Boeing 737 VR speed question
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: australia
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing 737 VR speed question
Hi All,
Say I have the example (demo) base line data;
B737-800, speeds V1 137 VR 138 V2 142
Based on the windshear from FCOM SP section and FCTM gusting crosswind.
"Consider increasing Vr speed to the performance limited gross weight rotation speed, not to exceed actual gross weight Vr + 20 knots. Set V speeds for the actual gross weight. Rotate at the adjusted (higher) rotation speed. This increased rotation speed results in an increased stall margin and meets takeoff performance requirements. If windshear is encountered at or beyond the actual gross weight Vr, do not attempt to accelerate to the increased Vr but rotate without hesitation"
"increasing VR speed to the performance limited gross weight rotation speed, not to exceed actual gross weight VR + 20 knots. Set V speeds for the actual gross weight. Rotate at the adjusted (higher) rotation
speed. This increased rotation speed results in an increased stall margin, and meets takeoff performance requirements. Avoid rotation during a gust. If a gust is experienced near VR, as indicated by stagnant airspeed or rapid airspeed acceleration, momentarily delay rotation."
Can people please explain from a practical element based on the speeds I have given for the example how VR would change if you were going to conduct operations on the aircraft if needed (I know from a practical point of view no one would take off from known windshear!!)
What does it mean to say
"Consider increasing Vr speed to the performance limited gross weight rotation speed, not to exceed actual gross weight Vr + 20 knots" and,
"Rotate at the adjusted (higher) rotation speed."
Does this mean your VR based on this example would be 158 kts IE at planning from the RTOW chart??? for both of the above OR you use perf data for VR 138 kts and if you encounter the event you use the new speed of 158 kts?
Also "consider increasing VR speed to perf limited gross weight"? What does this mean in plain english????
Thanks.
Say I have the example (demo) base line data;
B737-800, speeds V1 137 VR 138 V2 142
Based on the windshear from FCOM SP section and FCTM gusting crosswind.
"Consider increasing Vr speed to the performance limited gross weight rotation speed, not to exceed actual gross weight Vr + 20 knots. Set V speeds for the actual gross weight. Rotate at the adjusted (higher) rotation speed. This increased rotation speed results in an increased stall margin and meets takeoff performance requirements. If windshear is encountered at or beyond the actual gross weight Vr, do not attempt to accelerate to the increased Vr but rotate without hesitation"
"increasing VR speed to the performance limited gross weight rotation speed, not to exceed actual gross weight VR + 20 knots. Set V speeds for the actual gross weight. Rotate at the adjusted (higher) rotation
speed. This increased rotation speed results in an increased stall margin, and meets takeoff performance requirements. Avoid rotation during a gust. If a gust is experienced near VR, as indicated by stagnant airspeed or rapid airspeed acceleration, momentarily delay rotation."
Can people please explain from a practical element based on the speeds I have given for the example how VR would change if you were going to conduct operations on the aircraft if needed (I know from a practical point of view no one would take off from known windshear!!)
What does it mean to say
"Consider increasing Vr speed to the performance limited gross weight rotation speed, not to exceed actual gross weight Vr + 20 knots" and,
"Rotate at the adjusted (higher) rotation speed."
Does this mean your VR based on this example would be 158 kts IE at planning from the RTOW chart??? for both of the above OR you use perf data for VR 138 kts and if you encounter the event you use the new speed of 158 kts?
Also "consider increasing VR speed to perf limited gross weight"? What does this mean in plain english????
Thanks.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ankh Morpork, DW
Posts: 652
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let’s say your Vr at your actual weight was 138, but the runway could support a higher TOW of 174k with a resulting Vr of 160.
But, max rotation would be 138+20 or 158.
So rotate at 158 unless you get wind shear before that speed.
But, max rotation would be 138+20 or 158.
So rotate at 158 unless you get wind shear before that speed.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: FL410
Posts: 860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ImbracableCrunk is furthermore correct.
Simply said:
- determine maximum TOW and Vr speed for ambient conditions
- determine actual TOW and associated speeds for ambient conditions
- use no more than. +20kts above actual Vr for adjusted Vr but no more than the Vr for maximum weight
Moderator
A few thoughts ...
