What @killbilly said but to add that on the 73 at least there’d be no need to rerun numbers. Deleting the assumed temp in the FMC makes it a max thrust takeoff and our performance data always comes with those numbers. That said, we’d have no idea where on the runway we’d unstick except for a vague idea based on weight.
And very real possibility that the 737 or A321 needs more runway than a lightly loaded 767 so not much you can do. I tend to drag my feet when getting into position behind a heavy and when taking off just for the couple of extra seconds, but in reality there isnt a whole lot you can do in one airliner behind another.
Very real possibility that the 737 or A321 needs more runway than a heavy loaded 767 as well.
Why is that?
Big boys jump off the runway when they’re light. I had an empty 330 for a charter and it was something else.
Power to weight ratio. The fully loaded plane is gonna use a lot of runway, while the light 767 is super overpowered.
I took an empty 777 from Liege to Milan. We were at 2000' by the end of the runway.
I don’t know about other types and other operations, but on the Guppy with Johnny Cash on the tail our takeoff performance (flap setting, derate, flex temp) is always optimized to use the lowest possible N1 that meets runway and engine out criteria. The upshot is that on any takeoff with less than about 10,000’ of runway you’re staring down the TDZ markings on the other end as you ever so slowly rotate because don’t bonk the tail on this overstretched abomination….
I saw y’all or DAL I forget which yeeting out of BOS yesterday and rotating around the last TDZ mark on the correct end of the runway.
I rode the JS from MCO-ATL on a DL 777LR when they were doing familiarisation flights for the LCP’s.
The thing is a beast! I love climbing out of LA above 10k and they request 250 knots. The freighter is a 200 with a 300 wing. It's fun!
*whale problems*
Did you try being more senior??
