Single-Engine Climb requirements

[asolo]

For Small, non-transport 135 aircraft, (King Air 90, 200, Baron, etc), do you have to have single-engine climb gradient performance? If so, can you direct me to the reg? I can't find it anywhere!!! My flight dept is split. I understand you have to meet the requirements on takeoff-but do you have to make sure you can make the climb single engine? I would also agree it would be a good idea to make sure you can meet it. Thanks.

 

[FlyingFisherman]

There's an altitude between 5,999 and 6,001' at which you need to show a climb. I can't remember what that altitude is though. There's also something to do with an MEA along the airway on which you're flying too but I can't remember what MEA stands for so I guess I'm not much help.

 

[asolo]

yeah, I know about that enroute climb which I believe is climb 50 ft/min to 5000' or the MEA whichever is higher. But I'm refering to the climb performance to clear obstacles while departing an airport in which takeoff minimums are prescribed- as in more than 200 ft/NM.

 

[lazyace75]

yeah, I know about that enroute climb which I believe is climb 50 ft/min to 5000' or the MEA whichever is higher. But I'm refering to the climb performance to clear obstacles while departing an airport in which takeoff minimums are prescribed- as in more than 200 ft/NM.

Simply put, no. Non-transport category aircraft do NOT have to meet those requirements that larger, TRANSPORT category aircraft do.

The 50 fpm climb at 5,000MSL or at the MEA is all that's required.

Therefore, there's no reg that shows this.

 

[Buckeye]

Here is your answer, Part 135.181


§ 135.181 Performance requirements: Aircraft operated over-the-top or in IFR conditions.

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, no person may—
(1) Operate a single-engine aircraft carrying passengers over-the-top; or
(2) Operate a multiengine aircraft carrying passengers over-the-top or in IFR conditions at a weight that will not allow it to climb, with the critical engine inoperative, at least 50 feet a minute when operating at the MEAs of the route to be flown or 5,000 feet MSL, whichever is higher.
(b) Notwithstanding the restrictions in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, multiengine helicopters carrying passengers offshore may conduct such operations in over-the-top or in IFR conditions at a weight that will allow the helicopter to climb at least 50 feet per minute with the critical engine inoperative when operating at the MEA of the route to be flown or 1,500 feet MSL, whichever is higher.
(c) Without regard to paragraph (a) of this section, if the latest weather reports or forecasts, or any combination of them, indicate that the weather along the planned route (including takeoff and landing) allows flight under VFR under the ceiling (if a ceiling exists) and that the weather is forecast to remain so until at least 1 hour after the estimated time of arrival at the destination, a person may operate an aircraft over-the-top.
(d) Without regard to paragraph (a) of this section, a person may operate an aircraft over-the-top under conditions allowing—
(1) For multiengine aircraft, descent or continuance of the flight under VFR if its critical engine fails; or
(2) For single-engine aircraft, descent under VFR if its engine fails.
[Doc. No. 16097, 43 FR 46783, Oct. 10, 1978, as amended by Amdt. 135–20, 51 FR 40710, Nov. 7, 1986; Amdt. 135–70, 62 FR 42374, Aug. 6, 1997]

 

[asolo]

yeah, I've read 135.181(a)(2) before and it appears as just that...climb at 50'ft/min at the MEA's, but not anything that lists and obstacle departure from the airport. Thanks guys!

 

[Coastin]

The FAA inspectors handbook does a good job of explaining it.....I believe its chapter 4.

 

[Coastin]

Here's the link...look in chapter 3 section 2.....

http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/examiners_inspectors/8400/

 

[Coastin]

Let me get this right. Volume 4. Chapter 3, section 2.

 

[fu69atacafyeah]

For Small, non-transport 135 aircraft, (King Air 90, 200, Baron, etc), do you have to have single-engine climb gradient performance? If so, can you direct me to the reg? I can't find it anywhere!!! My flight dept is split. I understand you have to meet the requirements on takeoff-but do you have to make sure you can make the climb single engine? I would also agree it would be a good idea to make sure you can meet it. Thanks.

14 cfr 23 will have your answer for non-transport category a/c.. 23.65/23.66/23.67

 

[MauleSkinner]

Don't forget to check your OpSpecs, section C079...everywhere I flew 135, at least some of the lower-than-standard takeoff authorizations required compliance with 135.367, .379, or .398 for all aircraft.

Fly safe!

David

 

[flyboyike]

For Small, non-transport 135 aircraft, (King Air 90, 200, Baron, etc), do you have to have single-engine climb gradient performance?

It has nothing to do with whether you're Part 135 or not. A Part 23 aircraft is not required to show SE climb performance.

 

[MauleSkinner]

It has nothing to do with whether you're Part 135 or not. A Part 23 aircraft is not required to show SE climb performance.

Don't confuse certification rules with operational rules...there are a LOT of things that aren't required for certification that ARE required under various operational regulations.

Fly safe!

David

 

[flyboyike]

Don't confuse certification rules with operational rules...there are a LOT of things that aren't required for certification that ARE required under various operational regulations.

Absolutely right, but one would think that an aircraft that can't do something won't magically become capable of that something due only to the type of operation.

In other words, are you saying that there is a gradient requirement for Part 23 aircraft when operating under 135? I'm not saying there isn't, only that I don't see it in the FARs. Can you point me to the pertinent reg?

 

[MauleSkinner]

Absolutely right, but one would think that an aircraft that can't do something won't magically become capable of that something due only to the type of operation.