Consider increasing Vr speed to the performance limited gross weight rotation speed, not to exceed actual gross weight Vr + 20 knots.
In shear/gusting conditions, a bit extra is for pilot comfort, improved climb gradient capability, and increased stall margins. What you are doing is trading the longer runway weight capability to achieve a modified overspeed takeoff. Overspeed increase generally is limited to around 20 kts to get the benefit of the improved climb gradient without too much distance increase .. above this, the gradient improvement is likely to taper off progressively while the distance increase becomes comparatively dramatic. Keep in mind that the climb gradient graph is a bit like an upturned teacup.
Set V speeds for the actual gross weight.
You're looking at a dynamic met situation with a goodly chance that things might cause you to need to rotate earlier than at the planned overspeed Vr. Bugging the base speeds means you have the minimum speed schedule for the weights right there in front of you should things get untidy.
Rotate at the adjusted (higher) rotation speed.
ie, if things go fine, you will do something akin to an overspeed takeoff
If windshear is encountered at or beyond the actual gross weight Vr, do not attempt to accelerate to the increased Vr but rotate without hesitation
To do otherwise puts you in the lap of the Gods as you have no quantitative idea of what the real acceleration is ...
Avoid rotation during a gust. If a gust is experienced near VR, as indicated by stagnant airspeed or rapid airspeed acceleration, momentarily delay rotation
Again, you don't have any idea quite what the weather gods might be doing for the short term. On the other hand, if you have pushed it up to a limiting overspeed case, one wouldn't want to delay to the extent where you might go off the end of the runway. However, keep in mind that, if you don't lose a motor, then you have a distance factor on top of the expected certification AEO distance so, probably, it's not all bad.
... and if you encounter the event you use the new speed of 158 kts?
Not quite. You're planning and intending on using the higher speed .. UNLESS things get messy.
... consider increasing VR speed to perf limited gross weight"? What does this mean in plain english????
As above, in effect you are now running with an overspeed schedule for the continued case while maintaining the lower scheduled V1 for the reject case.
Consider increasing Vr speed to the performance limited gross weight rotation speed, not to exceed actual gross weight Vr + 20 knots.
In shear/gusting conditions, a bit extra is for pilot comfort, improved climb gradient capability, and increased stall margins. What you are doing is trading the longer runway weight capability to achieve a modified overspeed takeoff. Overspeed increase generally is limited to around 20 kts to get the benefit of the improved climb gradient without too much distance increase .. above this, the gradient improvement is likely to taper off progressively while the distance increase becomes comparatively dramatic. Keep in mind that the climb gradient graph is a bit like an upturned teacup.
Set V speeds for the actual gross weight.
You're looking at a dynamic met situation with a goodly chance that things might cause you to need to rotate earlier than at the planned overspeed Vr. Bugging the base speeds means you have the minimum speed schedule for the weights right there in front of you should things get untidy.
Rotate at the adjusted (higher) rotation speed.
ie, if things go fine, you will do something akin to an overspeed takeoff
If windshear is encountered at or beyond the actual gross weight Vr, do not attempt to accelerate to the increased Vr but rotate without hesitation
To do otherwise puts you in the lap of the Gods as you have no quantitative idea of what the real acceleration is ...
Avoid rotation during a gust. If a gust is experienced near VR, as indicated by stagnant airspeed or rapid airspeed acceleration, momentarily delay rotation
Again, you don't have any idea quite what the weather gods might be doing for the short term. On the other hand, if you have pushed it up to a limiting overspeed case, one wouldn't want to delay to the extent where you might go off the end of the runway. However, keep in mind that, if you don't lose a motor, then you have a distance factor on top of the expected certification AEO distance so, probably, it's not all bad.
... and if you encounter the event you use the new speed of 158 kts?
Not quite. You're planning and intending on using the higher speed .. UNLESS things get messy.
... consider increasing VR speed to perf limited gross weight"? What does this mean in plain english????
As above, in effect you are now running with an overspeed schedule for the continued case while maintaining the lower scheduled V1 for the reject case.
In practical terms this method is a horses rear end...
too much confusion about what should happen and when, I’m my opinion.
