Climb Requirements When Departing in VMC

AllSmashNoVector

AllSmashNoVector

New Member
If you've met the published WX requirements to depart an airport using "see and avoid" terrain clearance versus a published climb gradient, is there still a minimum climb gradient required (i.e. 148 ft/NM)? Does it differ if you're flying under Part 135 versus Part 91? We see a lot of aircraft departing places like Aspen and Jackson Hole headed for the East Coast and I'd be willing to bet they don't all have a Runway Analysis plans, so if they're too heavy to meet the published climb gradient are they still legal if it's VMC?
 
1.6 Percent is all you need to meet VMC, versus the 3.3 Percent for IFR. If you accept a DP then you have to meet the requirements unless you have an emergency. Then hopefully you have a backup plan, IE it is VMC when accepting a departure out of Aspen. Important point is, its a obstacle climb, not an ATC noise abtmt climb. This has been hashed out before, and there are some pretty lengthy threads on it.

1.6 = 100Ft/Mi Where as 3.3 = 200ft/Mi

As far as 135 vs 91, no differences that I know of unless it says something in the 135 ops GOM.
 
Thanks Crock. We know our aircraft won't make the published climb requirements if we lose a motor, so we're basically tied to VMC departures. My understanding is (assuming VMC) I can accept the departure knowing that I can meet the climb req on 2 engines, and if I do lose a motor and can still make the 100 ft/NM I use "see and avoid" for obstacle clearance. Even using that criteria, it's still hard to put much fuel on a Hawker if it's even remotely warm temperatures. Not sure how folks are legally blasting off into an overcast and going to Teterboro.
 
There is a special departure off of Aspen and Jacksonhole that Aerodata and Jepps can make based on your aircraft's performance on single engine.
 
Anyone have any insight into how much of a performance advantage you gain with one of the APG (or similar) alternate departure procedures? It looks like the cost would be around $900 per aircraft per year, but a fairly significant performance increase seems like it could pay for itself.
 
Unless you regularly fly into those kind of airports with heavy loads, its not always worth it. We have about 15 planes, and its not worth it for us. We only fly into ASE 3 or 4 times a year, and we've never had a problem.
 
You got something modern with autocorrect now, Steve? :) Nice! Put that Motorola StarTAC to rest!
 
AllSmashNoVector said:
Anyone have any insight into how much of a performance advantage you gain with one of the APG (or similar) alternate departure procedures? It looks like the cost would be around $900 per aircraft per year, but a fairly significant performance increase seems like it could pay for itself.
Click to expand...

I dunno, but on the Dash-8-200 we had to do in the sim and for Vail (Eagle Airport) even executed perfectly the terrain GPWS was going off constantly and I saw the radio altimeter get lower than 500ft. If that was the advantage god knows what it would be trying to execute the standard OD... so I guess it is the difference between departing IFR and not for some aircraft, and for airliners who have scheduled departures every single day it is worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top