Second Segment Climb

[flyguy75000]

I have yet to fly in or out of Van Nuys, but aren't those DP's NAV DP's and not Obstacle DP's? I am not sure since I live on the other side of the country, but it seems to me that the climb requirements are to get your a$$ up over the inbounds/outbound LAX traffic, but maybe someone from that area can explain it better, as I'm not sure how close those mountains are to L.A. At any rate, you can probably work something out with the tower to bypass a DP out of that kind of situation, but out in ASE/EGE you cant work something out with the mountains. You need to be able to fly them as charted, or like most operators do.....go VFR or the charted TO mins so you can see where the he11 you are going when you do lose an engine. But your right..its too late to be ramblin about this b.s. and I'm off tomorrow so I'm not gonna think about airplanes until I have to. Maybe someone can clear it all up later. Adios.

 

[HMR]

As for just departing and hoping, not only NO, but HELL NO. We get paid to make the hard decisions, and sometimes it is to tell the owner or pax that it is not possible to do what they want to do.

(Wiping tears from my eyes) That was beautiful.

 

[flyguy75000]

Ty's right. I'm glad that I work for a guy that came up and told us we were the only employees of his who could say no to him and we'd still have jobs. We hate to do it, but have on occasion and he's still alive to understand why we did.

 

[HMR]

If people flying private jets in these scenarios are so concerned and cancelling flights for the above mentioned reasons at KASE and others then these same pilots should be departing KVNY light to get fuel elsewhere also because I don't think many of the corporate jets meet the approximate 7.8% climb gradient out of there

Not sure which KVNY departure you're referring to, I think the Glendale Eight off of RWY34 has the highest gradient at around 6.7%. If KVNY is using RWY34(Santa Ana winds), chances are there isn't a cloud west of the rockies. In that case, the VMC maneuvers you mentioned would be easily executed. Also, KVNY is at 799' vs. 7820' for KASE. In our little jet (Astra) that 7,000' makes a world of difference in our climb performance.

At KEGE and KASE, if it's VMC we will ALWAYS brief our visual escape route in the event we lose one on takeoff. If we can't see the mountains nor make the gradient on one engine, we're not leaving.

 

[Kingairrick]

Isn't that part 25 for certification. Do we operate under that part?

I your aircraft is certified under that part, you are operating under that part. Unless you are a test pilot. I'm not, and don't want to be.

 

[NJA Capt]

First of all climb gradients in the US are for 2 engines not one.
Secondly there is no requirement to comply with any of them after you declare an emergency.

Climb gradients are to keep us from hitting something, regardless of the number of engines working.

2nd segment is based on LOSS of an engine.

A mountain isn't going to disappear just because you declare an emergency. You either have to be able to depart VFR+VMC, or, you MUST be able to meet the SID with one engine inop. You also must meet the 2nd segment requirement at the TOP of the climb, not just runway height.

http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/faa/8400/8400_vol4/4_003_01.pdf
Air Transportation Operations Inspector's Handbook, Order 8400.10 (page 10)

(1) When obstacles penetrate the obstacle clearance plane, the airplane must be able to climb at a steeper gradient or to use higher than standard takeoff minimums to allow the obstructions to be seen and avoided under visual conditions. Authorizations for lower-than-standard takeoff minimums are based on the operator adjusting airplane takeoff weight to avoid obstacles in the takeoff flightpath if an engine fails on takeoff . POI’s shall not authorize operators who do not prepare an airport analysis and perform obstacle climb computations to use lower than-
standard takeoff minimums. POI’s may approve a system in which the operator makes obstacle clearance computations and performs lower-than-standard visibility takeoffs on specified runways, as opposed to all runways.
(2) The criteria for TERPS does not take intoaccount whether or not the aircraft is operating on all
engines. Operators must either show compliance with TERPS criteria with an engine out or have an alternate routing available for use in case of an engine failure.

