OEI and TERPS

I understand your point, but my airline, and I'd say yours as well, has engineering data on a terrain critical departure for an OEI situation.

Airport analysis ends up with a specific runway turn procedure.

What the OP is talking about is that they operate under the premise of not having airport analysis and use charts or tables to figure their OEI performance.

All these guys may have data for is takeoff performance, but no runway specific data (although it's all the same math, they don't have an analysis of the specific terrain clearances).

And for the last part, I take it then, that all FARs are written in a vacuum and there isn't a "system" approach?

No, that's a red herring. The truth is that EO procedure charts are only valid if you lose an engine at V1 or happen to still be on that particular charted path when a fan stops. As they very rarely coincide with the SID or ODP, you are almost immediately off the published track and on your own as soon as you make your first turn after takeoff.

So, what do you do? The same thing you do if you don't have the company chart. You use your knowledge of local terrain, any charts that depict terrain you have, visual avoidance, etc., to avoid the rocks.

Personally, on most departures, I'd take that approach anyway. If I can see and avoid the terrain visually, I will be doing that in lieu of a complicated EO procedure, particularly in places like HKG. One less thing to worry about.

In any event, there is NOTHING that precludes and IFR takeoff absent those charts based on all engine performance. NOTHING. Use your common sense. It's an EMERGENCY, you don't have to follow those charts even if you have them. As an aside, if you know a little about the margins those charts provide (and I do), you will give them the weight they are due (which is not a lot!).
 
I was fixin' to self-correct my post, but you've done it for me.

Of course, I took a different tack to it (all in my head during the 14+ hours of flying today), but we came to the same conclusion.

Anyway, thanks for your insight. It's always appreciated.
 
In any event, there is NOTHING that precludes and IFR takeoff absent those charts based on all engine performance. NOTHING. Use your common sense.

I agree completely, except I don't even think it is common sense, it is federally documented...

I am a messily CFI so correct me if I am wrong here, but isn't being cleared for SID/STARS nothing more than an ATC clearance?

91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.
(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.

Isn't OEI considered an emergency in 121/135. . .:confused:

Concluding, I fail to see the point of the entire topic and from what it sounds like maybe an FAA guy here or there don't do things right (big surprise there), but the ops mentioned appear to be on track.
 
I agree completely, except I don't even think it is common sense, it is federally documented...

I am a messily CFI so correct me if I am wrong here, but isn't being cleared for SID/STARS nothing more than an ATC clearance?
Isn't OEI considered an emergency in 121/135. . .:confused:

Concluding, I fail to see the point of the entire topic and from what it sounds like maybe an FAA guy here or there don't do things right (big surprise there), but the ops mentioned appear to be on track.

You seem to be on track to me. As for the common sense, I think you might have misinterpreted what I meant. I was not referring to the FAA guidance (you are correct that is falls under emergency authority), but rather that what you do in that scenario is common sense. Departing out of the midwest, you can probably just fly straight ahead, but if there is terrain, part of your job is knowing which way to point the jet to avoid it, either VMC or IMC. The latter requires more homework before departure, obviously.
 
Interesting discussion.

I agree that there is nothing regulatory that states you must plan to clear obstacles OEI. However, every airline I've worked for (4) has completed their own in house engineering, or used a 3rd party analysis, to ensure procedures are in place to safely depart in the event of an engine failure after takeoff. Mostly, these consists of special paths or procedures to fly after takeoff in event of a problem.

As far as I know...the only OEI data that is required is computation of minimum climb gradients to the end of the takeoff path....and it makes no guarantees you will avoid obstacles.
 
No, that's a red herring. The truth is that EO procedure charts are only valid if you lose an engine at V1 or happen to still be on that particular charted path when a fan stops. As they very rarely coincide with the SID or ODP, you are almost immediately off the published track and on your own as soon as you make your first turn after takeoff.

So, what do you do? The same thing you do if you don't have the company chart. You use your knowledge of local terrain, any charts that depict terrain you have, visual avoidance, etc., to avoid the rocks.

Personally, on most departures, I'd take that approach anyway. If I can see and avoid the terrain visually, I will be doing that in lieu of a complicated EO procedure, particularly in places like HKG. One less thing to worry about.

In any event, there is NOTHING that precludes and IFR takeoff absent those charts based on all engine performance. NOTHING. Use your common sense. It's an EMERGENCY, you don't have to follow those charts even if you have them. As an aside, if you know a little about the margins those charts provide (and I do), you will give them the weight they are due (which is not a lot!).


