CPL Performance exam - Take off Charts
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CPL Performance exam - Take off Charts
Hi need some help please. My question re - take off weight chart for the echo.
The take off distance factor of 1.22.
Is this factor all ready factored into the chart or are you suppose to add the 22% to the toda after calculating using the chart?
Also for future reference the info in CAO 20.7.4 below is that to be used when calculating xyz aircraft that doesnt have an australian flight manual and only a manufacturers manual or should you add the recommended factors to all calculations?
(a) 1.15 for aeroplanes with maximum take-off weights of 2 000 kg or less;
(b) 1.25 for aeroplanes with maximum take-off weights of 3 500 kg or greater; or
(c) for aeroplanes with maximum take-off weights between 2 000 kg and 3 500 kg, a factor derived by linear interpolation between 1.15 and 1.25 according to the maximum take-off weight of the aeroplane.
thanks
The take off distance factor of 1.22.
Is this factor all ready factored into the chart or are you suppose to add the 22% to the toda after calculating using the chart?
Also for future reference the info in CAO 20.7.4 below is that to be used when calculating xyz aircraft that doesnt have an australian flight manual and only a manufacturers manual or should you add the recommended factors to all calculations?
TAKE-OFF DISTANCE REQUIRED
6.1 Subject to paragraph 6.3, the take-off distance required is the distance to accelerate from a standing start with all engines operating and to achieve take-off safety speed at a height of 50 feet above the take-off surface, multiplied by the following factors: (a) 1.15 for aeroplanes with maximum take-off weights of 2 000 kg or less;
(b) 1.25 for aeroplanes with maximum take-off weights of 3 500 kg or greater; or
(c) for aeroplanes with maximum take-off weights between 2 000 kg and 3 500 kg, a factor derived by linear interpolation between 1.15 and 1.25 according to the maximum take-off weight of the aeroplane.
thanks
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 41
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
It is already factored into the charts as a safety margin, no need to add it on. Just make sure you have a very sharpe pencil for the exam, it can make the world of difference to the answer you get.
It is already factored into the charts as a safety margin, no need to add it on. Just make sure you have a very sharpe pencil for the exam, it can make the world of difference to the answer you get.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hated those bloody charts in CPL performance. its half luck whether you get the right answer, even if you're super accurate. 
Oh well, i wonder if there will be many more in ATPLs.
Oh well, i wonder if there will be many more in ATPLs.
Moderator
I am a bit out of touch with the exams these days. However, the chart should indicate in the marginal information whether it is factored and I would expect it to be so.
So far as execution goes, take a little bit of care and time, use a sharp pencil and ruler, and you should do just fine.
So far as execution goes, take a little bit of care and time, use a sharp pencil and ruler, and you should do just fine.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all, need some clarification on wind and LDA available for the CPL performance exam
Would i be right in saying that you need to use NO wind on the chart if you are using a TAF or TTF but need to use the wind if in the exam ambient conditions are provided
cheers
Would i be right in saying that you need to use NO wind on the chart if you are using a TAF or TTF but need to use the wind if in the exam ambient conditions are provided
cheers
JayBo,
Double check your facts, don't take previous post answers as gospel.
GAMA type charts (US GA aircraft/FAA AFM) and similar are generally NOT factored, that is why the regs. exist, to add the safety margins for other than private operations, that were in "DCA" charts ( Australian Flight Manual) prior to 1998.
FAR 25 aircraft are a different kettle of fish, surprise, surprise, the certification factors for all performance can be found in FAR 25 and associated Advisory Circulars. Probably of limited relevance now (any 748 left) but BCAR factors were completely different to FAA.
As a digression, there were some rather amazing figures in those old DCA charts, there were several types where the "short dry grass + factored" were significantly less than the Cessna or Piper AFM distances, based on a sealed runway and no factor. "Go figure" is the appropriate expression.
Don't anybody suggest it would be "safer" to regress, ain't so.
As to the CASA "exam" charts, why don't you just ask them, 131757 is a free call.
Tootle pip!!
Double check your facts, don't take previous post answers as gospel.
