Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Martinlest wrote:Starlionblue - thanks, but you are talking about an Airbus of course: I was really asking about Boeings (no FLEX option there!).
I think I was aware of the various options, but wondered if using TOGA had become pretty much standard. I note that "On the 737NG I fly it's 100% always TOGA", even though "TOGA saves a bit of fuel, but the extra wear costs more than the saved fuel".
Thanks for the information guys.
GalaxyFlyer wrote:There’s a big difference between a “derate” and “reduced thrust”. One changes the thrust rating, the other doesn’t.
CanukinUSA wrote:Both methods are ways of obtaining Reduced Thrust. They obviously have different limitations on when and how they may be used. They are there to reduce engine wear to provide longer life, ensure reserve engine thrust availability in the event of some emergencies and better economics.
For details see FAA Advisory Circular 25-13 "Reduced and Derated Thrust (Power) Procedures" at
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policie ... ntID/22468
CanukinUSA wrote:What I was thinking of is the reduced wear and tear on the engine would make it have better reliability in obtaining full thrust if it is required in an emergency event. Obviously one cannot use full thrust if a derated takeoff was planned for a number of reasons mainly aircraft control. Wording was not that good.