A319 Take Off at Austin question...

[Fernando]

Yesterday i saw an A319 take off at KAUS runway 17r from the G intersection (heres the chart http://www.airnav.com/airport/KAUS )

I was wondering if this was too risky or can be considered OK for the type of plane, what do you think?

Was it too risky? i saw dirt floating around when they
got airbone

 

[Correcting]

Hard to say. I'm sure they had an airport analysis and numbers that said they could do it. That's still a fair amount of distance from that intersection. Looks like around 7,000 feet. There are lots of airports where an A319 flies that have less than 7000-foot runways.

Look at Orange County (KSNA) or Chicago Midway (KMDW) as an example.

All sorts of 757's, 737'a, A319's and 20's, MD80's going in to those places.

 

[zkmayo]

Yesterday i saw an A319 take off at KAUS runway 17r from the G intersection (heres the chart http://www.airnav.com/airport/KAUS )

I was wondering if this was too risky or can be considered OK for the type of plane, what do you think?

Was it too risky? i saw dirt floating around when they
got airbone

Hard to say... ultimately the PIC's call. The old adage about nothing less worthless than runway behind you always applies, however. It being a 319,its prob safe to assume it was a 121 operator which means that a w/b and t/o distance had to be computed prior to takeoff. That req distance would take into acct temp, weight, press.alt, avail runway distance, accelerate/stop senarios, runway conditions, slope, icing, and 2nd segment climb issues and prob a bunch of other things I forgot.

All that being said, as long as its legal for the distance avail (derived from t/o and w/b data) its ultimately the PIC's call. However, you'd be hard pressed to defend that call should you abort and not be able to stop the airplane for some reason and the FAA comes calling (technically shouldnt happen if abort below V1, timely and proper reject procedure used, and above t/o data computation was correct and used).

However, what's legal doesnt necessarily make it safe. My personal priorities have always been safety first, legal a very close second, and finally on-time/pax comfort a distant third.

319s/20s fly out of 7000ish ft all the time (LGA, BUR, DCA) and that looks about what int G is. Again, PIC's perogative.

 

[get2flyin]

When the numbers come off of the ACARS printer, if the runway and intersection is listed, you're good to go. We could pull out the manuals and try to work out the numbers but the companies dispatch program grinds up the applicable temp, weight, wind, etc, data and says yes or no. It's just about the black and white.

 

[oldxfr8dog]

When the numbers come off of the ACARS printer, if the runway and intersection is listed, you're good to go. We could pull out the manuals and try to work out the numbers but the companies dispatch program grinds up the applicable temp, weight, wind, etc, data and says yes or no. It's just about the black and white.

If you don't have obstacles considered, the onboard runarounds wouldn't be accurate.
Also, not everybody gets stuff off the ACARS, some have onboard performance software, JB and SWA, for example.

 

[get2flyin]

If you don't have obstacles considered, the onboard runarounds wouldn't be accurate.
Also, not everybody gets stuff off the ACARS, some have onboard performance software, JB and SWA, for example.

Ok, then let me rephrase that. "When the numbers come off of the ACARS printer, if the runway and intersection is listed, WE *(meaning my company) are good to go."

I have no idea what anybody else on the Airbus does. Also, I think the SIDs dictate what the obstacle limits are. If the specific airport has some obstacle that impedes the 200'/mile *(digging WAY back into my teaching days so don't quote that) cone, then that would be noted in the SID and a minimum climb gradient could be determined. The subsequent performance requirement could then be determined from the onboard manual.

On second thought, maybe I just made that entire thing up....my CFI has expired and thus my FAR/AIM knowledge is a little rusty.

I guess I'll just go if dispatch says I can.

 

[oldxfr8dog]

I have no idea what anybody else on the Airbus does. Also, I think the SIDs dictate what the obstacle limits are. If the specific airport has some obstacle that impedes the 200'/mile *(digging WAY back into my teaching days so don't quote that) cone, then that would be noted in the SID and a minimum climb gradient could be determined. The subsequent performance requirement could then be determined from the onboard manual.

On second thought, maybe I just made that entire thing up....my CFI has expired and thus my FAR/AIM knowledge is a little rusty.

I guess I'll just go if dispatch says I can.

I agree with the dispatch comment, but I think that if you'll think about it a minute, the SID theory isn't correct. The perf is also predicated on 2nd, 3rd, and 4th segment climbs, as well as the runway limits.

 

[D-Bo]

Yesterday i saw an A319 take off at KAUS runway 17r from the G intersection (heres the chart http://www.airnav.com/airport/KAUS )

I was wondering if this was too risky or can be considered OK for the type of plane, what do you think?

Was it too risky? i saw dirt floating around when they
got airbone

I'm sure it was legal but I'm also sure it was someone trying way TOO hard to save fuel for their airline. Who was it? F9 or UAL? I bet it wasn't UAL. Or is there another Airbus operator into KAUS?

Someone out there thinks their couple hundred pounds, if even that, of taxi fuel saved is gonna determine the fate of their airline.

No one out there can single handedly save their airline but you can save your own ass. Maybe they get paid more the more they stick out their neck?

 

[Fernando]

It was a Frontier i believe

 

[oldxfr8dog]

I'm sure it was legal but I'm also sure it was someone trying way TOO hard to save fuel for their airline. Who was it? F9 or UAL? I bet it wasn't UAL. Or is there another Airbus operator into KAUS?

Someone out there thinks their couple hundred pounds, if even that, of taxi fuel saved is gonna determine the fate of their airline.

No one out there can single handedly save their airline but you can save your own ass. Maybe they get paid more the more they stick out their neck?

D Bo, you have the big picture.

I always ask myself, when faced with such (non) decisions, "How will I explain this at the investigation?".

Edit: Or, maybe that airplane was empty. If very light, maybe extra margin was available.
I don't like to second guess another crew. I wasn't there.