You're on the approach when there's a deer!

[EnRoute]

Easy answer! HONK THE HORN!!!

[minitour]

Originally Posted by Polar742

If I remember right, the criteria for a balked landing is a 3.3 % gradient with ALL ENGINES running for twins.

As a note, that is significantly higher than the 2.5% OEI gradient for takeoff.

That would be "Landing Climb".

Once again...from 25.119

Originally Posted by 25.119 Landing Climb: All-Engines Operating

In the landing configuration, the steady gradient of climb may not be less than 3.2 percent, with the engines at the power or thrust that is available 8 seconds after initiation of movement of the power or thrust controls from the minimum flight idle to the go-around power or thrust setting—
(a) In non-icing conditions, with a climb speed of VREFdetermined in accordance with §25.125(b)(2)(i); and
(b) In icing conditions with the landing ice accretion defined in appendix C, and with a climb speed of VREFdetermined in accordance with §25.125(b)(2)(ii).

...emphasis is mine.

200ft/nm is ~3.3%
(200/6076)*100=3.291639236%

-mini

[400A]

...and those are certification numbers, not what you need on any given day. I think all part 25 airplanes have an "approach climb" chart which is basically your single engine missed chart, you must be able to do at least 200 foot/nm (3.3%) or higher as dictated by the missed (I only know of a couple of missed approaches that require higher than 3.3%).

Balked landing charts are two engine. I misspoke in an earlier post calling the approach climb chart the balked landing chart, my blonde is showing.

[minitour]

Originally Posted by 400A

...and those are certification numbers

Correct. The minimum that any transport category aircraft must show for certification. You can get an aircraft type certificated as transport category with numbers as low as 3.2%.

I think all part 25 airplanes have an "approach climb" chart which is basically your single engine missed chart, you must be able to do at least 200 foot/nm (3.3%) or higher as dictated by the missed (I only know of a couple of missed approaches that require higher than 3.3%).

It's been a while, but in my plane and I'm sure many others...one set of climb data is Net while another is Gross. I believe the OEI (approach climb) data is net while the landing climb (all engines) data is gross. That would make the most sense to me...I'd want to know worst case that I could make it out (that would be single engine...and me at the helm vs. some hero). With gross data, if you're showing 3.3%, you still might not make it what with pilots not being super-awesome and all.

...my blonde is showing.

...Must..........resist.........urge.............. .........................to...post.....childish... ..remarks.......

-mini

[400A]

Originally Posted by minitour

Correct. The minimum that any transport category aircraft must show for certification. You can get an aircraft type certificated as transport category with numbers as low as 3.2%.


It's been a while, but in my plane and I'm sure many others...one set of climb data is Net while another is Gross. I believe the OEI (approach climb) data is net while the landing climb (all engines) data is gross. That would make the most sense to me...I'd want to know worst case that I could make it out (that would be single engine...and me at the helm vs. some hero). With gross data, if you're showing 3.3%, you still might not make it what with pilots not being super-awesome and all.




...Must..........resist.........urge.............. .........................to...post.....childish... ..remarks.......

-mini

I don't know if gross numbers are published, even if they were the numbers for 2 engine climbs are very high (20% and higher) so it is almost a moot issue if it is gross or net (I think the difference between the two is .7%)

The performance section of the Beechjets manual lays out the limiting factors for landing weight (as do all part 25 airplanes).

Landing weight is limited by the most restrictive of the following
Structural limit
Break energy limit
Approach climb limit (anti ice on and off)


There is a note stating that approach climb will ALWAYS be more restrictive than balked landing climb .

All the other transport category aircraft I have flown have been the same way, from the turbo props to 3 and 4 engine heavies, to the "small" corporate jets.

It has been a while since flying the citation, I want to say that was a part 23 airplane and that might be where some gross climb gradient charts may be, again, the blonde is showing....

One big thing to keep in mind as well. A lot of these climb gradient charts are based on flying straight ahead. A turn as shallow as 15 degrees can kill most if not all of your single engine climb performance. Airport data, or OEI procedures usually have a 15 degree bank accounted for in the data, where manufacture data does not.

[Polar742]

Originally Posted by minitour

That would be "Landing Climb".

Once again...from 25.119




...emphasis is mine.

