Timeline for During a takeoff emergency, is it safer to abort or continue the takeoff if either can be done within the available runway?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 15, 2018 at 1:56 | comment | added | Vikki | @UnrecognizedFallingObject: And here's an example of an unsuccessful abort after V1 for failure to fly. | |
| Apr 1, 2015 at 1:43 | comment | added | UnrecognizedFallingObject | As an example of a successful abort after V1 for failure to fly, see this AvHerald link where a Chautauqua E135 aborted at Vr after their elevators came undone when trying to take off from JFK. | |
| Apr 17, 2014 at 0:04 | history | edited | Danny Beckett | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added MathJaX
|
| Jan 23, 2014 at 2:34 | comment | added | casey | Yes, I see that now. We always did reduced thrust takeoffs when able, so we were already at the highest published V1 for weight and configuration. | |
| Jan 23, 2014 at 2:26 | comment | added | Lnafziger | Well, I'm not suggesting arbitrarily adjusting it (which is why I said to use an assumed temp or similar approved procedure). :-) | |
| Jan 23, 2014 at 2:24 | comment | added | casey | Ah, I way be guilty of mainly reading the title of skimming the question. The primary implication of increasing V1 and aborting is going to be brake performance and in particular, break overheating and fire. So I don't know that I would arbitrarily adjust it. | |
| Jan 23, 2014 at 2:21 | history | edited | casey | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 769 characters in body
|
| Jan 23, 2014 at 2:16 | comment | added | Lnafziger | Well, my question is specifically about calculating a higher V1 (which we know is safe to abort at). While this is a good brief/procedure, it doesn't answer the question that I'm asking. :) | |
| Jan 23, 2014 at 2:14 | history | answered | casey | CC BY-SA 3.0 |