You're on the approach when there's a deer!
- Thread starter derg
- Start date
They are for ours. I'm sure others as well.
Depends. The 500 series is a part 25 plane. The 501 and 551 and Cjs are part 23, but the Cjs are certified with Part 25 climb performance (not sure on the 501 & 551). Next tour, I'll check to see which is gross and which is net if I can remember. Pretty sure Approach climb is net though, as I said...that would make the most sense.It has been a while since flying the citation, I want to say that was a part 23 airplane and that might be where some gross climb gradient charts may be, again, the blonde is showing....
True there.
HAH it happens. That was back when I was talking down to everyone.Sorry, I missed that post.
Back to the far side of the planet for me...
-mini
EDUC8-or
Well-Known Member
My thoughts exactly. A balked landing is very similar, but in most circumstances you're going to have more energy and better performance. Unless you're flying something slower or with great performance it's pretty rare to rotate in the first 3000' of the runway.
We can talk about all of the what ifs, flying out of Aspen, etc... Could an engine fail on the go around? Could we have a problem retracting the gear or flaps? The list goes on and on. But couldn't some of these things happen on takeoff as well? Are we going to fly into ASE and not takeoff because we could lose an engine at V1? What if a reverser inadvertently deploys just after takeoff?
Remember what happened to the Mesa ERJ when the CA said go around is not an option? If box yourself into a corner bad things can and will happen. I generally don't like to make absolute statements, so given the option of hitting a deer or side of a mountain I'll take the deer, but you've really reduced your options if you're in this situation. There's always the possibility of failures on a go around, but if I see a deer on the runway there's an extremely strong possibility I'm going around and flying the published missed unless otherwise instructed by ATC. If something is already broken I'm flying to an airport with a nice long runway that's not in mountainous terrain where a go around isn't an issue. If something is on fire and we can't put it out, we're running out of gas, or the airplane is difficult to control we're landing and having venison for dinner.
Funny story, one of my buddies from my initial class had a coyote run out onto the runway on his first flight after IOE. He went around, didn't even have to think twice about it.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
I thought about this thread yesterday.
I was reading our NavData book, in which many ICAO rules are addressed. One would apply here (don't ask me to quote it, you can goooooooogle yourself)
The rule ends up in this manner: If the airplane is unable to make a climb gradient sufficient to remain clear of the terrain, then it's up to the operator to raise the DH to ensure the aircraft will remain safe from terrain.
In there also is the criteria for the missed approach/balked landing. They use different terms, but it is based on the takeoff criteria for the runway with additional clearance for the higher initial energy state of the aircraft.
It's ICAO, that's just the way it is.
BTW, mini, as I was revisiting the thread, my post that you commented on was to emphasize that the balked landing performance for a Part 25 airplane is ALL engines running. Again, given the higher energy state of the aircraft should give a good performance versus a V1 cut or a standing takeoff.
I was reading our NavData book, in which many ICAO rules are addressed. One would apply here (don't ask me to quote it, you can goooooooogle yourself)
The rule ends up in this manner: If the airplane is unable to make a climb gradient sufficient to remain clear of the terrain, then it's up to the operator to raise the DH to ensure the aircraft will remain safe from terrain.
In there also is the criteria for the missed approach/balked landing. They use different terms, but it is based on the takeoff criteria for the runway with additional clearance for the higher initial energy state of the aircraft.
It's ICAO, that's just the way it is.
BTW, mini, as I was revisiting the thread, my post that you commented on was to emphasize that the balked landing performance for a Part 25 airplane is ALL engines running. Again, given the higher energy state of the aircraft should give a good performance versus a V1 cut or a standing takeoff.
mjg407
Well-Known Member
Martin,
Just out of curiosity, do plan on two engine climbouts or three? I know that in the mighty O, a dual engine failure after rotate is DOOOOOOM.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
Oh, shizzle, man, the ER's the same way when we're down to one. Some guys'll brief "autodump" and others will say, "Wait until you're really scared and start dumping".
75, not so much.
I had a shutdown in an MD-90 out of ORD once and I learned a valauble lesson that if you let yourself get a 1/2 dot low, well, that's the best you'll maintain.
'A half dot low, but I'll keep a little smash on, sir."
75, not so much.
I had a shutdown in an MD-90 out of ORD once and I learned a valauble lesson that if you let yourself get a 1/2 dot low, well, that's the best you'll maintain.
'A half dot low, but I'll keep a little smash on, sir."
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
I've learned to love that I ride around in a plane where if we lose one of anything, it's usually a non-issue.
Engine loss? Still operating under normal procedures.
Oooohh rah!:beer:
mjg407
Well-Known Member
That's what I figured. EP-3 at 142K out of Bahrain if you lost two EP was prepare to Ditch......
Baronman
Well-Known Member
If I like the overnight or want to avoid a future overnight, I smash the deer.....Looks like I'll be spending some time wherever ;-)
Otherwise...go around....call airport ops...FBO....ops....to see if they can get out there to get the sucker off the RWY. Then go at it again.
Otherwise...go around....call airport ops...FBO....ops....to see if they can get out there to get the sucker off the RWY. Then go at it again.
gatorbuc99
Well-Known Member
Funny i ran into this thread. Few days ago took the lady up for a spin, few touch and goes around the metro area in a 172. On one of the landings, right as dusk, over the numbers, flock of fowl just shy of the 1K markers. Decided to float and land long. Throught process was if i applied full power i might startle the fowl right into my path, and if i continued, i'd chop 'em all up. Looking back on it, not sure if i made the right decision even though it turned out ok.
Incidentally, earlier in the day, same flight, almost ran into a deer taxiing out for departure..maybe i should have taken a hint then and there
Incidentally, earlier in the day, same flight, almost ran into a deer taxiing out for departure..maybe i should have taken a hint then and there
fo4ever
Well-Known Member
Yes!
Scandinavian13
New Member
haha
To some degree, yes. There is a Missed Approach surface. The missed app surface is a 40:1 slope. That 40:1 slope begins at the MAP, so if you're past the MAP, you're under the slope and not guaranteed clearance. If there is an approach procedure to the opposite end of the runway, you could vaguely justify it by the Approach Surface to that end of the runway, which extends from that end's threshold at a 50:1 (34:1 farther out) slope. Provided you know you can climb at 50:1 from the reciprocal threshold (if there is an approach to that end), or you can make up the difference to get to the Missed Approach Surface over the runway area (where you're protected by the Object Free Zone), you should be safe. The amount of mental work you'd need to be assured of all that might be a bit much for a spur-of-the-moment deer avoidance and climb out, though. It might be an argument for calculating your climb performance for a missed approach before you go.
The above is a vague recollection of what I did when I worked for an airport planning/engineering firm, so it might not be 100% accurate, but I thought I'd share what I recall.
There are a few pages in this document that show the surfaces graphically. If you end up reading any of it, do realise that whoever made it never proofed it. There is a "specially" (as in 'specially, or especially) and an "abstruction to navigation" in there that I've caught so far:
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/FAA-Part77-BASICS_105811_7.pdf
Pilotforhire587
Lycra Man
like the way you think man. I agree, it all depends on the situation, but if I am in an interview, and someone asks me this, and tells me thats all the information I have, I am going missed. That being said, all the comments about everything from runway length, aircraft type, knowledge of the area and terrain, they all play a huge factor in this. Go missed is just a simple answer for a very complex question.
dasleben
That's just, like, your opinion, man
Pilotforhire587
Lycra Man
I haven't been on in a while, Skimming through the latest, which could be a month old or more, before bed.Holy crap, I don't even remember writing that.
Rise, RISE!
