laugh my ass off 
Now thats what I call an appropriate reply!
Well said go_dj, after all, if the RTOW says its approved, then I would say the rest of the decision making lies with the crew involved.
Now thats what I call an appropriate reply!
Well said go_dj, after all, if the RTOW says its approved, then I would say the rest of the decision making lies with the crew involved.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hey Grange,
Why dont you go and refamil yourself with the definition of V1, where and how it's measured or were you observing from a piston prop where you have to start on the clearway before the threshold to get any performance, and then you prob dont know what I'm asking anyway !!!!
Why dont you go and refamil yourself with the definition of V1, where and how it's measured or were you observing from a piston prop where you have to start on the clearway before the threshold to get any performance, and then you prob dont know what I'm asking anyway !!!!
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
God almighty here we go again.BORING,BORING,BORING
Grange, the crew worked out the RTOW figures well before they arrived at the holding point. As you would well know?????????
Most times we are cleared for t/o without too much hassle. If there are a/c on final and nothing much to be gained the crew might request the full length on approaching delta. The figures GUARANTEE we will stop before the end of the runway if rejecting prior to V1. So there is NO intellectual (or otherwise) case for not performing intersection departures. All performance figures are as I say GUARANTEED.
There may be any number of reasons why a crew may decide not to use an intersection departure. It's up to the individual Capt in addition to a discussion with the f/o. So grange why the interest?
Grange, the crew worked out the RTOW figures well before they arrived at the holding point. As you would well know?????????
Most times we are cleared for t/o without too much hassle. If there are a/c on final and nothing much to be gained the crew might request the full length on approaching delta. The figures GUARANTEE we will stop before the end of the runway if rejecting prior to V1. So there is NO intellectual (or otherwise) case for not performing intersection departures. All performance figures are as I say GUARANTEED.
There may be any number of reasons why a crew may decide not to use an intersection departure. It's up to the individual Capt in addition to a discussion with the f/o. So grange why the interest?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually LL, on the 737NG Boeing use Balanced Field Length Figures. They are only applicable if the TODR = ASDA.
Otherwise the figures can be manipulated to achieve a higher V1 if a greater TODA / ASDA is available. But I'm sure you already knew that. Moral to the story, had the guy used a greater runway length, he could have achieved a higher V1 speed.
Probably not a good idea to throw stones at our piston bretheran just because they sling off at a Virgin aircraft. I've seen many other operators do just the same.
Otherwise the figures can be manipulated to achieve a higher V1 if a greater TODA / ASDA is available. But I'm sure you already knew that. Moral to the story, had the guy used a greater runway length, he could have achieved a higher V1 speed.
Probably not a good idea to throw stones at our piston bretheran just because they sling off at a Virgin aircraft. I've seen many other operators do just the same.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Cambodia
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
or a schoolgirl.............nya nya ne nya nya!!
Why don't you guys have the balls to have a go on the ramp? Now THAT would be worth watching!! biting, scratching and screaming.
Better still, single warrior combat:
QF's best Vs DJ's best, caged of course, by the old firestation at YSSY.
Decide once and for all, then never utter a word again!
Why don't you guys have the balls to have a go on the ramp? Now THAT would be worth watching!! biting, scratching and screaming.
Better still, single warrior combat:
QF's best Vs DJ's best, caged of course, by the old firestation at YSSY.
Decide once and for all, then never utter a word again!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still laughing my ass off
Cactus you may think that I work for DJ but I dont. But I do find it amusing that the spirit of competion is so fierce amongst the two groups that this type of stuff gets posted.
No slurs on the professionalism on either side PLEASE, I'm sure the RTOW would have been consulted and the decision for an intersection at Delta was a professional one.
Hey Col Kurtz, you could sell tickets to that event if it ever occured!
Mind you, this is the type of stuff little boys get sent to their room for!
Cactus you may think that I work for DJ but I dont. But I do find it amusing that the spirit of competion is so fierce amongst the two groups that this type of stuff gets posted.
No slurs on the professionalism on either side PLEASE, I'm sure the RTOW would have been consulted and the decision for an intersection at Delta was a professional one.
Hey Col Kurtz, you could sell tickets to that event if it ever occured!
Mind you, this is the type of stuff little boys get sent to their room for!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sperm Bank said:
Do they Guarantee you will perform 100% as expected to stop the aircraft according to the appropriate and expected stopping methods? Or that another fault which may have caused the RTO will allow you to stop in the appropriate conditions....Or that some other influence will not affect the a/c's stopping ability ?
I always thought many RTO's ended in prangs due a/c not stopping in time despite the aircraft performance figures GUARANTEEING that the aircraft will stop.
Seems like a very confident and or (more likely) stupid statement to make IMHO.
I could be wrong of course, but then again, I am not Guaranteeing that I am correct
[BTW my comments are w.r.t. "Guarantee", not about full length or interesection departures as the figures will? adjust V1 based on length available. ]
The figures GUARANTEE we will stop before the end of the runway if rejecting prior to V1. So there is NO intellectual (or otherwise) case for not performing intersection departures. All performance figures are as I say GUARANTEED
I always thought many RTO's ended in prangs due a/c not stopping in time despite the aircraft performance figures GUARANTEEING that the aircraft will stop.
Seems like a very confident and or (more likely) stupid statement to make IMHO.
I could be wrong of course, but then again, I am not Guaranteeing that I am correct
[BTW my comments are w.r.t. "Guarantee", not about full length or interesection departures as the figures will? adjust V1 based on length available. ]
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You just answered yourself LL with that post.
I'm not convinced that GG was "taking the piss" as you so eloquently put it. He had a valid question, and he has a right to it. Same with me.