If if you are concerned about the shear, either don’t depart,
or a much more simple method, without all the flightdeck ambiguity at a critical time, is to just use full rated thrust and improved climb data.
It will give you all of the extra performance, without the extra brain ache....
Just my 2 cents
too much confusion about what should happen and when, I’m my opinion.
If if you are concerned about the shear, either don’t depart,
or a much more simple method, without all the flightdeck ambiguity at a critical time, is to just use full rated thrust and improved climb data.
It will give you all of the extra performance, without the extra brain ache....
Just my 2 cents
Always thought this was a dubious
practice
So you stay on the ground beyond
the computed VR building speed
to assist with any wind shear encounter
But what if you encounter a major wind shear while you’re still trundling down
the runway ?
If it’s significant enough you could be in a
situation where you don’t have enough
airspeed to lift off but your groundspeed
is too high to stop if you unwisely chose
to attempt to
I’d rather be in the air (where aircraft are
meant to be) with speed and some altitude
and go straight into the windshear recovery
maneuver, your odds are better
Stilton,
I thought JT covered your para 2 & 3.
Q: But what if you encounter a major wind shear while you’re still trundling down
the runway ?
A: you reject the t/o and that shouldn't be a problem as your new "W/Shear" V1 is still within the performance limits of the a/c.
"If it’s significant enough you could be in a
situation where you don’t have enough
airspeed to lift off but your groundspeed
is too high to stop if you unwisely chose
to attempt to"
How so? If you encounter w/shear on the t/o prior to V1 your rejection should solve the problem, unless the shear has affected acceleration and you've not picked this up thus resulting in an overrun.
"I’d rather be in the air (where aircraft are
meant to be) with speed and some altitude
and go straight into the windshear recovery
maneuver, your odds are better"
Not sure about that! Plenty of w/shear accident history shows you may not be able to outclimb it. If you rejected close to V1 and overrun the runway I'd say there'd be less loss of life than getting airborne and hitting the ground some kms from the airport.
But, as someone earlier said if there's already been reports of w/shear best choice is to delay departure. Let others be the pioneers if they wish!
I thought JT covered your para 2 & 3.
Q: But what if you encounter a major wind shear while you’re still trundling down
the runway ?
A: you reject the t/o and that shouldn't be a problem as your new "W/Shear" V1 is still within the performance limits of the a/c.
"If it’s significant enough you could be in a
situation where you don’t have enough
airspeed to lift off but your groundspeed
is too high to stop if you unwisely chose
to attempt to"
How so? If you encounter w/shear on the t/o prior to V1 your rejection should solve the problem, unless the shear has affected acceleration and you've not picked this up thus resulting in an overrun.
"I’d rather be in the air (where aircraft are
meant to be) with speed and some altitude
and go straight into the windshear recovery
maneuver, your odds are better"
Not sure about that! Plenty of w/shear accident history shows you may not be able to outclimb it. If you rejected close to V1 and overrun the runway I'd say there'd be less loss of life than getting airborne and hitting the ground some kms from the airport.
But, as someone earlier said if there's already been reports of w/shear best choice is to delay departure. Let others be the pioneers if they wish!
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Always thought this was a dubious
practice
So you stay on the ground beyond
the computed VR building speed
to assist with any wind shear encounter
But what if you encounter a major wind shear while you’re still trundling down
the runway ?
If it’s significant enough you could be in a
situation where you don’t have enough
airspeed to lift off but your groundspeed
is too high to stop if you unwisely chose
to attempt to
I’d rather be in the air (where aircraft are
meant to be) with speed and some altitude
and go straight into the windshear recovery
maneuver, your odds are better
Stilton,
I thought JT covered your para 2 & 3.
Q: But what if you encounter a major wind shear while you’re still trundling down
the runway ?
A: you reject the t/o and that shouldn't be a problem as your new "W/Shear" V1 is still within the performance limits of the a/c.
"If it’s significant enough you could be in a
situation where you don’t have enough
airspeed to lift off but your groundspeed
is too high to stop if you unwisely chose
to attempt to"
How so? If you encounter w/shear on the t/o prior to V1 your rejection should solve the problem, unless the shear has affected acceleration and you've not picked this up thus resulting in an overrun.
