FYI, the RCAF accident I quoted was on a touch-n-go. They did not use the full runway length. They started the go while still on the roll-out from the landing.
The point I was trying to make was that they had a more runway than was the minimum required, and used most of it, still with 1500' to spare.
Intersection take offs with Encore's Q400
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
goingnowherefast
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1990
- Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am
-
Eric Janson
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1250
- Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am
Re: Intersection take offs with Encore's Q400
Some links:-
216 pages of Performance info from airbus.
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/2263.pdf
airbus definition of V1.
http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_g ... _SEQ07.pdf
airbus briefing on the "Stop or Go" decision.
http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_g ... -SEQ04.pdf
216 pages of Performance info from airbus.
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/2263.pdf
airbus definition of V1.
http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_g ... _SEQ07.pdf
airbus briefing on the "Stop or Go" decision.
http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/media_g ... -SEQ04.pdf
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business
Re: Intersection take offs with Encore's Q400
Eric, thank you for the link to the Airbus briefing, I always appreciate safety briefings. Of note, it does stress the importance of a go decision at V1, however they describe situations where a stop decision would be appropriate at or above V1.
"The Captain can consider to reject a takeoff when the aircraft is above V1, only in the event that the aircraft is not able to ensure a safe flight."
Windshear, would be a scenario I envision where having the extra runway might be important and is talked about.
Pilots have been known to make mistakes and having the ability to correct that mistake with a cushion is something I hope to never need but will always appreciate I had if I need it!
An entire hockey team died and the report indicates they could've stopped after V1 on the remaining runway after the first failed attempt to get airborne.
Complex,
My AOM comes with a warning that basically reads, a decision to reject above V1 on a balanced field will result in the aircraft being unable to stop on remaining runway. It does not however prohibit us from making a decision to stop, not going against any procedure at all. Frankly, I would rather be in the back with a crew who would choose a low speed excursion as opposed to one who will die trying to get an unflyable airplane in the air because they are over the decision speed. There are examples of near catastrophies with incorrect flap settings, barely getting airborne at the end of the runway and an intersection takeoff may have been the difference of all aboard dying. As far as I know there is no warning to indicate an incorrect flap setting, if my performance has indicated flap 20 but flap 8 is selected, I'll still get a takeoff ok indication.
I have had situations where when I was offered an intersection and sent for new data, it went from reduced thrust flap 8, to rated and flap 20, why would I choose that!
It does surprise me that a pilot of a heavy would advocate for runway behind them and I truly hope you are the minority!
"The Captain can consider to reject a takeoff when the aircraft is above V1, only in the event that the aircraft is not able to ensure a safe flight."
Windshear, would be a scenario I envision where having the extra runway might be important and is talked about.
Pilots have been known to make mistakes and having the ability to correct that mistake with a cushion is something I hope to never need but will always appreciate I had if I need it!
An entire hockey team died and the report indicates they could've stopped after V1 on the remaining runway after the first failed attempt to get airborne.
Complex,
My AOM comes with a warning that basically reads, a decision to reject above V1 on a balanced field will result in the aircraft being unable to stop on remaining runway. It does not however prohibit us from making a decision to stop, not going against any procedure at all. Frankly, I would rather be in the back with a crew who would choose a low speed excursion as opposed to one who will die trying to get an unflyable airplane in the air because they are over the decision speed. There are examples of near catastrophies with incorrect flap settings, barely getting airborne at the end of the runway and an intersection takeoff may have been the difference of all aboard dying. As far as I know there is no warning to indicate an incorrect flap setting, if my performance has indicated flap 20 but flap 8 is selected, I'll still get a takeoff ok indication.
I have had situations where when I was offered an intersection and sent for new data, it went from reduced thrust flap 8, to rated and flap 20, why would I choose that!
It does surprise me that a pilot of a heavy would advocate for runway behind them and I truly hope you are the minority!
Re: Intersection take offs with Encore's Q400
Incident: Jet Airways B773 at London on Aug 30th 2016, unsafe departure
By Simon Hradecky, created Thursday, Oct 6th 2016 16:00Z, last updated Thursday, Oct 6th 2016 16:00Z
A Jet Airways Boeing 777-300, registration VT-JEK performing flight 9W-117 from London Heathrow,EN (UK) to Mumbai (India), lined up Heathrow's runway 27L at taxiway S4E, about 1200 meters/4000 feet down the runway (total runway length 3660 meters/12000 feet leaving about 2400 meters/8000 feet remaining for that takeoff). The aircraft departed, climbed through 1000 feet MSL about 3200 meters/1.7nm past the runway end and continued the flight to Mumbai for a safe landing about 8:10 hours after departure.
However, local residents complained to police about a low flying aircraft, that had barely cleared the aerodrome perimeter fence. Police contacted Air Traffic Control at Heathrow Airport, who identified the aircraft and notified United Kingdom's AAIB. The AAIB opened an investigation into the occurrence and informed India's Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), who suspended both captain and first officer of the flight pending the investigation.
The airline reported there had been no injuries and no damage, the airline however investigates the occurrence as part of their active safety management, too. The aircraft performed an intersection departure, thus not using the full runway length, however, did not climb to required height in time and crossed the airport perimeter wall and traffic on the road just past the wall at very low height.