Since you don't seem to wish to understand my point I will courteously spell it out for you.
Taking full length is an airmanship decision which allows a higher V1 speed, and often greater margins.
LL, your post towards GG was insulting, as was your last to me. You should learn some manners. Have a nice day....
I'm not convinced that GG was "taking the piss" as you so eloquently put it. He had a valid question, and he has a right to it. Same with me.
Since you don't seem to wish to understand my point I will courteously spell it out for you.
Taking full length is an airmanship decision which allows a higher V1 speed, and often greater margins.
LL, your post towards GG was insulting, as was your last to me. You should learn some manners. Have a nice day....
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amos, "the difference between being a pro or not" Given your anti DJ slant on most things I think most discernable intelligent people would laugh whole heartedly at your comment. It is is a farcical thing to say and you know it.
Blue loo, stupid is as stupid does. How much study and research have you done on RTO's? I wont descend to your level by brandishing insults such as stupid. Many RTO's end up in an incident MAINLY because the crew do not perform them correctly eg rejecting AFTER V1 (has happenend plenty of times), taking too long to reject and working out incorrect data to name a few. The FACTS are that if an a/c continues the t/o even with a failure BEFORE V1, it will generally be able to continue and return to land normally. MOST operators in the world use intersection departures when they are available. It saves time and money and does not in any way jeopardise safety. I have a document with 45 a/c accidents detailing mistakes by crews close to or after V1. I am not aware of any accidents where the crew decided to continue before or after V1 and didn't make it back sucessfully.
No one can predict what each individual pilot will do during a reject. You will notice some of the more experienced drivers taking their hands off the thrust levers just before V1 is called. They know that statistically it is better to take a problem into the air.
So with regard to your comment "seems like a very confident (or more likely) stupid statement, it is neither. It is simply the FACTS. A/C can SAFELY depart from ANY intersection the RTOW/ RWY analysis manual determines.
Blue loo, stupid is as stupid does. How much study and research have you done on RTO's? I wont descend to your level by brandishing insults such as stupid. Many RTO's end up in an incident MAINLY because the crew do not perform them correctly eg rejecting AFTER V1 (has happenend plenty of times), taking too long to reject and working out incorrect data to name a few. The FACTS are that if an a/c continues the t/o even with a failure BEFORE V1, it will generally be able to continue and return to land normally. MOST operators in the world use intersection departures when they are available. It saves time and money and does not in any way jeopardise safety. I have a document with 45 a/c accidents detailing mistakes by crews close to or after V1. I am not aware of any accidents where the crew decided to continue before or after V1 and didn't make it back sucessfully.
No one can predict what each individual pilot will do during a reject. You will notice some of the more experienced drivers taking their hands off the thrust levers just before V1 is called. They know that statistically it is better to take a problem into the air.
So with regard to your comment "seems like a very confident (or more likely) stupid statement, it is neither. It is simply the FACTS. A/C can SAFELY depart from ANY intersection the RTOW/ RWY analysis manual determines.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Melbourne Aus
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cactus jack, Im not going to wade into an airmanship argument with anyone but interesting that you mentioned Balanced Field Length.
Yep, intersection or not BFL is the worse possible case.(Accelerate Stop Distance Required [ASDR] = Engine out distance to reach 35 ft).
Some guys still insist on pushing things closer to the limit unnecessarily but still the decision rests with the PIC, although its still legal.
Even though legal some guys consider this wreckless and mention the word "cowboy" but each to their own.
I see international airline guys do it all the time, take the "F" intersection on the western side of Rwy 16R (Syd) and hold for five mins before the cabin is ready when there is no traffic between them and the full length.
With some 600m of runway wasted you see these guys disappear from sight over the hump only to reappear on TCAS struggling away over BBay.
If someone wants to take the intersection which in this case was legal then so be it.
Others may judge but dont know the facts (ie: pax numbers/weight etc).
Yep, intersection or not BFL is the worse possible case.(Accelerate Stop Distance Required [ASDR] = Engine out distance to reach 35 ft).
Some guys still insist on pushing things closer to the limit unnecessarily but still the decision rests with the PIC, although its still legal.
Even though legal some guys consider this wreckless and mention the word "cowboy" but each to their own.
I see international airline guys do it all the time, take the "F" intersection on the western side of Rwy 16R (Syd) and hold for five mins before the cabin is ready when there is no traffic between them and the full length.
With some 600m of runway wasted you see these guys disappear from sight over the hump only to reappear on TCAS struggling away over BBay.
If someone wants to take the intersection which in this case was legal then so be it.
Others may judge but dont know the facts (ie: pax numbers/weight etc).
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: oz
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the use of an intersection lowers the V1 to below balanced field, without any other gain, then I defy anyone to come up with a good explanation as to why that is good airmanship.
Runway behind you is just as useless to a heavy as it is to a lighty if the V1/VR split is 20 knots! ( or whatever figure you care to pick )
As was mentioned previously, the figures in the book ( albeit with good margins ) are arrived at by test pilots, not Jo Average ( or below average ).
The amount of RTOs that turn into runway over runs/accidents is quite alarming, regardless of the reason.
At the end of the day why would you want to reduce the safety margins for no gain ?
Runway behind you is just as useless to a heavy as it is to a lighty if the V1/VR split is 20 knots! ( or whatever figure you care to pick )
As was mentioned previously, the figures in the book ( albeit with good margins ) are arrived at by test pilots, not Jo Average ( or below average ).
The amount of RTOs that turn into runway over runs/accidents is quite alarming, regardless of the reason.
At the end of the day why would you want to reduce the safety margins for no gain ?
