Climb Gradient
08-26-2008 | 06:51 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Climb Gradient
Just wondering what the climb gradient rules are for the civ guys? USAF requires 200ft/nm (with some caveats) one engine inop. I was skimming the FARs/AIM/FAA Instrument Procedures Handbook the other day and found some references to the TERPS 152/48 ft/nm guidelines, but couldn't find a concrete reference for one engine inop performance requirements. My guess is that this is buried somewhere in Part 121, which is not included in my ASA copy of FAR/AIM.
Can anyone elaborate?
Can anyone elaborate?
08-26-2008 | 07:06 PM
#2
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,618
Likes: 558
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
I don't have it handy either, but bottom line in 121 is you have to be able to clear the obstacles with an engine-out after taking all conditions into account. Otherwise, it's a no-go. And yes, all the calculations are done for every takeoff (by a computer).
08-26-2008 | 07:54 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
From: 747 Captain (Ret,)
See FAR Sec. 25.121 - Climb: One-engine-inoperative.
"Take off, Landing gear retracted.....the steady gradient of climb may not be less than 2.4 percent for two engine airplanes, 2.7 percent for three engine airplanes, and 3.0 percent for four engine airplanes at V2..."
I really need to learn how to do the cut and paste thing from other web sites.
Joe
"Take off, Landing gear retracted.....the steady gradient of climb may not be less than 2.4 percent for two engine airplanes, 2.7 percent for three engine airplanes, and 3.0 percent for four engine airplanes at V2..."
I really need to learn how to do the cut and paste thing from other web sites.
Joe
08-26-2008 | 09:14 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
The Part 25 requirements mentioned above are for the certification of the aircraft. TERPS on the other hand is what we have to comply with in order to meet IFR climb requirements (obstacle clearence). Standard is single engine, 200' per nm which is equivilant to 3.3%. These of course are minimums and are often increased in either an obstable departure procedure or SID. The 3.3% starts from the second segment on take off or the missed apporach point on an approach. It sounds similar to what you mentioned for the military.
-Brett
-Brett
09-19-2008 | 10:37 AM
#5
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
OK, so I am here at the USAF advanced instrument school, and from what I gather, all communities address this differently. USAF requires all multi engine guys to meet the 200'/NM (higher if published) OEI. However, talking to some of the folks in the class with airline experience, this is not necissarily the case at all 121 or 135 operations. Further, there is only very vague guidance in the FARs/AIM/Instrument Procedures Handbook. Language like: The pilot must have an emergency plan of action should an engine fail on departure. Anyone care to tell how their operation addresses this issue? SDPs anyone?
09-19-2008 | 12:42 PM
#6
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,618
Likes: 558
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
OK, so I am here at the USAF advanced instrument school, and from what I gather, all communities address this differently. USAF requires all multi engine guys to meet the 200'/NM (higher if published) OEI. However, talking to some of the folks in the class with airline experience, this is not necissarily the case at all 121 or 135 operations. Further, there is only very vague guidance in the FARs/AIM/Instrument Procedures Handbook. Language like: The pilot must have an emergency plan of action should an engine fail on departure. Anyone care to tell how their operation addresses this issue? SDPs anyone?
Each airport and runway has a single engine procedure specfic to it, and we always brief that. It may involve anything from a straight-out safe heading to a very complex DP-like procedure with precise turn, airspeed, configuration, power, and bank requirements. Also all performance factors are taken into account to ensure that the specified procedure can actually be completed under the given conditions.
09-20-2008 | 04:20 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,732
Likes: 0
From: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Each airport and runway has a single engine procedure specfic to it, and we always brief that. It may involve anything from a straight-out safe heading to a very complex DP-like procedure with precise turn, airspeed, configuration, power, and bank requirements. Also all performance factors are taken into account to ensure that the specified procedure can actually be completed under the given conditions.
09-21-2008 | 06:41 AM
#8
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,618
Likes: 558
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Not necessarily true. There are tones of airports that have NO single engine departure that are specific to it. Yes, we may brief what we are going to do in the event of a failure, but there may not be any specific documented procedure. Take a look at LAX. Blasting out of the the water, there is NO reason to have one. Now RNO, SLW, OAX on the other hand........
Complex ones are published on special plates, Simple ones are on the release. Many are obvious common sense, such as LAX which is straight out, but we still have them published and have to comply with them.
You are correct that in 91 there is no requirement for this.
09-21-2008 | 08:56 AM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,732
Likes: 0
From: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Both airlines I have worked for have had SE departure procedures for 100% of runways we were authorized to use. These are company-derived and I'm certain are regulatory requirements.
Complex ones are published on special plates, Simple ones are on the release. Many are obvious common sense, such as LAX which is straight out, but we still have them published and have to comply with them.
You are correct that in 91 there is no requirement for this.
Complex ones are published on special plates, Simple ones are on the release. Many are obvious common sense, such as LAX which is straight out, but we still have them published and have to comply with them.
You are correct that in 91 there is no requirement for this.
I'm not so sure it's a regulatory requirement. Another example would be DEN. We ONLY has a SE when departing to the South, nothing for ANY other direction.
Big difference on some airplanes.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