200ft/nm is ~3.3%
(200/6076)*100=3.291639236%

-mini

Sorry, I missed that post.

Back to the far side of the planet for me...

[dasleben]

Solid discussion, guys. Keep it up.

[minitour]

Originally Posted by 400A

I don't know if gross numbers are published

They are for ours. I'm sure others as well.

It has been a while since flying the citation, I want to say that was a part 23 airplane and that might be where some gross climb gradient charts may be, again, the blonde is showing....

Depends. The 500 series is a part 25 plane. The 501 and 551 and Cjs are part 23, but the Cjs are certified with Part 25 climb performance (not sure on the 501 & 551). Next tour, I'll check to see which is gross and which is net if I can remember. Pretty sure Approach climb is net though, as I said...that would make the most sense.

One big thing to keep in mind as well. A lot of these climb gradient charts are based on flying straight ahead. A turn as shallow as 15 degrees can kill most if not all of your single engine climb performance. Airport data, or OEI procedures usually have a 15 degree bank accounted for in the data, where manufacture data does not.

True there.

Originally Posted by Polar742

Sorry, I missed that post.

Back to the far side of the planet for me...

HAH it happens. That was back when I was talking down to everyone.

-mini

[EDUC8-or]

Originally Posted by FlyChicaga

My point is, if you think you can get in, shouldn't you make sure you can get out?

A balked landing is similar to a takeoff, no? So if you can depart the airport, you should be able to accomplish a balked landing.

My thoughts exactly. A balked landing is very similar, but in most circumstances you're going to have more energy and better performance. Unless you're flying something slower or with great performance it's pretty rare to rotate in the first 3000' of the runway.

We can talk about all of the what ifs, flying out of Aspen, etc... Could an engine fail on the go around? Could we have a problem retracting the gear or flaps? The list goes on and on. But couldn't some of these things happen on takeoff as well? Are we going to fly into ASE and not takeoff because we could lose an engine at V1? What if a reverser inadvertently deploys just after takeoff?

Remember what happened to the Mesa ERJ when the CA said go around is not an option? If box yourself into a corner bad things can and will happen. I generally don't like to make absolute statements, so given the option of hitting a deer or side of a mountain I'll take the deer, but you've really reduced your options if you're in this situation. There's always the possibility of failures on a go around, but if I see a deer on the runway there's an extremely strong possibility I'm going around and flying the published missed unless otherwise instructed by ATC. If something is already broken I'm flying to an airport with a nice long runway that's not in mountainous terrain where a go around isn't an issue. If something is on fire and we can't put it out, we're running out of gas, or the airplane is difficult to control we're landing and having venison for dinner.

Funny story, one of my buddies from my initial class had a coyote run out onto the runway on his first flight after IOE. He went around, didn't even have to think twice about it.

[Polar742]

I thought about this thread yesterday.

I was reading our NavData book, in which many ICAO rules are addressed. One would apply here (don't ask me to quote it, you can goooooooogle yourself)

The rule ends up in this manner: If the airplane is unable to make a climb gradient sufficient to remain clear of the terrain, then it's up to the operator to raise the DH to ensure the aircraft will remain safe from terrain.

In there also is the criteria for the missed approach/balked landing. They use different terms, but it is based on the takeoff criteria for the runway with additional clearance for the higher initial energy state of the aircraft.

It's ICAO, that's just the way it is.

BTW, mini, as I was revisiting the thread, my post that you commented on was to emphasize that the balked landing performance for a Part 25 airplane is ALL engines running. Again, given the higher energy state of the aircraft should give a good performance versus a V1 cut or a standing takeoff.

[mjg407]

Originally Posted by Polar742

If I remember right, the criteria for a balked landing is a 3.3 % gradient with ALL ENGINES running for twins.

As a note, that is significantly higher than the 2.5% OEI gradient for takeoff.

So, while operators that have tailored OEI procedures have an advantage for running higher takeoff weights, and thus can use that for a balked landing procedure, operators that don't use specific turn procedures for OEI operations must use good judgment for terrain avoidance.

Kinda goes back to using your experience as an aviator and in a specific aircraft to know what it can and can not do.

At least, that's how I see it.

Martin,
Just out of curiosity, do plan on two engine climbouts or three? I know that in the mighty O, a dual engine failure after rotate is DOOOOOOM.

