Flight Factor A320 Ultimate

One of our resident real world Airbus A320 pilots takes the recently released Flight Factor A320 Ultimate for a test flight, wringing it out in ways only an actual Airbus pilot could think of….

No automatic alt text available.

So. Here we are. Flight Factor’s A320. I was in two minds about getting it, to start with, in much the same way a farmer might be in two minds about getting Farming Simulator Gold Deluxe, or whatever, for his after work entertainment. But I was also unremittingly curious. A friend of mine on a Discord channel got it the first day it came out, and swayed me to decide to obtain it myself. Of course, real life situations prevented me from getting it immediately, and when I finally did, I had scarce a chance to actually try it, again because of real life.

So, let’s start.

Here it is, while we walk out to it on the north military platform of SPJC, Jorge Chavez Intl., Lima, Peru…

Up the steps, here’s a view from the entrance of One Lima…

And a look back towards the aft galley. Oooh arrr…

And into the busines end…

Okay, straight off the bat, we are EFB certified. Also, someone left the sliding window open. As on the real thing, moving that little latch, on the lower sill, unlocks the window and allows it to slide forwards, in and closed, with a characteristic “ratchet” clicking sound that is accurately reproduced.

The aircraft is all cold and dark, with the GPU connected but not online yet. Also, I can’t help noticing that Lima seems to be hosting a visit from VF-161…

Now, I do have normal procedures that I will follow, roughly (despite there being a checklist on the EFB; I will look at that some other time), but there will also be a few things that I will want to test on the module. Okay, it will not be an exhaustive study, at this point, and once again, I will not perform these in a “reinventing the wheel” fashion. I will therefore use a few of the non-normal procedures out of the ISATM (In Service Aircraft Technical Manual), which is the main reference for company test flights.

Switching on the batteries. There’s that funny, though perfectly logical, quirk that it has of the second battery’s OFF light coming on when you turn on the first one…

I then deviate from the normal power up to test the fire switches on battery power only. Hold on a second. Two things here. It is mostly right, but when on battery power alone, only half of the lights on the Fire PB should light up…

And, on both of the Engine Fire PB tests, only AGENT 1 SQUIB/DISCH PB should light up. It is correct on No. 1 engine, but on No. 2, the AGENT 2 SQUIB/DISCH PB lights up (which is not right, but what is right is that only one of the AGENT lights should light up on battery power alone, albeit the wrong one for ENG No. 2)…

Small, knit picky detail. I’m not bothered. After a brief moment of being on battery power only, the ISIS initializes as it should. All other screens remain off…

Good enough for the moment, I check that I’ve got the GPU available…

And engage it. The bus transfer contactor “clack” is, indeed, very satisfactorily represented. All little things that make you feel at home in the office. Several PBs light up, and a further check of positioning the Annunciator Lights switch to TEST, lights up the whole Christmas tree…

Except those on the RCDR, OXYGEN and CALLS panels on the OHP, and the door lights on the pedestal. None of these are actually working in the simulator model (yet, I suppose)…

That radar control panel, incidentally, is completely INOP at the moment, too.

The DU’s go into their SELF TEST as the DMCs and units get power (very convincing of some great research)…

And the MCDUs initialize to the AIRCRAFT STATUS page (correct!), in which we can see that we have CFM56-5B4 engines. This is good news to me, I would have been slightly uncomfortable with IAEs. Also, it can be seen that I am using a slightly more up to date Nav DB than the stock one, though not the exact current cycle. My friend tells me (he looks at the forums much more than I do) that FF is still working on the DB side of things…

Because the ADIRUs are off and not providing any aircraft position data yet, we immediately get a NAV TCAS FAULT in the MEMO section of the E/WD. This is spot on. Also note, the Oxygen amber REGUL LO PRES warning on the lower ECAM SYSTEM DISPLAY screen. I cannot do anything about getting rid of that, unfortunately, as the OXYGEN panel on the OHP is INOP as yet…

 

After the DU self test, the screens display as they should. Again, as there is no power to the ADIRUs yet, there is no display of attitude or air data. It is time to test the screen transfer feature. Here it is in a standard configuration…

Here, I transfer the Lower ECAM (SD) to the captain’s side ND. Note the right most rotary switch on the SWITCHING panel…

And the PFD/ND transfer button…

Works well. This module is looking all primed up for practicing Abnormal Procedures before each six monthly simulator recurrent. So, back to the Normal Procedures flows. All white lights on the OHP out (which is basically press in all the fuel pump PBs). All the FIRE PB tests work correctly, with the audible CRC, once the electrical system is all completely online (both AGENT lights and all lights on the PB itself)…

All ADIRUs on to NAV, one at a time, left, right, center (for 1, 2, 3 respectively), waiting for the ON BAT light test to go out before selecting the next successive one to NAV…

Once done, on the MCDU INIT (A) page, enter the flight’s data, and hit the ALIGN IR key…

