Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Single Engine Escape Procedures  
User currently offlineMiller22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 716 posts, RR: 4
Posted (4 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5037 times:

How common is it that an aircraft would not be able to meet the single-engine climb rate for a given SID?

Consider an example where an aircraft loses an engine on a SID, can't maintain the single-engine climb gradient required on the SID, and can't turn back to the departing airport due to weather. I've heard of escape procedures being developed for just this scenario, but exactly how common are these?

Does anyone have any examples?

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21420 posts, RR: 56
Reply 1, posted (4 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5035 times:

If you can't meet the climb requirements for the SID with an engine out, don't depart. Either take some weight off, wait for lower temperatures, etc. That solves most of the problems right there.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineBri2k1 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 988 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (4 years 6 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5025 times:

SIDs do not have to be accepted anyway. If you can't meet the climb gradient for a SID, but you're planning on departing the airport anyway, you should have some idea of where you're going to go. When I'm in IMC, that's always on my mind -- which way to visual conditions in case of ice, mechanical failure, whatever.

Not being able to return to an airport due to weather, but still being safe to depart from it, seems like a narrow slice of circumstances, too. If you can land in 200 and 1/4, but the weather is below that, should you be taking off in the first place?



Position and hold
User currently offlineJetpilot From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3130 posts, RR: 29
Reply 3, posted (4 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 5012 times:

Airlines use runway analysis which gave you the maximum operating weight for a given runway at an airport. If you didn't meet the second segment climb requirment or any of that runways requirments then you were not legal to depart that runway. You can also use a runway with a tailwind if you can meet those requirments. You don't always need to takeoff into the wind. In San Jose CR it is not uncommon to see planes after 8 or 9AM start using the runway opposite direction becasue of the increasing daytime heat they can no longer meet the second segment climb gradient with the mountains. The runway in the opposite direction is downslope and has no mountains but usually has a slight tailwind. We can take that if we meet those weight requirments which are often higher.

User currently offlineMiller22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (4 years 6 months 6 days ago) and read 4997 times:

I'm thinking more from a planning perspective. How common are escape procedures for an airline's operation into a specific airport. I know I've seen some of them before, but can't remember any specific examples.

User currently offlineMiller22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (4 years 6 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4991 times:



Quoting Bri2k1 (Reply 2):
If you can land in 200 and 1/4, but the weather is below that, should you be taking off in the first place?

This is the idea behind a takeoff alternate, which most definitely exist. This is considering a part 121 operation deciding whether an airline would start service into a city with an escape procedure. I know that it has in the past. I'm just curious if anyone has any examples.


User currently offlineDashTrash From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1505 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (4 years 6 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 4956 times:

Escape maneuvers are pretty common. At my old job we called them special departure procedures. They were broken down into simple or complex specials. A simple procedure would give you a point at which you commenced a turn, then a flap retract altitude. A complex special may have a couple of turns in it predicated off various fixes. DCA has a complex special. ROA, BTV, IPT, PIT, LGA, ITH, AGS are some airports that had simple specials. We had the procedure listed on the perf data in the release.

The company I work for now uses charted escape procedures at ASE, EGE, TEX, SUN, and a couple of others. They are considered VFR maneuvers and allow lower than standard climb gradients. We still can't use them for IMC departures, and although we may fly it should we lose an engine, they don't give us any relief on the departure minimums.

Without an escape procedure you must be able to maintain a 3.2 climb gradient to a safe altitude in IMC, or 1.6 in VMC. If flying a SID that states a higher climb gradient you must be able to meet that requirement, or you cannot fly the SID.

All second segment climb gradients are single engine.


User currently offlineGLEN From Switzerland, joined Jun 2005, 219 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (4 years 6 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 4864 times:

A lot of SID procedures may not be suitable to follow in case of engine failure due to several reasons:

- SID's are based on gradients from 3.3% up to approx. 9%, while the the aircraft minimum required one-engine-out performance is 2.4%(2-engine aircraft) and 3.0%(4-eng a/c).
- There are different SID's published for one runway
- The aerodrome obstacle chart usually covers a straight climb area, whereas SIDs often turn away from this sector.

The standard engine-out procedure therefore is to climb on RWY track to 1500 ft AAL, then turn back to the aerodrome. Acceleration and clean-up after the turn. Hold over the airport.

At airports where terrain conditions don't allow this procedure specific Engine Failure Climb Out Procedures (EFCOP) are designed to allow a safe climb out in case of engine-failure at V1.



"The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view." - Albert Einstein
User currently offlineFlyinTLow From Germany, joined Oct 2004, 519 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 6 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 4853 times:



Quoting Mir (Reply 1):
If you can't meet the climb requirements for the SID with an engine out, don't depart. Either take some weight off, wait for lower temperatures, etc. That solves most of the problems right there.

That's not correct at all.

A lot of SIDs have climb gradients due to many different reasons (not only terrain, but also noise abatement, airspace structure, military shooting areas, etc.). One of the best examples for that is ZRH. Whoever departed out of there on RWY 28 knows what I am talking about. SID for ZRH is a bunch of turns which basically take you back overhead the airport with a teardrop and then continue to whereever you want to go.
The EOSID (that's what you are talking about, Engine Out SID, which is developed for each and every RWY) for RWY 28 (at least with my company) is something like 7.5 DME KLO RT follow R280 KLO and so on.

Thilo



- When dreams take flight, follow them -
User currently offlineMiller22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (4 years 6 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4722 times:

DashTrash,GLEN, and FlyinTLow,

All great information, thanks!

It's my understanding that the escape procedures are carrier and aircraft specific. Is this the case?


User currently offlineGLEN From Switzerland, joined Jun 2005, 219 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (4 years 6 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4673 times:



Quoting Miller22 (Reply 9):
It's my understanding that the escape procedures are carrier and aircraft specific. Is this the case?

Normally they are not aircraft specific. As all planes require the same climb gradient in the engine-out case (see reply 7) they can use the same engine-failure climb out procedure. As a 4-engine aircraft requires a slightly higher gradient you are save on a procedure which is designed for a 2-engine a/c anyway.
There can be cases where a procedure might be aircraft specific (or only for a group of aircraft). E.g. if there is a speed limit in the procedure for a turn to stay within the protected area.

These procedures can be carrier specific, but there are many companies having them designed and calculated by someone else - therefore many carriers have the same procedures from one supplier.



"The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view." - Albert Einstein
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Single Engine Escape Procedures
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
...Single Engine Taxi... posted Thu Jul 10 2008 21:11:48 by Boeing727
Single Engine Aircraft Pax Rule posted Wed May 14 2008 13:23:07 by AlexEU
Single Engine A/c: Ball Not Centered, What To Do? posted Sun Apr 20 2008 05:04:46 by Kay
Single Engine Taxis Overrated? posted Sat Sep 29 2007 04:50:10 by Apodino
Single Engine IFR--For Hire? posted Mon Sep 17 2007 09:33:28 by Dw747400
Single Engine Sea Rating Add-on posted Fri May 11 2007 19:12:22 by ATCT
Twin Pushers: Single Engine Aerodynamics posted Wed Apr 11 2007 23:23:32 by CptSpeaking
Advice For Single Engine Bush Plane posted Mon Jan 22 2007 05:08:43 by BHMBAGLOCK
Single Engine Airliners Of The Future? posted Wed Nov 29 2006 15:59:29 by DHHornet
Single Engine Over Water Rules posted Tue Sep 19 2006 18:11:55 by AirTran737

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format