Calling V1 five knots early?

[SteveC]

This is Airbus's explanation of FAA and JAR Part 25 certification requirements. Probably one of the most useful aviation documents I've read.

http://www.smartcockpit.com/aircraft-ressources/Getting_to_Grips_With_Aircraft_Performance.html

Thanks, I like this kind of reference material. Similarly liked this link someone posted a few pages back:

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/avi...e_operators/training/media/takeoff_safety.pdf

I wonder if anyone has that Boeing document that's been referred to a few times?

 

[jtrain609]

Thanks, I like this kind of reference material. Similarly liked this link someone posted a few pages back:

https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/avi...e_operators/training/media/takeoff_safety.pdf

I wonder if anyone has that Boeing document that's been referred to a few times?

Multiple Boeing drivers have made reference to it, so it's likely in the AOM.

 

[SteveC]

Multiple Boeing drivers have made reference to it, so it's likely in the AOM.

Yeah, and I'm curious how it actually reads since we seem to be getting conflicting interpretations here.

Edit to add: I'm guessing the difference may come from some wording that says or implies "may", or "can", or "should" or some variation thereof. Also I'd bet that memory of what was read versus going back and re-reading for clarity may be in play as well.

 

[Seggy]

That is incorrect.

Then it's incorrect. I really don't know I was going off what others said. It really doesn't matter as well.

Approved procedures for Boeing aircraft is to call it at V1 or V1-5.

 

[Autothrust Blue]

Waaaah. Waaaaah.

This disparity in airworthiness standards has created an unfair international trade situation, affecting the competitiveness of a later design of the A320. At the June 1990 annual meeting, the FAA and JAA agreed to jointly review the current takeoff performance standards to reduce the above-discussed inequities, without adversely affecting safety. In March 1992, the JAA Notice for Proposed Amendment (NPA) 25B,D,G-244: “Accelerate-Stop Distances and Related Performance Matters” was issued, followed by the FAA Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) 93-8 on July 1993. The rule changes proposed in the NPA and in the NPRM were essentially the same, and are better known as Post-Amendment 42.

 

[Joshwa]

This is precisely what my 737 FCOM 1 says.

 

[KLB]

View attachment 29432

This is precisely what my 737 FCOM 1 says.

It interesting how it says the call must be completed "by" V1 instead of "at" V1. It leaves room for interpretation.

 

[A Life Aloft]

Here's an older (still relevant) Boeing safety video that y'all might enjoy.............

 

[B767]

View attachment 29432

This is precisely what my 737 FCOM 1 says.

I guessed somewhat right!

 

[BobDDuck]

It interesting how it says the call must be completed "by" V1 instead of "at" V1. It leaves room for interpretation.

Because V1 (as far as Boeing is concerned and how the aircraft is certified) is based on AFM data. An airline may be authorized to use a third party's data (think: Aerodata) with the stipulation that Vmcg<="V1"<="AFM" V1. And then of course Vmca<=Vr.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Then it's incorrect. I really don't know I was going off what others said. It really doesn't matter as well.

Approved procedures for Boeing aircraft is to call it at V1 or V1-5.

Remember those fancy auto callouts in the 737 are certified by Boeing for V1 to be bugged at V1.

 

[Seggy]

What fancy call outs on the airplane superior to the Airbus?

 

[Bumblebee]

all of them.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

What fancy call outs on the airplane superior to the Airbus?

Do you guys not have the auto V1 call on your flufs?

 

[Seggy]

Nope.

 

[derg]

Nope.

Why not?

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Why not?

Because technique.

 

[derg]

Because technique.

At the end of the day, outside of the checkride environment, if failure or smoking, fiery death is 5 knots, you're doing aviation wrong.

 

[Seggy]

Because technique.

Nah.

 

[derg]

Nah.

Yes. SAY IT!