You and your company get it. But, ask the crews that have been violated departing from places like Aspen and Rifle where the FEDS note the tail number and destination then ask the pilot to prove they can meet the SID climb requirements OEI.

But, trying to talk important points about this stuff is useless anymore, everyone is so ingrained and unwilling to look outside the box, it is like trying to teach someone to play soccer and they keep using their hands even though it is against the rules.
 
Interesting discussion.

I agree that there is nothing regulatory that states you must plan to clear obstacles OEI. However, every airline I've worked for (4) has completed their own in house engineering, or used a 3rd party analysis, to ensure procedures are in place to safely depart in the event of an engine failure after takeoff. Mostly, these consists of special paths or procedures to fly after takeoff in event of a problem.

As far as I know...the only OEI data that is required is computation of minimum climb gradients to the end of the takeoff path....and it makes no guarantees you will avoid obstacles.


The only thing, regulatory, that you have to meet there is out of the AFM, ie takeoff weight is the lesser of, break energy, runway length available or part 25 climb requirements (1.6% Net for two engine airplanes). The obstacle clearance requirements come from part 121/135 as applicable and are pretty thin.
 
Interesting discussion.

I agree that there is nothing regulatory that states you must plan to clear obstacles OEI. However, every airline I've worked for (4) has completed their own in house engineering, or used a 3rd party analysis, to ensure procedures are in place to safely depart in the event of an engine failure after takeoff. Mostly, these consists of special paths or procedures to fly after takeoff in event of a problem.

As far as I know...the only OEI data that is required is computation of minimum climb gradients to the end of the takeoff path....and it makes no guarantees you will avoid obstacles.

There is an AC for 121 and 135 regarding this, which instructs how to comply with 121.189 and 135.379. The AC is 120-91. Read the regs.
 
You and your company get it. But, ask the crews that have been violated departing from places like Aspen and Rifle where the FEDS note the tail number and destination then ask the pilot to prove they can meet the SID climb requirements OEI.

But, trying to talk important points about this stuff is useless anymore, everyone is so ingrained and unwilling to look outside the box, it is like trying to teach someone to play soccer and they keep using their hands even though it is against the rules.

If they issue an LOI for just that (no more to the story), then I hope those guys are fighting it, as there is no basis.

In fact, from the aformentioned AC http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library\rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/list/AC%20120-91/$FILE/AC120-91.pdf:

7. TERPS CRITERIA VERSUS ONE-ENGINE-INOPERATIVE REQUIREMENTS.
a. Standard Instrument Departures (SID) or Departure Procedures (DP) based on TERPS or ICAO Procedures for Air Navigation Services—Aircraft Operations (PANS-OPS) are based on normal (all engines operating) operations. Thus, one-engine-inoperative obstacle clearance requirements and the all-engines-operating TERPS requirements are independent, and one-engine-inoperative procedures do not need to meet TERPS requirements. Further, compliance with TERPS all-engines-operating climb gradient requirements does not necessarily assure that one-engine-inoperative obstacle clearance requirements are met.
 
SG

I've posted it, cited, explained how and why, but no one will listen. I don't know what else to do. I am fighting with my own flight department to get the data as well.

Here is the million dollar question I cannot find an answer to. Say an ODP requires 4% as a gradient, my aircraft's AFM does not provide (nor is it required to) a chart that tells me what my all engine climb gradient is??
 
SG

I've posted it, cited, explained how and why, but no one will listen. I don't know what else to do. I am fighting with my own flight department to get the data as well.

Here is the million dollar question I cannot find an answer to. Say an ODP requires 4% as a gradient, my aircraft's AFM does not provide (nor is it required to) a chart that tells me what my all engine climb gradient is??

There should be a chart that shows rate of climb and climb speed for various weights, right? From that chart, gradient is easy to determine.
 
There should be a chart that shows rate of climb and climb speed for various weights, right? From that chart, gradient is easy to determine.


Not for the BeechJet or Citation 550. Part 25 does not require the chart or the data.
 
Yes it does. 25.1587, and the following AC further describes the requirements. That data is, without question, required. Period.

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_G...20bd265862569b3005479d7/$FILE/AC25-1581-1.pdf


.
Here is the actual reg

§ 25.1587 Performance information.

