Performance / obstacle clearance
Moderator
Even TERPs and PANS-OPs normal operations criteria cannot protect for errant blunders.
.. but the training dollar can go a long way towards reducing such to a reasonable minimum ..
Until there be NO dinosaur aeroplanes with which the Industry has to contend, the problem remains extant.
.. and, indeed, there remains the potential problem that the gee-whizz JB stuff has a day off whereupon the pilot comprises the last line of defence ....
.. but the training dollar can go a long way towards reducing such to a reasonable minimum ..
Until there be NO dinosaur aeroplanes with which the Industry has to contend, the problem remains extant.
.. and, indeed, there remains the potential problem that the gee-whizz JB stuff has a day off whereupon the pilot comprises the last line of defence ....
Folks,
Many moons ago now, I was sitting at the holding point of 15 in Cairns (when it was a lot shorter than now) and a TAA DC-9 went off ahead of us.
Somewhere past V-1, his thrust was reduced by 50%, and as per SOPs, he started to turn for the all engine/engine out profile ---- for only a few second, then the wings leveled --- now headed for the hills around Awaba mission.
Then a second go at a turn, same result ---- then decided to head straight down the valley past Gordonvale visual ---- where the overcast was about 1500 with scattered heavy showers.
As there were no headlines next morning, the "change of plan" to a visual departure OCTA obviously worked, but I was glad it wasn't me.
An aeroplane with seriously "modest" performance was the 747-100/200 with Pratt -7A engines --- 2000' at 20 miles from Bahrain down the Persian/Arabian ( name of choice or prejudice) Gulf ---- and that was on 4.
After a bird strike off RW 16 in Sydney, one of the QF as above flew visual through the Botany Bay Heads, the SID over the sandhills was out of the question. The comments of the Captain immediately after ( an old Sunderland/Sandringham pilot) was quite "instructive".
Many moons ago now, I was sitting at the holding point of 15 in Cairns (when it was a lot shorter than now) and a TAA DC-9 went off ahead of us.
Somewhere past V-1, his thrust was reduced by 50%, and as per SOPs, he started to turn for the all engine/engine out profile ---- for only a few second, then the wings leveled --- now headed for the hills around Awaba mission.
Then a second go at a turn, same result ---- then decided to head straight down the valley past Gordonvale visual ---- where the overcast was about 1500 with scattered heavy showers.
As there were no headlines next morning, the "change of plan" to a visual departure OCTA obviously worked, but I was glad it wasn't me.
An aeroplane with seriously "modest" performance was the 747-100/200 with Pratt -7A engines --- 2000' at 20 miles from Bahrain down the Persian/Arabian ( name of choice or prejudice) Gulf ---- and that was on 4.
After a bird strike off RW 16 in Sydney, one of the QF as above flew visual through the Botany Bay Heads, the SID over the sandhills was out of the question. The comments of the Captain immediately after ( an old Sunderland/Sandringham pilot) was quite "instructive".
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
j.t.
You would think so, yet TWA 514 and AAL 965 happened.
Time is overdue to not drag the high-tech birds down to the lowest common denominator.
A risk worth taking, because the gadgets failing at the same time as an engine failure on lift-off is down in the statistical weeds.
.. but the training dollar can go a long way towards reducing such to a reasonable minimum ..
Until there be NO dinosaur aeroplanes with which the Industry has to contend, the problem remains extant.
.. and, indeed, there remains the potential problem that the gee-whizz JB stuff has a day off whereupon the pilot comprises the last line of defence ....
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
J.T.:
In the Land of Oz they are already way ahead of the rest of the world. Great example is at Cairns. For the airplane that is RNP capable, they extend the missed approach track to become the OEI track. In the example the missed approach ends at KABUT all engines operating. But, with an engine failure the track extends much further to UPOLO.
I don't know whether they use it for takeoff or just for OEI on the RNP AR missed approach.
In the Land of Oz they are already way ahead of the rest of the world. Great example is at Cairns. For the airplane that is RNP capable, they extend the missed approach track to become the OEI track. In the example the missed approach ends at KABUT all engines operating. But, with an engine failure the track extends much further to UPOLO.
