Far 25.111

[GEXDriver]

The "AFM certified data" that you mention above is derived from the FAR part 25 certification process, specific to each make/model

...your AFM data, as derived through the certification process under FAR part 25 will tell you how well you can reasonably expect your aircraft to perform. So, reference your FAR part 25 AFM data and make adjustments accordingly to meet the requirements for your specific TERPS IFR departure...

I think GVFlyer probably knows that as he is a Gulfstream Aerospace engineering test pilot, but isn't that what he said anyways?

 

[A Squared]

Nobody has really responded to the actual question raised by the original poster, that is that a transport category aircraft with an engine shut down will not necessarily meet the required climb gradient of a diverse departure, or any other departure for that matter, or a missed approach procedure. Any thoughts on that?

 

[mar]

Sort of.

I think his actual question was more along the lines of: What explains the inconsistancy of the requirement under Part 25 for a 1.2% gradient but 3.3% under TERPS.

True, no one really had an answer for that.

My thoughts on your question would be along the lines of....what the hell are you doing flying old crap that won't climb with an engine shut down unless it's DAY VMC???

Fly safe.

 

[Coool Hand Luke]

I think his actual question was more along the lines of: What explains the inconsistancy of the requirement under Part 25 for a 1.2% gradient but 3.3% under TERPS.

True, no one really had an answer for that.

My thoughts on your question would be along the lines of....what the hell are you doing flying old crap that won't climb with an engine shut down unless it's DAY VMC???

Fly safe.

TERPs guys and certificaion guys apparently don't talk to each other, therefore, we have two different sets of criteria applied. As for why they do not agree on one set of rules, I do not know, but that is the reality of it.

 

[A Squared]

My thoughts on your question would be along the lines of....what the hell are you doing flying old crap that won't climb with an engine shut down unless it's DAY VMC???

Aren't you the same guy who once contributed a post in the defense of flying old crap? Something about making you a better pilot or something?

 

[MauleSkinner]

TERPs guys and certificaion guys apparently don't talk to each other, therefore, we have two different sets of criteria applied. As for why they do not agree on one set of rules, I do not know, but that is the reality of it.

In reality, there is no need for the criteria to be the same...TERPS are designed for flight in IMC; whereas certification requirements are the minimum standard for VMC flight, when obstacles can be seen and avoided.

It's really no different than your light twin, which doesn't require ANY climb rate with an engine inop...it's generally ok in VMC conditions, but not taking obstacles into account in IMC can be hazardous to your health.

Fly safe!

David

 

[GVFlyer]

Aren't you the same guy who once contributed a post in the defense of flying old crap? Something about making you a better pilot or something?

It's got to be an educational experience flying an airplane where at night, you set the mixture control on the 4 Pratt & Whitney R-2800's by looking at the 18 foot flame pattern they generate.

GV

 

[Coool Hand Luke]

It's got to be an educational experience flying an airplane where at night, you set the mixture control on the 4 Pratt & Whitney R-2800's by looking at the 18 foot flame pattern they generate.

GV

Now that is funny!

 

[mar]

Did I say that?

Aren't you the same guy who once contributed a post in the defense of flying old crap? Something about making you a better pilot or something?

Yeah that sounds like something I'd say: Pure brilliance. Thanks for reminding me.

It's really no different than your light twin, which doesn't require ANY climb rate with an engine inop...it's generally ok in VMC conditions, but not taking obstacles into account in IMC can be hazardous to your health.

Actually, there is (was) a requirement for a positive rate of climb on light twins

Ref: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFAR.nsf/0/67a6f26638f5b1c385256687006b9239!OpenDocument&ExpandSection=-3

The link above is the old FAR airplanes used to be certificated under. The next link is the new FAR pertaining to, obviously, new airplanes: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFAR.nsf/0/2459CA427595FBF685256687006BC958?OpenDocument

 

[MauleSkinner]

Actually, there is (was) a requirement for a positive rate of climb on light twins

Ref: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFAR.nsf/0/67a6f26638f5b1c385256687006b9239!OpenDocument&ExpandSection=-3

The link above is the old FAR airplanes used to be certificated under. The next link is the new FAR pertaining to, obviously, new airplanes: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgFAR.nsf/0/2459CA427595FBF685256687006BC958?OpenDocument

You are correct. I should have said, "...which may not require ANY climb rate with an engine inop...", as aircraft under 6000 lbs with Vso less than 70 mph/61kts (depending on the reg) show up with no positive climb requirements.

I'm sure that aircraft certificated under CAR 3 or Aeronautical Bulletin 7A have less stringent requirements yet, so it's also important to know the basis under which your airplane was certificated.

Fly safe!

David