Can a Lear....?

100-1/2

OVER-N-DUN!
Joined
Sep 19, 2002
Posts
436
Total Time
lifer
20/30 series legally take-off under 135 from a 5300' runway with 2% downslope?

Standard ISA
Wet runway

Thanks,
100-1/2

Accelerate-Stop, Accelereate-Go distances?
 

Lead Sled

Sitt'n on the throne...
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Posts
2,066
Total Time
> enuf
100-1/2 said:
20/30 series legally take-off under 135 from a 5300' runway with 2% downslope?

Standard ISA
Wet runway

Thanks,
100-1/2

Accelerate-Stop, Accelereate-Go distances?
Can you takeoff legally under those conditions? The answer is most likey yes, but you need to give us three more tidbits of information - aircraft model, field elevation and aircraft weight. There's a big difference between a grossed out Lear 35 and a lightly loaded Lear 24.

'Sled
 

some_dude

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2004
Posts
430
Total Time
342000
I'm too lazy to get up and look, but generically, a Lear 35, at sea level, yes. Not at max t.o. weight, probably.

Incidentally, 135 and 91 are the same as far as takeoff runway performance is concerned.

100-1/2 said:
20/30 series legally take-off under 135 from a 5300' runway with 2% downslope?

Standard ISA
Wet runway

Thanks,
100-1/2

Accelerate-Stop, Accelereate-Go distances?
 

scubabri

Junior Mint
Joined
Jan 8, 2003
Posts
550
Total Time
4200
LR35/36 18300. 16c, flaps 20, PA 1000' = 5305

From the tab data.. to lazy to look at spagetti charts ;)

I always thought it was wierd that landing wet 91 is dry X 1.4 but t/o wet is the same. I'm sure there is a logical reason why... but I can't think of it.

sb
 

some_dude

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2004
Posts
430
Total Time
342000
That is not totally correct. Lear publishes contaminated and wet runway data in an addendum, which is specifically not FAA approved and NOT mandatory. So legally, I guess you are right, but from a practical perspective, using the wet runway data would be a good idea.

At weights above 14,000 pounds, the wet runway factor is 1.2.

So, I'd WAG that you would need to be around 17,000 pounds or less to comply with the Learjet wet runway guidance.

scubabri said:
I always thought it was wierd that landing wet 91 is dry X 1.4 but t/o wet is the same. I'm sure there is a logical reason why... but I can't think of it.

sb
 

FlyaLear35

Active member
Joined
Feb 4, 2002
Posts
28
Total Time
5300
Using ULTRANAV calculations for a Lear 35 (no reversers), you are pretty close at 17,000; Wet Runway, 15 degree C, sea level, 2% downslope, wet runway, 8 degrees flap:

Balanced field length = 5,049' close enough for me.

18,000 - same conditions but flaps 20 = 5,120.


Not 25 numbers, but thought it might help.
 
Top