TOGA time limit (JAR vs FAR)
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
From: Madrid
TOGA time limit (JAR vs FAR)
According JAR, TOGA is certified for use for a maximum of 10 minutes in case of an engine failure at take off. On the other hand ,and as far as I know, FAR only allows 5 minutes in the same scenario.
So, for the same enviromental conditions and aircraft/engine type, the [U]Obstacle Limited TO Mass might be different (higher)for the company operating according JAR than for the one complying with FAR.
I donīt believe this could really happens, it might be a great disadvantage for americans.
Can anybody out there explain me that?
Thank you in advance.
So, for the same enviromental conditions and aircraft/engine type, the [U]Obstacle Limited TO Mass might be different (higher)for the company operating according JAR than for the one complying with FAR.
I donīt believe this could really happens, it might be a great disadvantage for americans.
Can anybody out there explain me that?
Thank you in advance.

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,581
Likes: 0
From: flyover country USA
It IS a disadvantage for American operators when there are remote obstacles to clear OEI, thus RTOW limited. However on modern engines there is really no basis in technical fact for the 5-min. limit.
I used to do test cell runs in which we repeatedly held rated TO power longer than 10 minutes, and while I can't say it was good for long-term retention of EGT margin or SFC, there was NEVER any reliability issue.
Thus - the beancounters are not delighted by the prospect of early removal of a performance-limited donk for seal refurbishment, but flight crews of a modern engine should not hesitate to use TOGA as required.
I used to do test cell runs in which we repeatedly held rated TO power longer than 10 minutes, and while I can't say it was good for long-term retention of EGT margin or SFC, there was NEVER any reliability issue.
Thus - the beancounters are not delighted by the prospect of early removal of a performance-limited donk for seal refurbishment, but flight crews of a modern engine should not hesitate to use TOGA as required.
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
From: Does not matter
N registered aircraft operating in Europe under JAR's... Do they have to buy the "10 min" also?
Any US airline that you know of using the 10 min limit?
Any idea how much $ switching over to the 10min limit can cost?
Tks.
Any US airline that you know of using the 10 min limit?
Any idea how much $ switching over to the 10min limit can cost?
Tks.
Fleet Manager

Joined: Apr 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 7,447
Likes: 310
From: various places .....
cost ?
Can be significant .. put it this way, some years ago we were looking at the problem with a twin jet. In the end we convinced the local regulator that we could do a local flight manual amendment to "permit" the use of 10 minutes without taking any credit for the extra performance ... got us around our particular problems at next to no cost. I can't remember the OEM cost but it was in the many thousands ...
Can be significant .. put it this way, some years ago we were looking at the problem with a twin jet. In the end we convinced the local regulator that we could do a local flight manual amendment to "permit" the use of 10 minutes without taking any credit for the extra performance ... got us around our particular problems at next to no cost. I can't remember the OEM cost but it was in the many thousands ...


Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 25
From: ME
According JAR, TOGA is certified for use for a maximum of 10 minutes in case of an engine failure at take off. On the other hand ,and as far as I know, FAR only allows 5 minutes in the same scenario.
We operate 5 aircraft types under FAR121 with 10 minutes.Mutt