By Simon Hradecky, created Thursday, Oct 6th 2016 16:00Z, last updated Thursday, Oct 6th 2016 16:00Z
A Jet Airways Boeing 777-300, registration VT-JEK performing flight 9W-117 from London Heathrow,EN (UK) to Mumbai (India), lined up Heathrow's runway 27L at taxiway S4E, about 1200 meters/4000 feet down the runway (total runway length 3660 meters/12000 feet leaving about 2400 meters/8000 feet remaining for that takeoff). The aircraft departed, climbed through 1000 feet MSL about 3200 meters/1.7nm past the runway end and continued the flight to Mumbai for a safe landing about 8:10 hours after departure.
However, local residents complained to police about a low flying aircraft, that had barely cleared the aerodrome perimeter fence. Police contacted Air Traffic Control at Heathrow Airport, who identified the aircraft and notified United Kingdom's AAIB. The AAIB opened an investigation into the occurrence and informed India's Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), who suspended both captain and first officer of the flight pending the investigation.
The airline reported there had been no injuries and no damage, the airline however investigates the occurrence as part of their active safety management, too. The aircraft performed an intersection departure, thus not using the full runway length, however, did not climb to required height in time and crossed the airport perimeter wall and traffic on the road just past the wall at very low height.
Re: Intersection take offs with Encore's Q400
By Simon Hradecky, created Thursday, Sep 17th 2015 14:02Z, last updated Tuesday, Feb 16th 2016 23:07Z
A Qatar Airways Boeing 777-300, registration A7-BAC performing flight QR-778 from Miami,FL (USA) to Doha (Qatar) with 279 people on board, lined up runway 09 at taxiway T1 (approximately 2600 meters/8500 feet takeoff distance available, full runway length 3968 meters/13,016 feet) and departed Miami's runway 09 but struck the approach lights runway 27 during departure. Both tower, departure controllers as well as crew maintained routine communication. The aircraft continued to destination for a landing without further incident about 13.5 hours later.
On Sep 17th 2015 the FAA reported the aircraft struck approach lights on departure from Miami and continued to destination. The aircraft received substantial damage to its belly, the occurrence was rated an accident.
I think I've made my point, also Complex, please provide a definition of airmanship that includes operational performance in it. Safety and professionalism go with airmanship, protecting the bottom line of the company makes you a good employee, but I completely reject the notion that an intersection departure is "as safe" as full length and doing it to save a few bucks is not displaying good airmanship, over and out!
A Qatar Airways Boeing 777-300, registration A7-BAC performing flight QR-778 from Miami,FL (USA) to Doha (Qatar) with 279 people on board, lined up runway 09 at taxiway T1 (approximately 2600 meters/8500 feet takeoff distance available, full runway length 3968 meters/13,016 feet) and departed Miami's runway 09 but struck the approach lights runway 27 during departure. Both tower, departure controllers as well as crew maintained routine communication. The aircraft continued to destination for a landing without further incident about 13.5 hours later.
On Sep 17th 2015 the FAA reported the aircraft struck approach lights on departure from Miami and continued to destination. The aircraft received substantial damage to its belly, the occurrence was rated an accident.
I think I've made my point, also Complex, please provide a definition of airmanship that includes operational performance in it. Safety and professionalism go with airmanship, protecting the bottom line of the company makes you a good employee, but I completely reject the notion that an intersection departure is "as safe" as full length and doing it to save a few bucks is not displaying good airmanship, over and out!
Re: Intersection take offs with Encore's Q400
If those crews used proper take off numbers they would have departed with plenty of room and never hit anything.
Re: Intersection take offs with Encore's Q400
Ok, so you're infallible, got it!fish4life wrote:If those crews used proper take off numbers they would have departed with plenty of room and never hit anything.
Those were presumably experienced crews who made mistakes, maybe tired, maybe just thought they were incapable of making mistakes so they were fine with taking a few shortcuts here and there.
I don't think at this point I can say anything to convince anyone they are taking extra risks by doing this, some feel it's exactly as safe to leave perfectly good runway behind as a common practice, for me nothing will convince me I'm wrong. I just hope I'm not in the back if you realize this choice was the wrong one!
Re: Intersection take offs with Encore's Q400
I certainly hope I'm never in the back of an aircraft with someone up front who always uses full length in case they mess up the takeoff power/speeds. How would they know full length is enough? If that's your idea of risk management, best stay on the ground.
Re: Intersection take offs with Encore's Q400
I hope I'm not in the back of an aircraft who's pilots thinks they can't make a mistake, much worse in my mind. I happen to be very conscientious and very deliberate with regard to ensuring the correct flap and data is being used, it's not just a checklist item to read and say, it's the opportunity to make sure the data and the flap match but I'm not so arrogant to think it can't happen.ahramin wrote:I certainly hope I'm never in the back of an aircraft with someone up front who always uses full length in case they mess up the takeoff power/speeds. How would they know full length is enough? If that's your idea of risk management, best stay on the ground.
To be frank, I've grown tired of the idiots who can't see that as a general rule full length has benefits over an intersection and I think you are just trying to justify your actions at this point, I'm done.
