Category A Ops
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Category A Ops
My understanding of Category A (Group A) operations is OEI accountability during T/O or landing phase at clear areas or helipad. I have heard that there is a Category A enroute performance....has anyone heard of this? I can't find any specs on this except that someone said that Eurocopter have it in their N2/3 flight manuals. Anyone out there can clarify this?
Thanks
Thanks
Join Date: May 2001
Location: perth
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nasus,
Could that be a JAR requirement?
It may also be in the translation, i have never heard of it over here, except maintaining LSALT on remaining engine, and the 1% climb gradient, but thats all changed too. Someone will have the answer.
Could that be a JAR requirement?
It may also be in the translation, i have never heard of it over here, except maintaining LSALT on remaining engine, and the 1% climb gradient, but thats all changed too. Someone will have the answer.
It's not just an adventure....
it's just a job!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Philippines
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all I would like to apologise for my abscence from the BB. I have been rather busy. Enough said.
WRT CAT A performance, the single engine performance you refer to in JAR/FAA/CARS are really a Class 1 limitation wrt take off and landing. What you refer to is what the manufacturer provides in the form of CAT A or CAT B Ops.
Simply stated, CAT A performance for most manufacturers guarantees, after CDP, the A/C can climb at 100 FPM to min sector with the gear down (most unfavourable C of G) then continue at 150 fpm (most unfavourable C of G) to MEA in an OEI condition. This will vary of course between manufacturers.
Hope this helps.
OffshoreIgor
WRT CAT A performance, the single engine performance you refer to in JAR/FAA/CARS are really a Class 1 limitation wrt take off and landing. What you refer to is what the manufacturer provides in the form of CAT A or CAT B Ops.
Simply stated, CAT A performance for most manufacturers guarantees, after CDP, the A/C can climb at 100 FPM to min sector with the gear down (most unfavourable C of G) then continue at 150 fpm (most unfavourable C of G) to MEA in an OEI condition. This will vary of course between manufacturers.
Hope this helps.
OffshoreIgor
The en-route requirement under JAR Ops 3 is for Class 1 and 2 operations to ensure a 50 ft/min roc ability at MSA with OEI continuous rating, Vy and L/G up.
This was also a CAA requirement for Group A and Group A (restricted) operations, except they added a safety factor of 100 ft/min, specifying 50 ft/min net roc and 150 ft/min gross roc. The JAA do not distinguish between net and gross.
This was also a CAA requirement for Group A and Group A (restricted) operations, except they added a safety factor of 100 ft/min, specifying 50 ft/min net roc and 150 ft/min gross roc. The JAA do not distinguish between net and gross.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The exact requirements are slightly different for JAR Ops and FAR, but the principle is the same.
1) The engine installation must be so that no failure of one engine can affect the continued safe operation of the other engine. This is a very powerful statement that defines fully separate fuel systems, fire zones, airframe sensors and lots more.
2) A detailed procedure must be written to allow an OEI (one engine inoperative) rejected takeoff within specified landback distance; a critical decision point where it is safe to continue takeoff after an engine failure; the ability to safely climb out at a specified gradient (JAR) or climb rate (FAR) and accelerate to Vy; and the ability to achieve a climb rate at least 1000 feet above the takeoff point. For FAR the climb rate must be 150 feet per minute, JAR OPS allows some variance.
3) The procedures must provide a means of determining the combination of maximum weights, altitude and outside temperature to achieve the performance in 2 above.
4) The procedures must allow adjustment for changes in configuration and airframe systems operation to assure the performance in 2. This means that anti-ice, rotor de-ice, electrical loads, heater operation, doors open, and the like must all be accounted for in the procedures, if they are allowed in Cat A (JAR OPS 3) operations.
5) The procedures must be able to be performed by pilots of average skill, and no adjustment of engine controls is allowed for several seconds after the initial engine failure.
1) The engine installation must be so that no failure of one engine can affect the continued safe operation of the other engine. This is a very powerful statement that defines fully separate fuel systems, fire zones, airframe sensors and lots more.
2) A detailed procedure must be written to allow an OEI (one engine inoperative) rejected takeoff within specified landback distance; a critical decision point where it is safe to continue takeoff after an engine failure; the ability to safely climb out at a specified gradient (JAR) or climb rate (FAR) and accelerate to Vy; and the ability to achieve a climb rate at least 1000 feet above the takeoff point. For FAR the climb rate must be 150 feet per minute, JAR OPS allows some variance.
3) The procedures must provide a means of determining the combination of maximum weights, altitude and outside temperature to achieve the performance in 2 above.
4) The procedures must allow adjustment for changes in configuration and airframe systems operation to assure the performance in 2. This means that anti-ice, rotor de-ice, electrical loads, heater operation, doors open, and the like must all be accounted for in the procedures, if they are allowed in Cat A (JAR OPS 3) operations.
5) The procedures must be able to be performed by pilots of average skill, and no adjustment of engine controls is allowed for several seconds after the initial engine failure.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks guys for the info. Isn't it interesting how much variation there is on this subject! Is there a single ICAO standard defining Category A (Group A / Class A or whatever it's called)including Category B performance? Guess not. Seems that the manufacturers and regulators have their own interpretations and definitions!
regards
regards
Nick,
I'm a little suprised by your remarks re JAR. As far as certification goes, JAR 29 is extremely similar to FAR 29 to the extent that the chapter and paragraph numbers tally. For CAT A certification performance requirements, they are in agreement. The references to climb gradient sound more like the old UK BCARs.
CLASS 1 and 2 though are sub classifications of CAT A, defined in JAR OPS 3 (an Operational document, not certification)sections F,G and H. The essential difference being that Class 2 ops do not require a safe landing in the event of a reject, but a force landing from which the occupants and third parties remain uninjured. Additionally there is no stay up guarantee with Class 2 until a defined point after take-off, normally on reaching Vy or close to it.
The original question though refered to the en-route phase, which is what my original reply responded to (correctly I believe)
I'm a little suprised by your remarks re JAR. As far as certification goes, JAR 29 is extremely similar to FAR 29 to the extent that the chapter and paragraph numbers tally. For CAT A certification performance requirements, they are in agreement. The references to climb gradient sound more like the old UK BCARs.
CLASS 1 and 2 though are sub classifications of CAT A, defined in JAR OPS 3 (an Operational document, not certification)sections F,G and H. The essential difference being that Class 2 ops do not require a safe landing in the event of a reject, but a force landing from which the occupants and third parties remain uninjured. Additionally there is no stay up guarantee with Class 2 until a defined point after take-off, normally on reaching Vy or close to it.
The original question though refered to the en-route phase, which is what my original reply responded to (correctly I believe)
Guest
Posts: n/a
212Man said:
I'm a little suprised by your remarks re JAR.
Nick sez:
Yep, you're right. I sort of mucked about with JAR and old fashioned BCAR with imprudence. The old BCAR was really pretty good, the new JAR and FAR match. Thanks for clearing up the point.
I'm a little suprised by your remarks re JAR.
Nick sez:
Yep, you're right. I sort of mucked about with JAR and old fashioned BCAR with imprudence. The old BCAR was really pretty good, the new JAR and FAR match. Thanks for clearing up the point.
