Originally Posted by
Yabadaba
I have heard a lot of pilots chatter about things over at Atlantic ASE at a previous job... like "we are part 91 so we don't need all that climb gradient stuff"
Since ODP climb gradients are based on all-engines operating climb performance, that's 100% correct for part 91 operators...you don't have to be able to meet the ODP climb gradient with OEI. The FAA says the PIC does have to have a contingency plan, however, should circumstances arise that they cannot meet the gradient (like in the case of an engine failure). Visually maintaining one's own terrain/obstruction avoidance is one method, the other (useful when departing IFR) is a runway analysis & special departure procedure developed by APG.
I spoke with an ASE controller one day and he said the FAA was sitting in the tower the IFR day before copying down tail numbers as everyone took off. Then they were sending out letters to the listed PIC asking for proof of the modifications made to the airplanes so they were legal to make the LINDZ departure climb gradient. I bet violations followed shortly after.
I've heard that yarn before - FAA ASIs writing down tail numbers of aircraft departing at ASE in order to violate operators. Interestingly enough, nobody ever claims to have been violated or personally know anyone who was violated for departing ASE because they couldn't meet the 7.6% gradient OEI...
My AFM says at 18°C there's no possible way for me to depart ASE and maintain 7.6% to 14,000ft, but with an APG analysis says at 18°C I can depart at MGTOW. Needless to say, I wouldn't be real keen on being harassed by an ASI expecting me to prove I could meet the gradient when he cannot provide I couldn't...