 

[Lead Sled]

DP climb gradients are not engine operation specific, and should not be confused with FAR 25.111 takeoff path or 25.115 takeoff flight path obstacle clearance requirements. Rather, the IFR DP climb requirements represent a "plane" below which an aircraft should not penetrate while conducting a normal ("all engine") IFR departure. There was never an intention of making this a one-engine inoperative requirement as this was already addressed by the operating regulations, Subpart I, FAR 121 &135.

An FAR 121 or 135 operator should have performed an analysis for obstacle clearance with a continued takeoff with one engine inoperative after V1 as required by 121.189(d) or 135.379(d). You can have a contractor like Jeppesen Op's Data compute the analysis for you, or if performance data in not available in Jeppesen's computer database for your aircraft, you can receive the "raw" obstacle data and do the computations yourself using the climb gradient and takeoff flight path charts provided in the AFM. You will find, in many instances, that a special engine out departure procedure is provided as an escape route for a continued takeoff with one engine inoperative. This may or may not follow the ground track of the published DP.

If you operate under FAR 121 or 135, a VFR departure does NOT relieve you from meeting your one-engine inoperative requirements under 121.189(d) or 135.379(d). For example, electing to depart KASE and flying VFR "down the valley" doesn't make you legal in this sense. I can't, off the top of my head, recall the specific Op's Spec paragraph, but it's the one that addresses departing an airport VFR, and that Op Spec specifically addresses the need to meet the one engine inoperative obstacle clearance requirements for
takeoff. It's a fairly new Op's Spec provision.

There are no one engine inoperative obstacle requirements specified in 91.605 for FAR 91 operators. The only requirement is comply with the minimum one-engine inoperative climb gradient for certification (2.4% gross gradient 2nd segment, etc).

Engine-out obstacle clearance doesn't end at 1,500 ft either. FAR 121 &135 operators also have a requirement for enroute obstacle clearance. It is for this purpose that the net enroute climb gradient charts are provided in the AFM. These operators must demonstrate either a positive net enroute flight path that clear all terrain &obstacles 5 SM either side of track by 1,000 ft, or that the net enroute flight path allows for a continued flight from cruising altitude, following an engine failure, to an alternate airport (as specified under the applicable rules, such as 135.387) which clears all terrain and obstacles by 2,000 feet 5 SM either side of track. In this instance, the engine is assumed to fail at the most critical point enroute. In both instances, the aircraft must demonstrate a positive slope 1,500 ft above the airport of intended landing following an engine failure. If the second method is used, the operator must designate the airport(s) used as an alternate in the flight plan and that (those) airport(s) must meet the minimum weather requirements for an alternate. This does not relieve a pilot from landing at the nearest suitable airport following an engine failure. This is merely a dispatch requirement.

As for differences between TERPS and Part 25 one engine inoperative performance, I'll direct you to a draft AC. It does a much better job of explaining the differences than I can:

http://www1.faa.gov/avr/arm/apol/docs/120xx11.htm

'Sled

 

[Ty Webb]

Isn't that part 25 for certification. Do we operate under that part? .

You are not allowed to depart at a weight which precludes you from obtaining your required second-segment climb gradient of 2.4% after an engine failure at V1, just like you cannot depart from a runway that you cannot cross the departure end at or above 35 feet after an engine failure at V1.

Thanks to NJA Capt and LeadSled for the excellent review. . . . .

 

[XTW]

You are not allowed to depart at a weight which precludes you from obtaining your required second-segment climb gradient of 2.4% after an engine failure at V1

2.4% is certification, 1.6% is for us common folk I believe.

 

[Ty Webb]

2.4% is certification, 1.6% is for us common folk I believe.

Gawd, please tell me you guys are not collecting money for flying pax around if you don't even know what climb gradient you have to make, and whether or not it is single-engine performance. That is downright scary.

Repeat after me: "You need to be able to achieve a net climb gradient of 2.4%, or 152 feet per nautical mile, from a point 35 feet above the departure end of the runway, to the flap retraction altitude of 400 feet AGL, and then to accelerate to Vfs and maintain a 1.2% gross climb gradient to the top of Final segment, which is normally 1500 AGL, or higher when obstacles require a higher altitude. This is with an engine failure at or after V1".