"I’d rather be in the air (where aircraft are
meant to be) with speed and some altitude
and go straight into the windshear recovery
maneuver, your odds are better"
Not sure about that! Plenty of w/shear accident history shows you may not be able to outclimb it. If you rejected close to V1 and overrun the runway I'd say there'd be less loss of life than getting airborne and hitting the ground some kms from the airport.
But, as someone earlier said if there's already been reports of w/shear best choice is to delay departure. Let others be the pioneers if they wish!
I thought JT covered your para 2 & 3.
Q: But what if you encounter a major wind shear while you’re still trundling down
the runway ?
A: you reject the t/o and that shouldn't be a problem as your new "W/Shear" V1 is still within the performance limits of the a/c.
"If it’s significant enough you could be in a
situation where you don’t have enough
airspeed to lift off but your groundspeed
is too high to stop if you unwisely chose
to attempt to"
How so? If you encounter w/shear on the t/o prior to V1 your rejection should solve the problem, unless the shear has affected acceleration and you've not picked this up thus resulting in an overrun.
"I’d rather be in the air (where aircraft are
meant to be) with speed and some altitude
and go straight into the windshear recovery
maneuver, your odds are better"
Not sure about that! Plenty of w/shear accident history shows you may not be able to outclimb it. If you rejected close to V1 and overrun the runway I'd say there'd be less loss of life than getting airborne and hitting the ground some kms from the airport.
But, as someone earlier said if there's already been reports of w/shear best choice is to delay departure. Let others be the pioneers if they wish!
Point missed
If you encounter a significant windshear
at your increased VR you may well not
be able to stop
So you are still on the ground, past this
’artificial VR’ with a big loss of airspeed
potentially enough to prevent you from
lifting off but your groundspeed is too high
to stop
Thats the problem, and why I would never
use this procedure
If it’s too bad, delay departure, otherwise use
normal speeds and fly the windshear escape maneuver if necessary
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Point missed
If you encounter a significant windshear
at your increased VR you may well not
be able to stop
So you are still on the ground, past this
’artificial VR’ with a big loss of airspeed
potentially enough to prevent you from
lifting off but your groundspeed is too high
to stop
Thats the problem, and why I would never
use this procedure
If it’s too bad, delay departure, otherwise use
normal speeds and fly the windshear escape maneuver if necessary
My point is I’d rather be airborne
with speed in hand and altitude
beneath me
This gives me two energy options
to trade if I encounter windshear
I have some altitude to trade in case of
sink and some speed that can be
bled off in the escape maneuver
Building up excess speed past normal
VR on the runway only gives you one of these options and if the windshear is
strong enough you are still on the runway and have lost any additional energy gained
Youve lost any advantage, in fact you’re worse off than adhering to your normal VR
with speed in hand and altitude
beneath me
This gives me two energy options
to trade if I encounter windshear
I have some altitude to trade in case of
sink and some speed that can be
bled off in the escape maneuver
Building up excess speed past normal
VR on the runway only gives you one of these options and if the windshear is
strong enough you are still on the runway and have lost any additional energy gained
Youve lost any advantage, in fact you’re worse off than adhering to your normal VR
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point is I’d rather be airborne
with speed in hand and altitude
beneath me
This gives me two energy options
to trade if I encounter windshear
I have some altitude to trade in case of
sink and some speed that can be
bled off in the escape maneuver
Building up excess speed past normal
VR on the runway only gives you one of these options and if the windshear is
strong enough you are still on the runway and have lost any additional energy gained
Youve lost any advantage, in fact you’re worse off than adhering to your normal VR
with speed in hand and altitude
beneath me
This gives me two energy options
to trade if I encounter windshear
I have some altitude to trade in case of
sink and some speed that can be
bled off in the escape maneuver
Building up excess speed past normal
VR on the runway only gives you one of these options and if the windshear is
strong enough you are still on the runway and have lost any additional energy gained
Youve lost any advantage, in fact you’re worse off than adhering to your normal VR
Stilton,
I think you missed the point. If you abort at V1 after you decide you have encountered w/shear, why would you overrun? You have used a higher performance gross wt V1 which is still valid for the conditions i.e. you can still depart at that wt. If you abort at that V1 you should still stop in the available distance and if you say no to that, please explain your reasoning.