I don't know whether they use it for takeoff or just for OEI on the RNP AR missed approach.
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aus had a great start with all of the RNP-AR procedures that Naverus designed for QANTAS. This laid the groundwork, obstacle clearance, the waypoints, and the aircraft performance. The last thing we did was work on converting them to multivariant, but that was not too difficult as all of the turns were pretty big anyways and there werent any short finals.
These tracks are just for the missed. As you are aware, there is no criteria for DEP. Within the Naverus designs, we did provide some custom DEP, but given the lack of benefits to the airline, few were used.
I remember these 2.85 degree approaches with the temperatures, these go down to the 2.5 minimum, much lower than the FAA allowable.
Also thinking that with a max temp of 36 in Cairns, this wont get used much!
These tracks are just for the missed. As you are aware, there is no criteria for DEP. Within the Naverus designs, we did provide some custom DEP, but given the lack of benefits to the airline, few were used.
I remember these 2.85 degree approaches with the temperatures, these go down to the 2.5 minimum, much lower than the FAA allowable.
Also thinking that with a max temp of 36 in Cairns, this wont get used much!
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
underfire:
I meant an OEI path for takeoff. That doesn't require criteria.
That doesn't make much sense. KPHX, for instance, has a max of 46 degrees at 3.00 degrees. In any case, my point is about the RNP OEI flight track.
These tracks are just for the missed. As you are aware, there is no criteria for DEP.
Also thinking that with a max temp of 36 in Cairns, this wont get used much!
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because in Cairns, (chart shows NA above 36) it is below 36 for about 2 months out of the year!
If DEP does not require criteria, what would be the foundation of the design? (especially OEI?)
If DEP does not require criteria, what would be the foundation of the design? (especially OEI?)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Zulu Time Zone
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The mean maximum temperature is 29°C and peaks at 31.5º in June.
Climate statistics for Australian locations
Climate statistics for Australian locations
In the 737-300 simulator at max structural take off weight ISA sea level, with engine flameout at V1 and level acceleration height 1000 ft, it takes around 11 miles to reach flaps up single engine clean speed before resuming climb OEI.
Some operators do not assess obstacles more than 15 miles out and runway analysis charts do necessarily state how far the obstacle survey is valid. One European charter operator I worked for stated they expected the pilot to use "Airmanship" beyond the stated survey path
Some operators do not assess obstacles more than 15 miles out and runway analysis charts do necessarily state how far the obstacle survey is valid. One European charter operator I worked for stated they expected the pilot to use "Airmanship" beyond the stated survey path
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Underfire:
All engines operating uses either TERPS or PANS-OPS departure criteria. (or, the operator can submit its own all engines operating departure procedure for FAA approval.) OEI is a different matter, it becomes the domain of the operator's performance and planning department. In the U.S. that means adherence to 14 CFR 121.189 as at a minimum.
Most operators use AC 120-91 for area containment, but the use of the OEI RNP tracks, such as used as Cairns, would be quite acceptable for OEI planning and performance compliance. It would, however, require a certified RNP AR airplane and an RNP AR qualified flight crew.
If DEP does not require criteria, what would be the foundation of the design? (especially OEI?)
Most operators use AC 120-91 for area containment, but the use of the OEI RNP tracks, such as used as Cairns, would be quite acceptable for OEI planning and performance compliance. It would, however, require a certified RNP AR airplane and an RNP AR qualified flight crew.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Judd:
That is fool hardy and would violate 121.189 for a U.S. air carrier.
Some operators do not assess obstacles more than 15 miles out and runway analysis charts do necessarily state how far the obstacle survey is valid. One European charter operator I worked for stated they expected the pilot to use "Airmanship" beyond the stated survey path.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Zulu Time Zone
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...yes, and I think it would violate the rules anywhere that has an ICAO compliant policy.
Also:
...quite right.
Also:
All engines operating uses either TERPS or PANS-OPS departure criteria. (or, the operator can submit its own all engines operating departure procedure for FAA approval.) OEI is a different matter, it becomes the domain of the operator's performance and planning department. In the U.S. that means adherence to 14 CFR 121.189 as at a minimum.
