Quote:
Originally Posted by jynxyjoe  If you are afraid of "fighting it" then build a few extra knots on that long ass runway and then rotate. It's a dead engine, it didn't fall off or catch on fire. Do the procedures up in the air, come back and land. Why fight training? |
I tend to think that some of the ways we think about things are a little dangerous. Frankly I don't know what the right answer is, training is good, and going into the air and flying the approach is all well and dandy, but a million other things factor in, not the least including how the crew is feeling, what the weather is, runway condition (e.g. you definitely don't abort on slick runways). If you have plenty of runway, why is it that its a bad idea to use it. The problem is we have no metric to detirmine what "plenty of runway" is, so we need it so that people can have another outs.
The erj crew mentioned above probably wanted to continue the takeoff, but that would have killed them. There was a CO2 leak on the hazmat that a crew at my old company was flying, the only reason they survived at all was they aborted (presumeably after V1, as they just barely made the ramp) they passed out in the airplane after managing to feather the motors in a confused oxygen deprived haze. V1 continue flying would have been a death sentence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup The reason IMO for the V1 abort go/no-go is to take all guesswork out of it. While you are thinking "hey I have enough runway to stop here even though I am past V1" you are running off the side of the runway. The fact that the airplane may be able to stop after a V1 is irrelevant. |
That's the problem. We need a metric to figure that out. And may be able to stop is not exactly accurate. I know that the 1900 will stop in 8000' with brakes alone and no beta, but the problem is that we have no way to judge that on a daily basis with varying field length, wx, etc. Hence the potential need for a "Vbrake" or something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCL_128 Statements like these are why Velo gives you such a hard time. |
Ehh, I'm not trying to impress the guy, I just don't think its a good idea to mindlessly follow any procedure. There has to be reasons, justifications, and additional courses of actions. You've got to think. Even if its a split second "this airplane cannot safely fly." and throw the power levers to idle/reverse. 999 times out of 1000 a V1 about is what's required and what's the way to go, and above it were flying. However, there are plenty of times when its not. I know two guys who aborted and are breathing because of it, and I've thought a lot since then about what I would do. Company procedures and the Flight Manual say continue the takeoff, nothing is really
that abnormal right? This will be fine, just like in training. Those guys are alive because they recognized what was abnormal, even though it was subtle, and realized that the consequences for not reacting fast enough. They aborted and are alive. I'd rather be alive than have followed procedure right over the trees then nose down into the river.
To put it in perspective, a guy I flew with who's a captain with 26000TT, about 20,000 of it is in the 1900 once told me "never take a problem into the air that you can't handle on the ground." I don't know if that's always the right solution, but it seems to have worked for him real well.
Conversly I know a guy who continued after V1 because he knew that in PADU even with a balanced field length the winds were so chaotic that he wouldn't be able keep the airplane on the ground and stop in time. So he punched it and made it off the ground. I've also heard of brake release being v1 in PADU for the DC6s.
Idealy, abort at V1. However, I don't recommend anyone follow procedure to their grave.