(a) Each Airplane Flight Manual must contain information to permit conversion of the indicated temperature to free air temperature if other than a free air temperature indicator is used to comply with the requirements of §25.1303(a)(1).
(b) Each Airplane Flight Manual must contain the performance information computed under the applicable provisions of this part (including §§25.115, 25.123, and 25.125 for the weights, altitudes, temperatures, wind components, and runway gradients, as applicable) within the operational limits of the airplane, and must contain the following:
(1) In each case, the conditions of power, configuration, and speeds, and the procedures for handling the airplane and any system having a significant effect on the performance information.
(2) VSRdetermined in accordance with §25.103.
(3) The following performance information (determined by extrapolation and computed for the range of weights between the maximum landing weight and the maximum takeoff weight):
(i) Climb in the landing configuration.
(ii) Climb in the approach configuration.
(iii) Landing distance.
(4) Procedures established under §25.101(f) and (g) that are related to the limitations and information required by §25.1533 and by this paragraph (b) in the form of guidance material, including any relevant limitations or information.
(5) An explanation of significant or unusual flight or ground handling characteristics of the airplane.
(6) Corrections to indicated values of airspeed, altitude, and outside air temperature.
(7) An explanation of operational landing runway length factors included in the presentation of the landing distance, if appropriate.




25.103 is stall speed
25.101(f) is flight procedures (near as I can tell, written kind of weird)
25.1533 is for take off and langind weights and runway distances (wet, grooved, etc)
25.1303 is flight instruments.




To the PDF, I believe you are looking at pages 11-14 of it


25.121 is one engine inop climb performance
25.123 is enroute one engine inoperative (or 2 depending on the total number of engines)


Sections 10 and 11 of the pdf on page 14 are what I think you may have focused in on.
moz-screenshot.jpg

93726840.jpg


The only chart(s) I can find in the BeechJet are the fuel time and distance to climb charts. You can figure the gradient from that, but section 10 says the gradient must be presented (fwiw, a sea level climb to 10,000 feet is a 12.8% gradient by simple math).

Concerning section 11 above

25.111(a) is discussing one engine inoperative take off flight paths.
25.115 b and c discuss the percentage reduction that must be applied to the data derived from 25.111(a)

I've read the pdf a couple of times, and save for section 10 there, I can't find where it requires all engine operating climb data be included in the AFM. I believe this section is talking about data for one engine inoperative climbs (as it seems the pdf follows the order of part 25)


25.111 is take off path and it, as far as I can tell trying to decipher it, only talks about data and paths for one engine inoperative (25.111(a)(2))

There is nothing in part 25 subpart b (flight) that deals or talks about all engine climb performance, that I can find.


I could be very wrong, but my manuals, the manuals in the airplane and all the training material (for what it is worth) do not have a chart for all engine climb performance that gives me a gradient. The only charts are the fuel time and distance to climb and those charts are basically worthless because it assumes a take off at sea level and only gives me 5000 foot increments from 5000 foot pressure altitude to 15000 feet then 2000 foot increments from 15000 to 45000 feet. Based on the two climb profiles available.

You cannot interpolate the climb gradient from the F,T,D charts either, you could very well penetrate the obstacle plane even if your net gradient exceeds the obstacle plane gradient (you don't climb in a straight line, it is a curve).

The one place the data may be, and I don't have access to this manual, is the operational planning manual (OPM). From what I understand it isn't required to aboard the aircraft, you are not required to reference it, and thus very few operators even own them (they run about a grand or so from the manufacturer). I haven't had a chance to call Raytheon/BeechJet/Hawker yet to find out if there is even one available for the BeechJet.

Like I said, I could very well be wrong and completely missing something here.
 
The Ops manual is more like a "sales brochure" of what the airplane can do.

As far as I know, it is not FAA approved. But it will give you F.T.D and all that enroute flight planning stuff.

The AFM is what the airplane actually does.

What Ops Manual are you looking for? The beechjet 400A/Hawker 400XP?
 
400A. I have never seen an OPM so I am only guessing as to what may or may not be in there.
 
I have never seen that chart not provided. If I get time tomorrow (and remember to do it) I'll give AEG a call tomorrow and ask about it, if that doesn't work I'll call one of the ACO's.
 
I have never seen that chart not provided. If I get time tomorrow (and remember to do it) I'll give AEG a call tomorrow and ask about it, if that doesn't work I'll call one of the ACO's.


In the bigger 4 engine airplanes I have flown, yup that chart is there along with a whole mess of charts that I don't "read" as required by any regulation.
 
Apparently the manufacturer is not required to publish certified all-engine climb data in the AFM. The manufacturers do, separately, provide that information in a performance handbook or similar publication (each manufacturer calls it something different). It's not required to be certified in any event. Sounds like you need the other book.
 
Back
Top