Jet departing Courchevel

Jimmy_Norton said:
Isn't the citation a part 25 airplane? Doesn't that require a balanced field?
Click to expand...

I am not aware of the definition for balanced fields or what makes one without going hunting in some books, so I am not certain I could answer that. :oops:
Certainly some rusty with European regs and certification standards. I would doubt that there is any regulatory issue. The plane can certainly do it.
 
Cessna414JJB said:
I am not aware of the definition for balanced fields or what makes one without going hunting in some books, so I am not certain I could answer that. :oops:
Certainly some rusty with European regs and certification standards. I would doubt that there is any regulatory issue. The plane can certainly do it.
Click to expand...

Just because an airplane can do something does not mean it is legal to do it....

FAR 91.605:

(c) No person may take off a turbine-engine-powered transport category airplane certificated after August 29, 1959, unless, in addition to the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section—

(1) The accelerate-stop distance is no greater than the length of the runway plus the length of the stopway (if present); and

(2) The takeoff distance is no greater than the length of the runway plus the length of the clearway (if present); and

(3) The takeoff run is no greater than the length of the runway.

I highly doubt the Euro's have less restrictive regs than the FAA.
 
Jimmy_Norton said:
Just because an airplane can do something does not mean it is legal to do it....

FAR 91.605:

(c) No person may take off a turbine-engine-powered transport category airplane certificated after August 29, 1959, unless, in addition to the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section—

(1) The accelerate-stop distance is no greater than the length of the runway plus the length of the stopway (if present); and

(2) The takeoff distance is no greater than the length of the runway plus the length of the clearway (if present); and

(3) The takeoff run is no greater than the length of the runway.

I highly doubt the Euro's have less restrictive regs than the FAA.
Click to expand...

I'd inquire with EASA or the operator of the aircraft or the airport operator on that.
From the reg you posted, I would assume the action was absolutely within and perfectly legal.

(Length of Stopway: Not present.| Length of Clearway: Not Present | Takeoff run apparently inside specs, otherwise there would be aeroplane residue left behind.}
 
Cessna414JJB said:
I'd inquire with EASA or the operator of the aircraft or the airport operator on that.
From the reg you posted, I would assume the action was absolutely within and perfectly legal.

(Length of Stopway: Not present.| Length of Clearway: Not Present | Takeoff run apparently inside specs, otherwise there would be aeroplane residue left behind.}
Click to expand...

Yes, we've established that the aircraft didn't crash on takeoff, but it for sure didn't have a balanced field.

If that takeoff was in the United States, it would not have been legal.
 
Jimmy_Norton said:
Yes, we've established that the aircraft didn't crash on takeoff, but it for sure didn't have a balanced field.

If that takeoff was in the United States, it would not have been legal.
Click to expand...

OK. Copy that. I still don't know what a balanced field is and the takeoff wasn't in the U.S. so I am not sure what the point is.
I wasn't there, but my assumption would be that there was a bit of room to spare.
 
Last edited:
Jimmy_Norton said:
Yes, we've established that the aircraft didn't crash on takeoff, but it for sure didn't have a balanced field.

If that takeoff was in the United States, it would not have been legal.
Click to expand...

Balanced Field Length

The balanced field length is the runway length (runway plus stopway and/or clearway) for the takeoff weight, where engine-out accelerate-go distance equals accelerate-stop distance. This distance is met by determining a maximum runway specific weight using airport analysis data.

Has anyone actually looked at the takeoff numbers? Just because it looks "scary" or "unsafe" doesn't mean the numbers don't support it.
 
cencal83406 said:
Balanced Field Length

The balanced field length is the runway length (runway plus stopway and/or clearway) for the takeoff weight, where engine-out accelerate-go distance equals accelerate-stop distance. This distance is met by determining a maximum runway specific weight using airport analysis data.

Has anyone actually looked at the takeoff numbers? Just because it looks "scary" or "unsafe" doesn't mean the numbers don't support it.
Click to expand...

I think it was established very early in this thread that the max runway slope the AFM has for performance calculations is 2%. Therefore the gentleman flying the subject of the video is playing test pilot.
 
cencal83406 said:
Balanced Field Length

The balanced field length is the runway length (runway plus stopway and/or clearway) for the takeoff weight, where engine-out accelerate-go distance equals accelerate-stop distance. This distance is met by determining a maximum runway specific weight using airport analysis data.

Has anyone actually looked at the takeoff numbers? Just because it looks "scary" or "unsafe" doesn't mean the numbers don't support it.
Click to expand...

I am wondering about the same thing. I mean I just got off the phone with a pilot who caused a bunch of people to flop on their bellies because they thought he crashed.
I don't think a Citation is the biggest piece of metal that has taken off or landed on this airport. 98% chance that everything was legal and within procedures. So, legal or not, unless I am affected by it, I feel painfully removed. Nice to watch... and that's it. His business to play test pilot or not. Who the heck are we to judge?

Not planning to return to the field much before 2015/ 2016, but if I see that particular pilot, I'll stick my nose in his business and teach him a thing or two about what should be legal. All we Europeans know each other by first name, so this should be all easy. I'll report back with a picture of my broken nose and new dentures. [Shrug]
 
Jimmy_Norton said:
I think it was established very early in this thread that the max runway slope the AFM has for performance calculations is 2%. Therefore the gentleman flying the subject of the video is playing test pilot.
Click to expand...

He may have acted as a test pilot, but I promise he was going "Wheeeeeee!" all the way down the hill, really really fast. All good. It flew this time.
 
Jimmy_Norton said:
I think it was established very early in this thread that the max runway slope the AFM has for performance calculations is 2%. Therefore the gentleman flying the subject of the video is playing test pilot.
Click to expand...

Is it possible to get engineering data for a specific runway? Maybe they have that?
 
cencal83406 said:
Is it possible to get engineering data for a specific runway? Maybe they have that?
Click to expand...

As I said, when I get there sometime in the future, I'll make mental note to let someone present know that someone on some website thought some pilot flying some airplane out of the field at some time looked some illegal. Maybe they'll punish someone, some? I'd assume they'll just kick some stupid rock down some graded runway and have some more beer while they mentally calculate if some rock will hit some poor soul trying to take some shaky video at the end of the runway in the head or not.
 
Jimmy_Norton said:
Isn't the citation a part 25 airplane? Doesn't that require a balanced field?
Click to expand...
According to this link I found, some are part 23 and 25. Admittedly I'm the worst when it comes to Citation identification. So I'm not exactly sure which variant this is. Just for info though.

"For the Citation II, Cessna pursued both Part 25 transport category certification for the basic Model 550, with a 13,300-pound MTOW, and Part 23 normal category certification for the Model 551 Citation II/SP, a 12,500-pound MTOW limited aircraft"

http://www.sijet.com/download/Sierra_2013-14_CitationPerforrmance.pdf?inline
 
Jimmy_Norton said:
Just because an airplane can do something does not mean it is legal to do it....

FAR 91.605:

(c) No person may take off a turbine-engine-powered transport category airplane certificated after August 29, 1959, unless, in addition to the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section—

(1) The accelerate-stop distance is no greater than the length of the runway plus the length of the stopway (if present); and

(2) The takeoff distance is no greater than the length of the runway plus the length of the clearway (if present); and

(3) The takeoff run is no greater than the length of the runway.

I highly doubt the Euro's have less restrictive regs than the FAA.
Click to expand...
This doesn't say that accelerate-stop must be equal to take-off distance.
 
So if this was a takeoff on a 10,000' runway, at sea level, on a calm and clear day, but he took off 1000 pounds over the MTOW of the aircraft, what would your reaction be?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top