ATR 42-300 CLIMB GRADIENT
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: out there
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATR 42-300 CLIMB GRADIENT
Hi all,
Do anyone know where to find ATR 42-300 Climb gradient performance rated to weight (two engines alive). I am currently flying both ATR 42-300 and ATR 72-500. I could find the adequate chart in the FCOM (climb chapter) for the 72 but the equivalent one for the 42-300 doesn't even appear in the table of contents.
thx
bleeds off
Do anyone know where to find ATR 42-300 Climb gradient performance rated to weight (two engines alive). I am currently flying both ATR 42-300 and ATR 72-500. I could find the adequate chart in the FCOM (climb chapter) for the 72 but the equivalent one for the 42-300 doesn't even appear in the table of contents.
thx
bleeds off
Same problem here, except I only fly 42-300. Couple of years ago my outfit tried to persuade ATR to put all-engine climb gradient tables into FCOM 3. Some time has passed, there was no mail from Tolouse so we went to our performance boys and they've printed out tables from their performance software. So while we're waiting for major FCOM revision, these tables are inserted in FCOM binder behind chapt 3.04.05 as temporary solution.
My guess is that ATR was so embarrased by -300 climb performance that they want to keep it secret.
My guess is that ATR was so embarrased by -300 climb performance that they want to keep it secret.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: out there
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok i'm reassured that my FCOM version is not an out of date one (at least on that issue).
Do u know whether your company perfs software is an ATR designed one? And have you had the occasion to concretely observe the accuracy of its figures?
bleeds off
Do u know whether your company perfs software is an ATR designed one? And have you had the occasion to concretely observe the accuracy of its figures?
bleeds off
Bleeds off
Yup, our tables are generated with ATR's flight ops software and they are slightly optimistic but they were expected to be, as our planes are of early 90s vintage.
Cheers, C.
Yup, our tables are generated with ATR's flight ops software and they are slightly optimistic but they were expected to be, as our planes are of early 90s vintage.
Cheers, C.
ECON cruise, LR cruise...
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MIRSI hold - give or take...
Age: 52
Posts: 568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps ATR kept the 2 engine climb performance out of the book so that people only had one option - use the 1 ENG climb performance. And if you cannot make it on 1 engine - you don't need to know if you can make it on two.
This is of course assuming that we are talking about obstacle clearance performance. If we are talking en-route climb, there is no excuse for ATR not to have made that available.
Empty
This is of course assuming that we are talking about obstacle clearance performance. If we are talking en-route climb, there is no excuse for ATR not to have made that available.
Empty
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: out there
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, my concern was about those areas where SID's impose a minimum slope to sustain: I had no clue about how to figure out the max weight available to comply with such constraints. Since the case never apply on my company's network, nobody seems to have cared about it.
happy landings
bleeds off
happy landings
bleeds off