You suggest that getting airborne in known w/shear conditions is a better option, yet history says otherwise.
"Youve lost any advantage, in fact you’re worse off than adhering to your normal VR" Really, so you know more than Boeing and Airbus on this?
"
So you are still on the ground, past this
’artificial VR’ with a big loss of airspeed
potentially enough to prevent you from
lifting off but your groundspeed is too high
to stop
Thats the problem, and why I would never
use this procedure "
Again you go back to this without a skerrick of evidence to support it. An abort at V1 will result in you stopping within the remaining distance, unless you stuff it up or, as I said previously, you have suffered an acceleration deficit, which you have not recognised and, thus your abort, while at V1, has been delayed resulting in more runway being used. But, if you can screw up an abort I'm guessing that the w/shear escape procedure is not going to be optimal either and where will you end up there? 3-5 km down the takeoff path and in amongst buildings etc compared to a less than optimal abort and a slow speed overrun! I know which I will result in the lower fatality. Your belief in your piloting skill to overcome w/shear is nothing short of amazing.
I think you missed the point. If you abort at V1 after you decide you have encountered w/shear, why would you overrun? You have used a higher performance gross wt V1 which is still valid for the conditions i.e. you can still depart at that wt. If you abort at that V1 you should still stop in the available distance and if you say no to that, please explain your reasoning.
You suggest that getting airborne in known w/shear conditions is a better option, yet history says otherwise.
"Youve lost any advantage, in fact you’re worse off than adhering to your normal VR" Really, so you know more than Boeing and Airbus on this?
"
So you are still on the ground, past this
’artificial VR’ with a big loss of airspeed
potentially enough to prevent you from
lifting off but your groundspeed is too high
to stop
Thats the problem, and why I would never
use this procedure "
Again you go back to this without a skerrick of evidence to support it. An abort at V1 will result in you stopping within the remaining distance, unless you stuff it up or, as I said previously, you have suffered an acceleration deficit, which you have not recognised and, thus your abort, while at V1, has been delayed resulting in more runway being used. But, if you can screw up an abort I'm guessing that the w/shear escape procedure is not going to be optimal either and where will you end up there? 3-5 km down the takeoff path and in amongst buildings etc compared to a less than optimal abort and a slow speed overrun! I know which I will result in the lower fatality. Your belief in your piloting skill to overcome w/shear is nothing short of amazing.
If You rotate at Your RTOW Vr rather than at Your actual GW Vr You will simply delay the point in space at which You get airborne but You will do so with some extra speed that will potentially be useful if, in the first few hundred feet You encounter WS such that You are likely to lose 15/20 kt, let's imagine a strong tailwind component kicking in at 300-400 ft as a result of local wind phenomena (katabatic winds or so). Anyway as You well know any WS that is likely to be induced by TS activity around the field should be avoided in first place by sitting on the ground till conditions improve.
I agree with your specific example but
that’s not the scenario I described
In other words, what if that useful extra
speed is gone ?
If you are still on the runway AT this RTOW
VR when you encounter a significant airspeed loss due to windshear, you could well lose all that energy you have gained
by staying on the ground longer
So you’re past the point you can reject and still on the ground with no choice but to lift off into a windshear
At this point you have no advantage, no additional airspeed and of course no altitude
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could argue you hit that same fairly severe windsheer while airbourne, probably pretty low down at a lower airspeed.
You are past V1 in both examples so you are going to end up flying. In the increased Vr example yes you have less potential energy by being lower but in the early rotate you have less kinetic energy to play with now airbourne.
You are past V1 in both examples so you are going to end up flying. In the increased Vr example yes you have less potential energy by being lower but in the early rotate you have less kinetic energy to play with now airbourne.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Having a margarita on the beach
Posts: 2,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You do not modify the V1, the V1 will always be your actual GW V1. In fact You do not modify any V speed, You simply rotate at the RTOW Vr or actual Vr +20 kt whichever is lower. In my operator SOP the PM calls "rotate" at the bugged Vr and the PF initiates the rotation at Vr+20 kt (provided no WS is encountered etc..). I have used the above supplementary many times and given the weights we usually operate at I have almost always been within actual Vr+20kt when looking for the RTOW Vr.
