Two engine G/A climb gradient B737Ng
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,050
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two engine G/A climb gradient B737Ng
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.
kind regards
pin
trying to find where I can find this figure to determine what minimums I can use. Checked the FPPM but only found SE figures.
kind regards
pin
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Any half decent airliner will greatly exceed any required missed approach gradients with all engines operating, hence no performance charts published.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: In Space
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
