Another interview what if question...

[Ian J]

Originally Posted by WalterSobchak

"Surely you can't be serious?"

How did you pass an check ride? The whole point of v speeds is to prevent actions like that. You chop the power, you will be off the end I guarantee it! You will have positive performance per part 25 certification. When I flew freight I lost 4 engines in 4 years. 1 was a crankshaft failure shortly after rotation in an Aztec. It climbed out about 400 ft/min(it was light and cool) I made it up to a 1000 agl came back around pumped the gear down and landed safely. Thats not even a transport category airplane. If I would have done something dumb like chop the power it would have went off the end and god knows how that would turn out. I hope you are just inexperienced and your company doesn't teach things like that.

He is serious, and don't call him Surely.

[jtrain609]

I dunno bro, knowing what V1 means *should* be part of any checkride that involves an aircraft that has one. I used the "if the gear isn't up, we're aborting and going off the end" method in part 23 aircraft, but in part 25 aircraft you've gotta trust those engineers and not be a cowboy.

[zmiller4]

Originally Posted by jtrain609

I dunno bro, knowing what V1 means *should* be part of any checkride that involves an aircraft that has one. I used the "if the gear isn't up, we're aborting and going off the end" method in part 23 aircraft, but in part 25 aircraft you've gotta trust those engineers and not be a cowboy.

What mr. train said.

V1 and you're flying unless something really screwy happens like (obviously) a dual engine flameout. It's simple. I haven't flown a 1900, but even in the ATR (which had relatively low V1's compared to the rocket ship-like speeds of the CRJ200) it always looked like the end of the runway was coming up really fast at V1. At 25 feet above the runway, I don't think there's a runway in the country that you wouldn't be off the end of if you tried to chop the power in an RJ.

[ppragman]

Originally Posted by zmiller4

What mr. train said.

V1 and you're flying unless something really screwy happens like (obviously) a dual engine flameout. It's simple. I haven't flown a 1900, but even in the ATR (which had relatively low V1's compared to the rocket ship-like speeds of the CRJ200) it always looked like the end of the runway was coming up really fast at V1. At 25 feet above the runway, I don't think there's a runway in the country that you wouldn't be off the end of if you tried to chop the power in an RJ.

At max gross or maybe above we use 114, 118, 119. 114 = V1, 118 = Vr, 119 = V2. Usually if we're using the 7L, the leftover ALD looks pretty good to get it back down.

One of the guys in Dutch planted it when the wx was ######, he wouldn't have been able to climb out and the wind coming over ballyhoo prolly would have killed him when he hit the shear.

As for reliability, they are very reliable, however, a few years ago, they were having a problem with the oil pumps. I guess the pressure was reading alright, but the engines weren't getting any oil and were eating themselves alive or something like that. Anyhoo, I know what V1 means, and I understand the implications. But if you'll read my post, I'm asking for what other people think about the issue. Now, however, I'm pissed. I post one thing on here, and suddenly I'm a dumbass who shouldn't have passed his checkride? Screw that, I'm not PIC anyway, so I have no real authority in the matter. Am I learning? Hell yes, I'm I progressing? Hell yes, and by the time I'm done working there, I'm going to be significantly better than when I got there. I come to JC because it seems to have useful information with professionals that seem to care very deeply about what their doing, and for all of those out there, thanks a lot, you guys, however what I don't need is comments like "how did you pass your checkride." What an incredible waste of my time. Go do something productive instead of insulting me, makes me wonder why I even waste so much time here.

[Doug Taylor]

So, just to wrap it up, you do know that under 99.99% of circumstances, you're going to want to continue the climb, yes?

[Snuggle]

I wouldn't want to chop and drop a 1900 after an engine failure. During a v1 cut it's an instant reaction to fly the airplane and your call outs / emergency procedure should follow. If you try and chop and drop that plane it's likely to go ALL OVER THE PLACE as you pull that power back. After the engine fails, just to keep it straight you would have put a lot of rudder into the operating engine. Pulling that power out would be ugly. In the sim we had a scenario.... 2000 lbs overweight...gear stuck down....v1 cut.. the plane still climbed.

There's also a good chance you would scare the crap out of the other guy you are flying with. It would probably cause confusion and the results most likely wouldn't be good.

[Snuggle]

To answer the interview question...

If we have an engine failure at or above v1 we are going flying!

[jettison IT]

I would only land if the other engine quit too. .

[jtrain609]

Originally Posted by ppragman

At max gross or maybe above we use 114, 118, 119. 114 = V1, 118 = Vr, 119 = V2. Usually if we're using the 7L, the leftover ALD looks pretty good to get it back down.

One of the guys in Dutch planted it when the wx was ######, he wouldn't have been able to climb out and the wind coming over ballyhoo prolly would have killed him when he hit the shear.

As for reliability, they are very reliable, however, a few years ago, they were having a problem with the oil pumps. I guess the pressure was reading alright, but the engines weren't getting any oil and were eating themselves alive or something like that. Anyhoo, I know what V1 means, and I understand the implications. But if you'll read my post, I'm asking for what other people think about the issue. Now, however, I'm pissed. I post one thing on here, and suddenly I'm a dumbass who shouldn't have passed his checkride? Screw that, I'm not PIC anyway, so I have no real authority in the matter. Am I learning? Hell yes, I'm I progressing? Hell yes, and by the time I'm done working there, I'm going to be significantly better than when I got there. I come to JC because it seems to have useful information with professionals that seem to care very deeply about what their doing, and for all of those out there, thanks a lot, you guys, however what I don't need is comments like "how did you pass your checkride." What an incredible waste of my time. Go do something productive instead of insulting me, makes me wonder why I even waste so much time here.

