EZY 737 departure procedures
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EZY 737 departure procedures
Does anyone know if the initial departure profile of EZY 737s varies from that of the majority of other 737 operators?
This applies to all their variants which seem to climb out more slowly immediately after take-off than other companies aircraft.
" Sorry sir, you're number two to the RJ146"
This applies to all their variants which seem to climb out more slowly immediately after take-off than other companies aircraft.
" Sorry sir, you're number two to the RJ146"
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: West London
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its a noise abatement departure (ICAO B or 2) which is t/o thrust to 1500agl then climb thrust to 3000' before accelerating. I think other operators may not use this profile except where required but at easy the decision was made to use this as the standard in order to reduce noise problems.
Why do you ask?
Why do you ask?
Being an ex 737-300 driver was surprised to learn that Easy used Flap 1 for take-off, whereas we always used Flap 5, and of course Flap 15 on short or contaminated rwys. It would account for the sluggish climbouts. Although i have heard that Flap 5 is more common at Easy these days 
Am i right or hopelessly wrong
Am i right or hopelessly wrong
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the record, noise abatement procedures are to be established by operators for IFR operations in accordance with ICAO PANS-Aircraft Operations (Doc 8168).
Engee 73 is incorrect in that he has stated Procedure A (not B), which results in noise relief during the latter part of the procedure. Procedure B is t/o thrust to 1000'agl, and therefore provides relief close to the airport.
Think Procedure "A" way, should you need some help remembering.
Its a noise abatement departure (ICAO B or 2) which is t/o thrust to 1500agl
Think Procedure "A" way, should you need some help remembering.
my memory fails me! 
eazy departures
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Inside the M25
Posts: 2,404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm, not heard of that before. Rotate faster to hit the tail on the runway, that's what we were told. Rotate faster to stall you when you have an engine failure. That wasn't what you were thinking of?
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Allendale, Northumberland
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot of states insist on the following, significantly CH; T/O pwr to 1500 agl, climb pwr to 3000agl, then clean up. That is the easy standard sop and meets all european noise requirements. Whats the beef?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Far flung shores
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I just add a word of caution on the phraseology being used in this thread.
I.e. If on a B737 you are using an ‘increased V2’, or indeed your V1/Vr is based on (say) Flap 1, you will almost certainly be traveling faster than (say) the ‘more normal’ Flap5 V1/Vr speed, and as such the elevator is much more effective.
Accordingly a tadge more finesse w.r.t. your rotation technique might be wise - as in, ‘gently does it’ !
That said, and in any event, it's all a bit of a balancing act isn't it :
E.g. Increased V2 (or else Flap 1) allows you to lift predominantly more weight – in that it has the net effect (all things being equal – which they’re not) of lowering the distant obstacles (due to a better 2nd segment climb gradient; all much reliant of course on you having the runway available to achieve the higher lift-off speed in the first place – performance achieved from veritably from ‘leaping’ into the air at full gallop), the flip-side being that your 'stop-go' margin, i.e. the V1/Vr spilt might be 'impressive' - and / or attempting to stop from such a higher V1 speed might, in general, be a very poor idea.
In any event, it would take some balls to call "Stop" with a V1 at (say) 160Kt on what normally seems a longish runway, in a heavy aircraft, on a hot day - and then to think that Mr Boeing says that you will indeed stop (before departing through the perimeter fence, maybe) is truly impressive !
Ps. Two of my favorite examples of this increased V2 or Flap 1 method are the N/W departures out of both Malaga and Alicante – and I’m sure that you all too all have many others examples.
Veritably and for good reason, one of those Airmanship rules includes something about 'Runway behind you' !
I.e. If on a B737 you are using an ‘increased V2’, or indeed your V1/Vr is based on (say) Flap 1, you will almost certainly be traveling faster than (say) the ‘more normal’ Flap5 V1/Vr speed, and as such the elevator is much more effective.
Accordingly a tadge more finesse w.r.t. your rotation technique might be wise - as in, ‘gently does it’ !
That said, and in any event, it's all a bit of a balancing act isn't it :
E.g. Increased V2 (or else Flap 1) allows you to lift predominantly more weight – in that it has the net effect (all things being equal – which they’re not) of lowering the distant obstacles (due to a better 2nd segment climb gradient; all much reliant of course on you having the runway available to achieve the higher lift-off speed in the first place – performance achieved from veritably from ‘leaping’ into the air at full gallop), the flip-side being that your 'stop-go' margin, i.e. the V1/Vr spilt might be 'impressive' - and / or attempting to stop from such a higher V1 speed might, in general, be a very poor idea.
In any event, it would take some balls to call "Stop" with a V1 at (say) 160Kt on what normally seems a longish runway, in a heavy aircraft, on a hot day - and then to think that Mr Boeing says that you will indeed stop (before departing through the perimeter fence, maybe) is truly impressive !
Ps. Two of my favorite examples of this increased V2 or Flap 1 method are the N/W departures out of both Malaga and Alicante – and I’m sure that you all too all have many others examples.
Veritably and for good reason, one of those Airmanship rules includes something about 'Runway behind you' !
Last edited by Puritan; 29th Apr 2002 at 23:04.