[Polar742]

Originally Posted by mjg407

Martin,
Just out of curiosity, do plan on two engine climbouts or three? I know that in the mighty O, a dual engine failure after rotate is DOOOOOOM.

Three.

If we lose 2, it'll be hairy. Just start dumping gas and get some religion.

[Doug Taylor]

Oh, shizzle, man, the ER's the same way when we're down to one. Some guys'll brief "autodump" and others will say, "Wait until you're really scared and start dumping".

75, not so much.

I had a shutdown in an MD-90 out of ORD once and I learned a valauble lesson that if you let yourself get a 1/2 dot low, well, that's the best you'll maintain.

'A half dot low, but I'll keep a little smash on, sir."

[Polar742]

Originally Posted by Doug Taylor

Oh, shizzle, man, the ER's the same way when we're down to one. Some guys'll brief "autodump" and others will say, "Wait until you're really scared and start dumping".

75, not so much.

I had a shutdown in an MD-90 out of ORD once and I learned a valauble lesson that if you let yourself get a 1/2 dot low, well, that's the best you'll maintain.

'A half dot low, but I'll keep a little smash on, sir."

I've learned to love that I ride around in a plane where if we lose one of anything, it's usually a non-issue.

Engine loss? Still operating under normal procedures.

Oooohh rah!

[mjg407]

Originally Posted by Polar742

Three.

If we lose 2, it'll be hairy. Just start dumping gas and get some religion.

That's what I figured. EP-3 at 142K out of Bahrain if you lost two EP was prepare to Ditch......

[Baronman]

If I like the overnight or want to avoid a future overnight, I smash the deer.....Looks like I'll be spending some time wherever ;-)

Otherwise...go around....call airport ops...FBO....ops....to see if they can get out there to get the sucker off the RWY. Then go at it again.

[BobDDuck]

Interestingly enough, yesterday on my deadhead down to Charlotte we rolled out on to the runway and then rejected the takeoff after about 10 feet. Apparently two coyotes walked across the runway in front of the plane.

[gatorbuc99]

Funny i ran into this thread. Few days ago took the lady up for a spin, few touch and goes around the metro area in a 172. On one of the landings, right as dusk, over the numbers, flock of fowl just shy of the 1K markers. Decided to float and land long. Throught process was if i applied full power i might startle the fowl right into my path, and if i continued, i'd chop 'em all up. Looking back on it, not sure if i made the right decision even though it turned out ok.

Incidentally, earlier in the day, same flight, almost ran into a deer taxiing out for departure..maybe i should have taken a hint then and there

[fo4ever]

Originally Posted by 400A

Really? You guys brief the ODP off of the back of the 10-9 chart for the runway you are shooting the approach to?

Yes!

[Scandinavian13]

Originally Posted by BajtheJino

What size plane am I in?
I land, hit the deer and laugh about it later.
Its a great story.

haha

Originally Posted by dasleben

Something tells me TERPS takes into account a balked landing from below DA/MDA for their missed approach procedures.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, though.

To some degree, yes. There is a Missed Approach surface. The missed app surface is a 40:1 slope. That 40:1 slope begins at the MAP, so if you're past the MAP, you're under the slope and not guaranteed clearance. If there is an approach procedure to the opposite end of the runway, you could vaguely justify it by the Approach Surface to that end of the runway, which extends from that end's threshold at a 50:1 (34:1 farther out) slope. Provided you know you can climb at 50:1 from the reciprocal threshold (if there is an approach to that end), or you can make up the difference to get to the Missed Approach Surface over the runway area (where you're protected by the Object Free Zone), you should be safe. The amount of mental work you'd need to be assured of all that might be a bit much for a spur-of-the-moment deer avoidance and climb out, though. It might be an argument for calculating your climb performance for a missed approach before you go.

The above is a vague recollection of what I did when I worked for an airport planning/engineering firm, so it might not be 100% accurate, but I thought I'd share what I recall.

There are a few pages in this document that show the surfaces graphically. If you end up reading any of it, do realise that whoever made it never proofed it. There is a "specially" (as in 'specially, or especially) and an "abstruction to navigation" in there that I've caught so far:
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/FA...S_105811_7.pdf