Accelerate/Stop Question

[Lear-fan]

If it is in the Flight Manual...

If the flight manual has the performance chart then you are obligated to use it. If you don't and you have a problem then your fall under 91.13, "reckless operation..." It won't matter if 91, 135, 121 or type 23 or 25 a/c. Some Jets even have contaminated runway performance chats that state they are not approved by the FAA but are a suppliment to AFM and the Feds will sit down and tell you "you have to comply with them" even they they are not quote "FAA approved". The Lear 60 comes to mind as an example.

There is no other interpretation the Fed's will allow. Use the performance charts!

DES

 

[h25b]

I can't believe this is even under debate... If the chart says the thing won't stop on pavement, I don't go. Very cut and dry. If the boss has a problem with it you should probably be looking for another job anyway...

FAR 91.13 says it all, if this scenerio doesn't fall under it I don't know what would. It's very simple, if you hang it out there don't be surprised when someone cuts it off... So to speak.

 

[Singlecoil]

I can't believe this is even under debate... If the chart says the thing won't stop on pavement, I don't go. Very cut and dry. If the boss has a problem with it you should probably be looking for another job anyway...

FAR 91.13 says it all, if this scenerio doesn't fall under it I don't know what would. It's very simple, if you hang it out there don't be surprised when someone cuts it off... So to speak.

To the boss: "Sir, my performance manual says the King Air won't be able to stop if we lose an engine at decision speed on take off. I'm not comfortable with this and I don't think we should go."

Boss: "OK, fine. Take the Caravan then. Does that make you feel safer? If you take the King Air, there is about a ten second window where an engine failure will result in the airplane being wrecked. If you take the Caravan, you will wreck the airplane if you have an engine failure at almost any point in the flight."

 

[h25b]

Listen, you can if and but this to death... But again, this is VERY cut and dry, if the airplane that you've been assigned to will NOT stop on pavement, I am NOT going... VERY SIMPLE!!! I have avoided a few of these kinds of operations in my career.

Bottom line: let your conscience be your guide Singlecoil. I don't care what you do, noone else does either. I do know however I wouldn't want my family on your airplane if that's how you chose to operate it. Like I said hang it out if you want, just don't go crying when someone (i.e. the FAA...) cuts it off. I have posed this very question to an FAA Inspector and guess what the response was? FAR 91.13

It's been my experience that stuff tends to happen when you're doing something you're not supposed to be. I am just trying to throw my opinion out there, not to argue. Like I said do whatever you want...

 

[nosehair]

To the boss: "Sir, my performance manual says the King Air won't be able to stop if we lose an engine at decision speed on take off. I'm not comfortable with this and I don't think we should go."

Boss: "OK, fine. Take the Caravan then. Does that make you feel safer? If you take the King Air, there is about a ten second window where an engine failure will result in the airplane being wrecked. If you take the Caravan, you will wreck the airplane if you have an engine failure at almost any point in the flight."

Excellent point. That is my thinking. When I have a short runway, I consider that I am operating as if I were single-engine. However, I know that the feds may consider me careless and reckless. But you know what? I am more worried about what may happen to my a$$ if the engine quits on T.O. - safety of the flight is my concern. Weighing the risks against the neccessity of the job. That's what we get the Big Buck$ for. If you consider all things and decide the risk is manageble, and you make the right decision, then the FAA will probably go along with a well thought out process. If you just "jump-and-go" with no appreciable thought about the risk, the feds will lean towards a "careless" attitude.

 

[h25b]

"That's what we get the Big Buck$ for."

Counterpoint...

Actually if you make it to the point where you are making the big bucks you are getting paid to make the safest decision possible, regardless of the pressures otherwise. I'd wager that any operator that would pressure you to go in this situation is NOT paying you the "big bucks" to begin with...

If you really think that if you decide to go under this situation and it goes south that you will not get a 91.13 slapped against you, well I don't need to comment further... Also, like someone else said, wait until your company's insurance carrier gets wind. I can say for a fact that your C.P. will have ZERO luck arguing this point with those guys... And by the way, good luck getting one of those "big bucks" paying jobs with that stapled to your record... I think to any reasonable mind I've made my point, again do what ever you want, as long as you're willing to bet your life AND the rest of your career on it. I sure don't want them to tell my widow, and fatherless child that I killed myself or anyone else while being stupid and taking some avoidable risk.

You are absolutely correct about managing risk, and this is a perfect example. Maybe in the Alaskan bush there are no suitable alternates, but here in the lower 48 I have yet to go in to an airport that there wasn't a second choice somewhere nearby. Nosehair, if you're profile is correct and you are still a flight instructor please take this free advice and don't let ANYONE tell you this garbage way of operating is standard procedure, because it ain't. I'm sure it is in some situations, but I sure wouldn't want to make a career out of it and you certainly won't make the "big bucks" at it... Good luck all and always fly safe.........

 

[Lead Sled]

I can't believe that this thread is still breathing. There is another aspect of this that hasn't been adequately addressed - the legal & liability issues after the accident. I have served as an expert witness in a trial involving a pilot involved in a takeoff incident in a Cessna 340. Fortunately, no one was injured, but the insurance company was not too happy about having to pay the owner's claim. Dealing with the FAA may end up being the least of your problems. After all, what can they really do to you - ground you for a while? That's bad enough - it would be the end of most career paths - but the worst would be yet to come. It seems that there are no shortage of attornies out there willing to represent clients or their survivors on a contingency basis. Those guys are no dummies and they will go to great length to prove their allegations and it will cost you or your heirs great sums of money to defend yourself.

Bottom line is that we are expected to use ALL available information to ascertain the safety of any flight. If there are charts available that indicate a certain operation would be unsucessful in the event of an engine failure and we attempt it anyway - good luck, hopefully nothing happens. The problem is, engines never quit (yeah, right) and it's all too easy to let yourself become complacient. I bet that those who are advocating the position that it's OK to make the takeoff under those conditions either don't have the experience that they claim to have and/or they have never personally seen the aftermath. Real professionals know when to say no.

Lead Sled

 

[h25b]

AH, Light dawns and a voice of reason chimes in.............

 

[avbug]

Listen, you can if and but this to death... But again, this is VERY cut and dry, if the airplane that you've been assigned to will NOT stop on pavement, I am NOT going... VERY SIMPLE!!! I have avoided a few of these kinds of operations in my career.

You live in a very small, narrowly defined world, mate.

Far, far from reality.

 

[h25b]

I think anyone that really knew my career route (where I've been, what I am doing now) would disagree... Like I said, and I think that most of the replies here agree with me, make the decision to go and it doesn't work out the FAA, the insurance companies, and no doubt the trial lawyers will have plenty of rope to hang you with. Like I've said, I've seen this process in action...

Don't get so defensive bro., like I said... I don't care what you choose to do, just my two cents. If I did however operate this way I would make sure and get the legal defense option on my AOPA membership though.... By the way with over 2000 + post to your credit someone could say the same about you...