Guest
Posts: n/a
99.9% of EZY take-offs are flap 5, with just the occasional Flap 15 for training, in case we get stuck somewhere short. Flap 1 take-off’s were abolished last year. Our (Jeppesen) performance, in common with many others, has provision for improved climb if we need it. Again this is very rarely used.
Re the climb out, all departures are noise abatement, ie climb thrust at 1500 & accel at 3000. It may not be necessary everywhere but it is easier (and therefore perhaps safer) to have only one profile. It is also more environmentally friendly and I would bet that in 10yrs time most airports will be insisting upon it.
To slow things down further for you, we restrict ourselves to 250 below 10, unless ATC requests otherwise. This gives us a healthy margin for descent planning, reduces the risk of serious birdstrike damage, builds up hours for the F/O and is a much more gentlemanly pace for the old boy in the LHS to move around the skies.
I am surprised that you think our climb-outs are slow, perhaps our loads are better than everyone elses
But we are usually at 410 within 20mins so we can’t be that sluggish!
S & L
Re the climb out, all departures are noise abatement, ie climb thrust at 1500 & accel at 3000. It may not be necessary everywhere but it is easier (and therefore perhaps safer) to have only one profile. It is also more environmentally friendly and I would bet that in 10yrs time most airports will be insisting upon it.
To slow things down further for you, we restrict ourselves to 250 below 10, unless ATC requests otherwise. This gives us a healthy margin for descent planning, reduces the risk of serious birdstrike damage, builds up hours for the F/O and is a much more gentlemanly pace for the old boy in the LHS to move around the skies.
I am surprised that you think our climb-outs are slow, perhaps our loads are better than everyone elses
But we are usually at 410 within 20mins so we can’t be that sluggish!S & L
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Inside the M25
Posts: 2,404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Runway behind you". This is where I get shot down ........
The number of times I've seen slaves to that rule of "airmanship" risking fracture of their nosewheel strut and excessive tyre wear to try and get the last few metres out of the runway.
Runway in front of you is no good to you either, if there is no circumstance in the performance book in which you will use it. I've accelerated to 170 kts in a full B737 and then stopped with a good few hundred feet in front of me at LHR, just on RTO brakes. In the sim. Yes, I know there are adverse conditions and wet runways etc etc etc - but I bet the people who cranked the poor airframe around at the end of the runway didn't actually know how long their take off roll was going to be, or how much runway they would use if they stopped at V1.
The number of times I've seen slaves to that rule of "airmanship" risking fracture of their nosewheel strut and excessive tyre wear to try and get the last few metres out of the runway.
Runway in front of you is no good to you either, if there is no circumstance in the performance book in which you will use it. I've accelerated to 170 kts in a full B737 and then stopped with a good few hundred feet in front of me at LHR, just on RTO brakes. In the sim. Yes, I know there are adverse conditions and wet runways etc etc etc - but I bet the people who cranked the poor airframe around at the end of the runway didn't actually know how long their take off roll was going to be, or how much runway they would use if they stopped at V1.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: London UK
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Young Paul, I know where you're coming from, however, it depends what is the restrictive factor in your performance calculations. Most take-offs in a 737 are climb limited (as single engine performance is obviously poor in a twin engined a/c). In these cases I agree with you.
However, in some cases the performance is runway limited (eg Jersey), and I would backtrack, use every available inch of runway, and hold the power on the brakes until engines stable.
In this case I disagree with you, as if you decided to stop for an engine failure just before V1, then had multiple tyre bursts, brake fade etc, then you would use more runway then the calcs. said. Also, what if you forgot the speedbrake, or the autobrake tripped out ?
If the performance is climb limited, then I am quite happy to use an intersection departure, as it may save time, and as you say, is well within the performance of the aircraft.
I've often wondered why UK airports, esp. LHR don't use noise abatement procedures (as Easy do), as most other airports in Europe do. I don't think they are any less safe, and it would help to lessen oppostion to new runways etc. Perhaps reduced thrust at 1000' is the best method for reducing noise close to the airport as someone suggested.
However, in some cases the performance is runway limited (eg Jersey), and I would backtrack, use every available inch of runway, and hold the power on the brakes until engines stable.
In this case I disagree with you, as if you decided to stop for an engine failure just before V1, then had multiple tyre bursts, brake fade etc, then you would use more runway then the calcs. said. Also, what if you forgot the speedbrake, or the autobrake tripped out ?
If the performance is climb limited, then I am quite happy to use an intersection departure, as it may save time, and as you say, is well within the performance of the aircraft.
I've often wondered why UK airports, esp. LHR don't use noise abatement procedures (as Easy do), as most other airports in Europe do. I don't think they are any less safe, and it would help to lessen oppostion to new runways etc. Perhaps reduced thrust at 1000' is the best method for reducing noise close to the airport as someone suggested.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Inside the M25
Posts: 2,404
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Er, yes. I didn't say runway behind you might never have been useful - just that the generalisation about "runway behind you" led to silly behaviour sometimes from people who didn't understand aircraft performance, the point being ....
Oh well, never mind. Yes, I know about aircraft performance. Let's leave it at that. But thanks for being enlightening and not sarcastic.
Oh well, never mind. Yes, I know about aircraft performance. Let's leave it at that. But thanks for being enlightening and not sarcastic.
