AI RTOLW charts / Perf. penalties
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: here and there
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AI RTOLW charts / Perf. penalties
Hi all,
I am a bit confused and would like to ask you for your opinion on the following:
T/O perf. determination using AI RTOLW charts
Problem: GND SPLR CNTRL SYS deactivated
The MEL (o) procedure gives some examples of how to use the charts
B.) How to proceed when the actual TOW is equal to the corrected MTOW (adapted to failed conditions)
C.) How to proceed when the actual TOW is less than the MTOW
The manual also says 'RTOLW charts are not limited by structual weight'
My questions:
What if the aTOW = Max.structual limit weight?
Where should the weight decrement be applied?
Applying the decrements on the perfomance weight gave us a still higher weight than the max. structual weight. What's the sense of a performance penalty if we still can t/o with max. weight?
ISA+10 / 1013 / 3000m / acft is an rather old B2
I am confused and the office is waiting for the report explaining the fuel stop.
Read the manual again and again but still didn't get the point.
English is not my native language and the manual was printed in France !
Any usefull thoughts except that I should attend a performance course again ?
I am a bit confused and would like to ask you for your opinion on the following:
T/O perf. determination using AI RTOLW charts
Problem: GND SPLR CNTRL SYS deactivated
The MEL (o) procedure gives some examples of how to use the charts
B.) How to proceed when the actual TOW is equal to the corrected MTOW (adapted to failed conditions)
C.) How to proceed when the actual TOW is less than the MTOW
The manual also says 'RTOLW charts are not limited by structual weight'
My questions:
What if the aTOW = Max.structual limit weight?
Where should the weight decrement be applied?
Applying the decrements on the perfomance weight gave us a still higher weight than the max. structual weight. What's the sense of a performance penalty if we still can t/o with max. weight?
ISA+10 / 1013 / 3000m / acft is an rather old B2
I am confused and the office is waiting for the report explaining the fuel stop.
Read the manual again and again but still didn't get the point.
English is not my native language and the manual was printed in France !
Any usefull thoughts except that I should attend a performance course again ?
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MaxBlow
The reason why 'RTOLW charts are not limited by structual weight is for cases such as yours, where a performance decrement has to be applied. Even with your deficiency, the aircraft was still capable, from the performance stand-point, of takeoff in excess of the Structural Limit. It's a right pain in the butt when manufacturers cut off performance data at the Structural Limit because performance decrements then have to be applied to this limit.
Whilst it may seem a futile exercise to you in THIS case, I'm sure that if you scan through your RTOLWs that you'll find plenty of shorter runways etc. where a performance decrement would have lead to a RTOLW lower than Structural Limit.
Do the performance calculation with applicable adjustments, compare the result with the Structural Limit, and observe the lower.
The reason why 'RTOLW charts are not limited by structual weight is for cases such as yours, where a performance decrement has to be applied. Even with your deficiency, the aircraft was still capable, from the performance stand-point, of takeoff in excess of the Structural Limit. It's a right pain in the butt when manufacturers cut off performance data at the Structural Limit because performance decrements then have to be applied to this limit.
Whilst it may seem a futile exercise to you in THIS case, I'm sure that if you scan through your RTOLWs that you'll find plenty of shorter runways etc. where a performance decrement would have lead to a RTOLW lower than Structural Limit.
Do the performance calculation with applicable adjustments, compare the result with the Structural Limit, and observe the lower.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MaxBlow,
You really cant blame AI for this, its a procedure that we follow for all our fleet aircraft, Airbus, Boeing and Douglas. Our intention is to comply with the MEL/CDL with the least impact on the economic operation of the aircraft, therefore we use weights greater than the structural weight.
Sorry mate, but i think that you will have to fall on your sword
Mutt.
You really cant blame AI for this, its a procedure that we follow for all our fleet aircraft, Airbus, Boeing and Douglas. Our intention is to comply with the MEL/CDL with the least impact on the economic operation of the aircraft, therefore we use weights greater than the structural weight.
Sorry mate, but i think that you will have to fall on your sword
Mutt.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: here and there
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks!
Calculated again and either way we wouldn't have been able to go all the way (uuhh). So getting the RCFPLN and stop for fuel was according to the manual.
Still think that manual could be a bit more straight foreward.
Learned a lesson again - merci
Calculated again and either way we wouldn't have been able to go all the way (uuhh). So getting the RCFPLN and stop for fuel was according to the manual.
Still think that manual could be a bit more straight foreward.
Learned a lesson again - merci