Again, don't confuse issues...just because it's "not required for certification" doesn't mean that it "can't". Some can, some can't...you just can't use the ones that can't for that particular operation if it's required.

In other words, are you saying that there is a gradient requirement for Part 23 aircraft when operating under 135? I'm not saying there isn't, only that I don't see it in the FARs. Can you point me to the pertinent reg?

Check out my OpSpecs post above.

Fly safe!

David

 

[flyboyike]

Again, don't confuse issues...just because it's "not required for certification" doesn't mean that it "can't". Some can, some can't...you just can't use the ones that can't for that particular operation if it's required.

Check out my OpSpecs post above.

Fly safe!

David

Yes, I understand about Ops Specs. My question is, is there anything in the FARs that mandates a Part 23 aircraft to demonstrate SE climb performance while under 135 and, if there is, can you point me to it?

Much obliged.

 

[Coastin]

Check out Appendix A to part 135

 

[flyboyike]

Check out Appendix A to part 135

Thank you, that's exactly what I was after. If I understand the appendix correctly, almost no light twin would qualify at any meaningful weight. The King Airs, Barons etc are another matter.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Yes, I understand about Ops Specs. My question is, is there anything in the FARs that mandates a Part 23 aircraft to demonstrate SE climb performance while under 135 and, if there is, can you point me to it?

Much obliged.

119.7 mandates OpSpecs.

From the OpSpecs of the last operator I flew for:

For takeoffs when the RVR is less than touchdown zone RVR and rollout RVR authorized in subparagraph b(2) (if selected), each airplane used must be operated at a takeoff weight which permits the airplane to achieve the performance equivalent to the takeoff performance specified in 14CFR section 135.367 for reciprocating power airplanes...

Granted, it's not a regulation specifically requiring engine-out performance, but effectively it does.

Fly safe!

David

 

[SMOOTHRIDE]

Forgive me;

IFR (below the "other" column on the Jepp SID) you have to make your chosen SID climb gradient, single engine, correct? Legally, maybe not, but if you wanna live to be an old pilot--yes. VFR, it's see and avoid, right y'all? There are many stories out there that we all have--and that's how we learn, by others' experience. So by all means, talk away, it's more fun that way--here goes my attempt:

One time, at band camp, I was flying outta OOBI (gulf), P-3 at night, very heavy, and it was hot and humid (of course). The aft observer reported sparks coming out of the engine, and we had to shut it down (it was safe to do so--we had altitude--which was nice). We dumped fuel, came back, and made an overweight landing (which was ok to do in an emergency 3 engine landing). If not shut down, the engine would have ate itself very soon, the mechs told us the next morning via the borescope inspection. Scary stuff.

I also had an engine roll back in a kingair to min fuel flow just before takeoff when I was ligning up on the runway in KBOI. If that had happened just a few seconds later, it would have been interesting. We aborted and had to taxi back pretty much single engine.

These two situations, in an IFR environment would have resulted in complying with the SID climb gradient single engine. Don't bet it won't happen to you. I have more examples, that time I hit 7 ducks at once in a P-3 while practicing a engine failure after V1 comes to mind. The airplane shuddered. All the maintainers on the ramp stared as we came to a stop in the chocks, guts everywhere. Damn birds.. that was unexpected. Aint that the way it is... Passengers will wait when it's a safety/legal issue. Pick your chief pilots brain, ask the other guys what they have done, and don't be shy about it. You know how pilots are, we love to talk airplanes--all of us. No worries.

The dark, ugly part of this business is when you have to make a safety decision (backed up by regs/ actual safety issues, aircraft limits, your limits, etc...) and your company doesn't back you up. None of us want to delay or cancel a flight, but when you have to, so be it. PAX get home itis or the commpany telling you to go when it's not safe to do so happens quite alot, and you have to stick to your guns. I didn't like that part of the business.

Fly Safe,

SR

 

[flyboyike]

Well, I don't think the P-3 is relevant here, being as it is 4-engine and all. You were complying with three-engine climb gradient requirements there.

 

[SMOOTHRIDE]

lighten up, francis

Well, I don't think the P-3 is relevant here, being as it is 4-engine and all. You were complying with three-engine climb gradient requirements there.

Oh, I see............


Well, I did write too much (enthusiasm-sorry), so maybe those with ADD (flyboy) had problems deciphering it all. Hmmmm... Short version is -- plan for the worst -- $hit happens.

Seeya

 

[soarby007]

Appendix A. 10 or more passengers? Probably not in a Baron or Kingair.

The newer king air's have a climb gradient chart and that will imply that you probably cannot climb much if you can't make those gradients, and none if you lose an engine. Doesn't mean you have to use it by regulation. As previously mentioned in the other posts, you may have part 25 charts for the part 23 airplanes, that are not mandatory unless required by your ops specs or company SOP's.

Be careful.

Regulatory wise, probably nothing there.

 

[joew]

What is the Ops Spec reference here C0?? or whatever. I am curious where this comes from. As far as I know ours does not include this, but I would like to know where this comes from so that I might check more closely.

jw

 

[MauleSkinner]

What is the Ops Spec reference here C0?? or whatever. I am curious where this comes from. As far as I know ours does not include this, but I would like to know where this comes from so that I might check more closely.

jw

C079, lower than standard takeoffs...the climb requirement kicks in when you get below a certain vis/rvr.

Fly safe!

David