GAMA type charts (US GA aircraft/FAA AFM) and similar are generally NOT factored, that is why the regs. exist, to add the safety margins for other than private operations, that were in "DCA" charts ( Australian Flight Manual) prior to 1998.
FAR 25 aircraft are a different kettle of fish, surprise, surprise, the certification factors for all performance can be found in FAR 25 and associated Advisory Circulars. Probably of limited relevance now (any 748 left) but BCAR factors were completely different to FAA.
As a digression, there were some rather amazing figures in those old DCA charts, there were several types where the "short dry grass + factored" were significantly less than the Cessna or Piper AFM distances, based on a sealed runway and no factor. "Go figure" is the appropriate expression.
Don't anybody suggest it would be "safer" to regress, ain't so.
As to the CASA "exam" charts, why don't you just ask them, 131757 is a free call.
Tootle pip!!
Moderator
there were some rather amazing figures in those old DCA charts
Hear what you say.
However, over the years I had a fair bit to do with the old P-charts. While the sums were pretty simple (until JCF's version to cover turboprops), the techniques were applied reasonably conservatively with an eye to not permitting sufficient conservatism to encourage disregard by the end user.
Comparison between specific P-charts and OEM data would require just that so I can't speak to specifics at the moment. However, be aware that some of the early OEM data was not subject to much in the way of independent scrutiny. The P-charts either were based on some simple quantitative flight tests or, for the later GAMA data, some spot points in the OEM schedule.
Unless I had a quantitative reason not to do so, I would happily use the old P-chart as being a reasonably indicative starting point for assessing the suitability of a runway length.
Hear what you say.
However, over the years I had a fair bit to do with the old P-charts. While the sums were pretty simple (until JCF's version to cover turboprops), the techniques were applied reasonably conservatively with an eye to not permitting sufficient conservatism to encourage disregard by the end user.
Comparison between specific P-charts and OEM data would require just that so I can't speak to specifics at the moment. However, be aware that some of the early OEM data was not subject to much in the way of independent scrutiny. The P-charts either were based on some simple quantitative flight tests or, for the later GAMA data, some spot points in the OEM schedule.
Unless I had a quantitative reason not to do so, I would happily use the old P-chart as being a reasonably indicative starting point for assessing the suitability of a runway length.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Australia
Age: 47
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all,
Passed flight planning today first up, im doing my conversion from Atpl(h) to CPL(a) then onto Atpl(a)...only got Law and Human factors to go for CPL(a). Ive had a PPL(a) for about 10 years so i though id do something with it anyway haha, you never know.
The echo is still tested and you can expect all types of load scenarios.
Anyway the exam consisted of the following:
3x3 markers on weight to shift, weight to add to maintian CofG in Echo
15 x 2 mark questions on landing dist reqd, t/off dist reqd, PNR's I had 2. Cp/Etp i had 2 also amongst the 15 described
The remaining 12x 1 markers were academic ones like DA, and aircraft general knowledge, climb gradients, rate of climb reqd.
Nail those 3 markers and you will be right, the graphs in the exam are not that bad but as others have mentioned have a very sharp pencil and good eraser!
Back to the celabratory beers!!
Passed flight planning today first up, im doing my conversion from Atpl(h) to CPL(a) then onto Atpl(a)...only got Law and Human factors to go for CPL(a). Ive had a PPL(a) for about 10 years so i though id do something with it anyway haha, you never know.
The echo is still tested and you can expect all types of load scenarios.
Anyway the exam consisted of the following:
3x3 markers on weight to shift, weight to add to maintian CofG in Echo
15 x 2 mark questions on landing dist reqd, t/off dist reqd, PNR's I had 2. Cp/Etp i had 2 also amongst the 15 described
The remaining 12x 1 markers were academic ones like DA, and aircraft general knowledge, climb gradients, rate of climb reqd.
Nail those 3 markers and you will be right, the graphs in the exam are not that bad but as others have mentioned have a very sharp pencil and good eraser!
Back to the celabratory beers!!
Last edited by belly tank; 8th Dec 2010 at 11:03.