I guess I'm gonna keep up the insults, because one of us is missing something here.

You said he wouldn't have been able to climb out if he lost an engine? Well there are some engineers at Beech that'd love to chat with you about that, because they certified your aircraft to be able to climb out at max gross weight at X climb gradient on one engine, so your buddy would have been able to climb out.

Now that goes out the window if you're operating over weight, and it doesn't matter if you don't run any calculations to figure out what your max weight for that departure is going to be.

So unless you're flying something like maybe a Beech 99 and not a 1900, which is a part 23 certified twin, then something isn't adding up here.

V1 means you're going no matter what, and if you've done your homework you know you'll out climb anything in your way or have an escape path. If you don't, you're a fool for departing in the first place eh?

[Dugie8]

I think I see, maybe, where your confusion on this issue may be coming from. You are looking at max weight numbers and seeing how close together they are and thinking a safer course of action would be to keep the airplane, or put the airplane, back on the ground because V2 is very close to V1. Not a totally unreasonable thought, IF the only factor at play here was the speed.

I think you are thinking in one dimension about these V speeds, you have to take into account a second dimension, your position along the runway.

Lets just play with the numbers a little bit, at V1 of 114 knots you are at a point on the runway that there is enough break energy and runway in front of you to stop AND/OR enough runway in front of you to accelerate to Vr and climb to 35' above the departure end of the runway. Now you look at a V2 of 118 and see only a 4 knot difference but you are not seeing how much farther down the runway you really are, probably somewhere around 500 to 700 feet, a lot of pavement when you think about it. That 500 or so feet isn't the only thing to consider, keep in mind the additional energy now needed to stop the airplane, that 4 knots equals about an additional 200-300 feet or so of landing distance (rule of thumb), add that to the already 500 or so feet of runway you have already chewed up, that is getting real close 1000 feet of extra runway needed, all over 4 knots. This doesn't even begin to bring into account the distance needed to bring the airplane back to the runway.

[WalterSobchak]

Beating a Dead horse

[FlyOrDie]

Its Alaska there's a few loose cannons up here. Aborting at Dutch probably made a lot of sense considering once you leave do you really want to go back and do you even want to try and go someplace else on one engine. http://airnav.com/airport/PADU

I'd say 50% of Captains I've been flying with brief a V2 abort when departing out of Anchorage. Its not standard but it sure makes more sense safety wise than flying an airplane around on 3 engines and risk losing another. Hopefully my thinking won't get too tainted by flying up here.

[Queboat]

i cant believe this is even being discussed. go past v1 and you're going flying.

[Sig]

How far below Vref are you at V1 or V2 for the flap setting used at takeoff?

[Screaming_Emu]

You would have to have a redonkulously long runway to be able to rotate, climb for a little cut the power and land again....pretty much no matter what turboprop/jet you're in. If you don't feel comfortable doing a single engine approach, you probably shouldn't be doing what you're doing.

[WalterSobchak]

Originally Posted by Screaming_Emu

You would have to have a redonkulously long runway to be able to rotate, climb for a little cut the power and land again....pretty much no matter what turboprop/jet you're in. If you don't feel comfortable doing a single engine approach, you probably shouldn't be doing what you're doing.

WORD

[Polarbear]

Originally Posted by EDUC8-or

What were they flying and what happened? You mentioned the 1900 earlier, I've heard those engines are very reliable.

After a half century of development and production, I can't think of a more reliable engine.

If your not comfortable returning to field under any conditions, don't take-off. The first moment you give into peer pressure your going to give mtx job security (at best) and a lot of blood cleanup at worst.

[Trybysky]

[quote=ppragman;729609]I dunno, often times we are really heavy, I'm talkin' prolly over gross because the guys in the hangar throw more on than they should. I'm a little cuirous about how much of my "amazing" climb performance would be gone if I lost it. Especially comming out of Dutch with a full load of crab. Hmm... I'm not sure that the "v1, I'm flying now" method is always the best method.

/QUOTE]

Ok, I understand what you are trying to ask and I don't agree with your decision. Like what has been said on the board for two pages now, V1 or above...you fly. PERIOD.

As far as being "prolly over gross"...that can and should be avoided at all costs. Those guys in the hangar should get their faces beaten in for throwing extra ##### on after it's been weighed. Isn't there a Cheif Pilot around that can have your back on that crap? Either your CP or Capt needs to be a little more mindful of the regs, or they need to grow a spine if they care but are still flying heavy. As SIC you still have a say...if you are comfortable with throwing all the performace charts out the window and flying around in AK then so be it. I'm not. I've flown pleanty in Ak to know that it is a different beast. I'd stay at gross or below, then I know I can fly SE.

[jynxyjoe]

uhmm.. been reading... i'm not sure WHAT i'm reading..

youre past V1 and the engine fails you go. its not a question unless the plane is unflyable. the plane flies fine on one engine; its CERTIFIED that way. follow company profiles. its not rocket science, its also not up for discussion in the cockpit in that situation OR when its VFR.

basically what queboat said.