Min Flap Retraction Versus Acceleration Height
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Australasia
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mutt,
Hence my comment about the cultural element of the policy making.
However, I would have thought that having identified the potential problem, there were a number of solutions:
first, emphasising that acceleration must not be at a rate of climb less than 5-700fpm (or as determined by the required departure gradient) when all engines are operating (draw a matching diagram) or acceleration must not be at a rate of climb more than 0-200fpm if one engine has stopped and acceleration altitude has been achieved (Boeing diagram);
second, structure all of the sim rides to have split AEO/OEI FRAs and drive in the correct solution; and
third, ensure that all Line Checks examine that policy.
JT,
Let me remove any doubt - in my view, any manager who directs that only the V1 cut scenario should be planned and everything else is the sole responsibility of the pilot is abrogating his/her duty of care and should be a prime candidate for industrial manslaughter if a death occurs through such professional neglect.
I also believe that employers and employees share an equal burden to keep the grass out of the windscreen wipers - any decision to depart from the OEI track needs to include a minimum MOC to start the turn that takes into account the climb performance at the time of a failure at any point of the turn and the ability to navigate into safe airspace post-failure (allowing for radius of turn!).
However, I also respect the need to maximise payload because that is the business we are in. Hence my previously expressed frustration at those who would seek the path of least resistance and climb to 25 mile MSA at the take-off flap setting before commencing any turn. The true beauty is in achieving a safe balance.
Stay Alive,
Hence my comment about the cultural element of the policy making.
However, I would have thought that having identified the potential problem, there were a number of solutions:
first, emphasising that acceleration must not be at a rate of climb less than 5-700fpm (or as determined by the required departure gradient) when all engines are operating (draw a matching diagram) or acceleration must not be at a rate of climb more than 0-200fpm if one engine has stopped and acceleration altitude has been achieved (Boeing diagram);
second, structure all of the sim rides to have split AEO/OEI FRAs and drive in the correct solution; and
third, ensure that all Line Checks examine that policy.
JT,
Let me remove any doubt - in my view, any manager who directs that only the V1 cut scenario should be planned and everything else is the sole responsibility of the pilot is abrogating his/her duty of care and should be a prime candidate for industrial manslaughter if a death occurs through such professional neglect.
I also believe that employers and employees share an equal burden to keep the grass out of the windscreen wipers - any decision to depart from the OEI track needs to include a minimum MOC to start the turn that takes into account the climb performance at the time of a failure at any point of the turn and the ability to navigate into safe airspace post-failure (allowing for radius of turn!).
However, I also respect the need to maximise payload because that is the business we are in. Hence my previously expressed frustration at those who would seek the path of least resistance and climb to 25 mile MSA at the take-off flap setting before commencing any turn. The true beauty is in achieving a safe balance.
Stay Alive,
Mach 3
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Stratosphere
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quick questions....
1) Is what people are referring to as fifth segment climb requirements analogous to the en-route climb requirements a la JAR-OPS 1.500/JAR 25.123 ?
2) In the event that an obstacle obliges that the requirements of JAR 25.121 (Climb OEI) be extended until >1500 AFE, is the obligation to meet the fourth segment requirements dispensed with? In this case, one resumes the calculation at the end of the third segment within the constraints of JAR 25.123 (Enroute Flight Paths)?
Cheers.
1) Is what people are referring to as fifth segment climb requirements analogous to the en-route climb requirements a la JAR-OPS 1.500/JAR 25.123 ?
2) In the event that an obstacle obliges that the requirements of JAR 25.121 (Climb OEI) be extended until >1500 AFE, is the obligation to meet the fourth segment requirements dispensed with? In this case, one resumes the calculation at the end of the third segment within the constraints of JAR 25.123 (Enroute Flight Paths)?
Cheers.
