Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

T/O Engine failure acceleration altitude

Wikiposts
Search
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

T/O Engine failure acceleration altitude

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 18th Jul 2008, 09:47
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
T/O Engine failure acceleration altitude

Hi folks!
Wondering what is the acceleration altitude in case of engine failure at take off (no contingency procedure due to obstacles) according to your AFM or/and company SOP.
I'd appreciate a brief comment on the pros and cons of different options, especially low altitude (ca. 400 ft) versus high altitude (ca. 1500 ft).

Thanks so much for your kind help, happy landings!!
Happy Landing is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2008, 10:36
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,845
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
...no contingency procedure due to obstacles...
I take that to mean that there is no ET or non-standard AA published in your Company performance data?

I would caution that just because there is no contingency procedure, it doesn't mean that there aren't any obstacles - just that following your SOPs will give you the required terrain clearance. It is not a licence to invent a novel OEI procedure and see if it works! (Or not... )

As far as the effects go, an early clean up might compromise the second and third segment obstacle clearance (compared with normal). A later clean up will probably give better clearance initially but there's the possibility of going below the net flight path later on if it's tight.

If you're taking off over the sea, then I suppose it doesn't matter (tall ships excepted!) but I'd be very wary of doing anything non-standard under limiting conditions as it's sometimes not obvious where the critical performance limitation is: could be just off the end of the runway, could be 10 miles away round a corner...

We use 1,000'AAL unless otherwise specified.
FullWings is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2008, 10:49
  #3 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fire drills at 400' and above, clean up and accelerate 1000' unless the plate says different for accelerate.
parabellum is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2008, 11:35
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: slightly left of you
Age: 43
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
same for us as with parabellum
cortilla is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2008, 12:02
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thank you guys!

FullWings: it means the general rule, when you have obstacle clearance with the 2.4° certification gradient; to distingush from special airports where a higher gradient is required (and you might have to delay the acceleration)...
Happy Landing is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2008, 12:12
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fire drills (well, all memory drills) at 400' and 1500ft for cleanup here. List reading only after cleanup completed.
Denti is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2008, 12:20
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I guess 400'/1500' are the reference for most. Of course, these are minimum heights, not mandatory!
LocBlew is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2008, 15:13
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
800 agl minimum for acceleration.
Note, fire drills are not accomplished (except bell silence) until the flaps are fully retracted, unless engine severe damage or separation are confirmed/suspected.
Type, L1011.
411A is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2008, 15:30
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,845
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Exclamation

I guess 400'/1500' are the reference for most. Of course, these are minimum heights, not mandatory!
I'd check with a performance expert before getting too carried away with that assumption. The reason you clean up after takeoff is to get the aircraft into a lower drag configuration; if you leave it 'dirty' for too long, with a lower rate-of-climb, you may not get the terrain clearance assumed in the perf. calculations later on in the flight profile... As I said in a previous post, this is only likely to become apparent at limiting weights (and after a V1 cut) but if you want to stay on the right side of FAR & JAR...
FullWings is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2008, 11:44
  #10 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: various places .....
Posts: 7,187
Received 97 Likes on 65 Posts
Some thoughts ..

(a) AEO ... the aim is to fly the aircraft so that the flight path stays above the calculated OEI flight path so that there is no particular concern in the normal takeoff case .. however, one needs to watch IAS critically if there are turns in the procedure as the turn radius varies with speed.

(b) while AEO routine cleanup procedures vary, typical protocols see a gentle acceleration (ie reduced ROC) from heights varying from 800 ft. Generally with twin jets, the AEO performance is such that, by the time the initial climb is established etc., the aircraft is going to be at a reasonable height arp anyway ... we all understand that this doesn't apply to some of the wonderful old girls .. Fokker, Argosy, 748 etc. etc ...

(c) minimum (OEI) third segment (acceleration) is 400ft arp

(d) maximum third segment is only limited by the AFM and commonsense .. so, for instance, Dart powered machines I have played with have a 600 ft maximum due to feather pump limits. Many jets can be pushed up to 800ft or more as necessary and considered appropriate. The general limit is that height which results in the END of the third segment occurring within the time limit for engine operation at takeoff thrust (generally either 5 or 10 minutes)

(e) often an operator will adopt a standard height based on a critical runway for standardisation (the Australian domestic airlines did this years ago for the jets using 800ft based on Canberra departures which were critical for the DC9.

(f) your particular operator's SOP for a given runway should prescribe the third segment height, either specifically or as a generic level for that operation ... he who doesn't follow that procedure exposes the aircraft to potential problems .. obstacle clearance in particular .. the pilot generally has NO idea what sums went into the procedure or what obstacle(s) are critical and under what circumstances .. be aware that the critical obstacle may well change depending on OAT or W/V
john_tullamarine is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2008, 14:08
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Argentina
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In Mad-Dogs, minimum is 800 ft AGL because of engine FCU design. That altitude is for all emergency conditions (except dual engine failure)
md-100 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.