Normal/Reduced or Derated ATM Take-off thrust in LVO's

[Autobrake RTO]

Hi Guys and Gals...

Just wondering what your thoughts are when considering whether to use Normal / Reduced or Derated ATM (or a combination of...) Take-off thrust in LVO's?

Does your Company stipulate or give you any guidance on what they expect you to use for take-off?

[Shanwick Shanwick]

As much de-rate as possible subject to runway conditions

[Sidestick_n_Rudder]

My previous mob requred TOGA t/o on LVO. Wouldn’t want to get an engine failure on that...

Where I fly now it’s just normal FLEX/ATM

[AmarokGTI]

My employer (AUS regional turboprop) requires rated power with vis 1000m or less.

I understand everyone’s points above regarding control following a failure.

[misd-agin]

Along with increased vertigo threat due to higher acceleration, pitch attitude, and subsequent larger thrust reduction when changing to CLB power.

Both methods have pluses and minuses.

[Peter G-W]

Just remind me of the benefit of taking off at full power please.

[Autobrake RTO]

Interesting replies....thanks!


One possible benefit would be a shorter take-off run and less time exposed to LVO conditions?

[Peter G-W]

Why is the take off run less safe if it takes 5 seconds longer? You could apply that logic to all take off runs.

[CloudHound]

What then if you throw in a contaminated runway?

[Citation2]

TOGA, FLAPS 2, that will do it in LVO.

[Escape Path]

It's TOGA at our outfit, but I agree that I'd prefer flex for the engine out reasons stated above. Then again TA says, there could be some scenarios for which TOGA would be preferred...

[aerobatic_dude]

Originally Posted by CloudHound

What then if you throw in a contaminated runway?

De-Rate OK but not allowed use temperature assumed for my company on contaminated rwy ( 737-800 )