Continuing with Normal Flows, you eventually get to the MAINTENANCE PANEL, up at the right/back of the OHP. This was worth a look, so I ducked out of the normal flows again, and to some surprise, almost all the guarded PBs worked! Here are two being tested. The BLUE hydraulic pump override, and the No. 1 FADEC GROUND POWER. Normally, these two systems have their own sequence of coming on automatically as you progress through a normal start up, but the Maintenance Panel allows you to turn them on independantly (you wouldn’t usually even touch them on a normal flight, so attention to detail is again commended)…

Here is the evidence that they work as they should. Note, No. 1 engine FADEC is alive (no amber crosses, as on No.2), and the BLUE hydraulic system is pressurized, with the electric pump on…

Next, I wanted to check something on the PRESSURIZATION system. As most things Airbus, this is almost always automatic. The two CPCs alternate between 1 and 2 each flight (notice SYS 1, here). But there is a way to change from one to the other. Up on the OHP panel, there’s a PB to select MANUAL pressurization mode. Pushing this to MAN, waiting 10 seconds, and reverting to AUTO, will change the CPC in control of pressurization (ie; in this case from SYS 1 to SYS 2).

Also, while I was here, I wanted to check the VENTILATION EXTRACT OVERRIDE. Pushing that in to OVRD, will change the AVIONICS VENT from open configuration to closed configuration (on the ground). The results will be seen on the CAB PRESS ECAM page. The two little “doors” (INLET and OUTLET) will transit from open to closed. Here goes.

Everything as it started…

MAN press mode for 10 seconds, and EXTRACT to OVRD…

Check? Hey, how about that!

Notice that while I was performing these “checks”, I was also continuing to fill in the flight plan on the MCDU. I use the DIFSRIP method described in the FCTM (there are others who use an alternate “C” sequence, which is equally acceptable). I filled the Flight Plan page out with a departure from RWY 15, ATATU1F SID, linking to the AUATU1 STAR, back to RWY 15, ILS V. For the Alternate, I used the ASIA5F SID, linked to the GEBED2 STAR to Pisco (SPSO). In the Secondary Flight Plan, I concocted a OEI Quick Return, shortening, ATATU1F at PELIK by linking it to LOBUS for the RWY 15 ILS V. Here are a few screens of that, with the ND in PLAN mode (as it should be during input of a flight plan), so you can all see the shenanigans I was up to…

A lot of detail and screenies have been suppressed here, or I will never end this post! Everyone knows how to fill in an MCDU flight plan, anyway.

Then I hard tuned the RAD NAVAIDS. This is done because the Airbus has an autotune function, and if you don’t hard tune them, the FMGS might suddenly decide to tune a different radio than the one you require for a STAR during the execution of that STAR. Not a good thing. However, here I discovered another small discrepancy with reality; when you clear out a hard tuned NAVAID, the associated CRS is also automatically cleared. On the module, you have to clear both. It does not delete the CRS automatically…

No worries, however, as long as you know about it. Next it was onto the INIT (B) page, to enter weights. The EFB provides you with the Weight and Balance Load Sheet…

Which you just check, and enter into the MCDU…

Now, some of that data on the INIT (B) page that can be edited IRL cannot be edited here on the sim. But again, it is not gravely important stuff, just things like manually adjusting ALT TIME and MIN DEST FOB, which some company SOPs for certain airports and routes require a manual edit (particularly, for ETOPS/EDTO operations). Again, not too bothered.

Finally, it is time to finish off the MCDU preparation inputting the PERF data. As I have the real RTOW for Lima, I used my data straight off my iPad. Whether there is a function, therefore, to provide the player with V1, VR, V2 and FLEX for a given airport, conditions and configuration, I do not know. In any event, these figures shouldn’t be guesswork, so there must be something, somewhere, to help out the player who does not have access to any RTOWs…

After this, there was the scan of the EFIS control panel and FCU, setting QNH, ND range and mode, VOR switches on, and initial altitude…

Closing the doors, setting the parking brake, and removing the chocks, finally, I was ready for start up.

Now, in the two previous short flights I have done, I did the normal start up, with APU bleed. This time, I’m going to pretend the APU is INOP, and see if the module can be started using the External Pneumatic Source (for No. 2), and then the Cross Bleed (for No. 1). Here’s the OHP AIR COND configuration for that procedure (PACKS OFF, Engine Bleeds OFF, X-BLEED OPEN)…

Before start checklist, down to the line, Beacon ON, check thrust levers at idle, and below the line. Connect External Pneumatic, ENGINE MODE SELECTOR to IGN/START…

“Starting No. 2”. Engine 2 Master ON. The starter valve opened. It’s spooling! Yeah!

Started a treat. There was a usual PACK 1 OFF / PACK 2 OFF ECAM caution, which is normal and can be cleared with this supplementary procedure start (even if it did happen a little quickly). Check that the GEN engaged, then remove GPU and External Pneumatic.

Now configure the OHP AIR COND for the Cross Bleed Start (PACKS ON, supplying engine bleed ON, receiving engine bleed OFF, X-BLEED OPEN)…

Get a check on the area behind, advance the the No. 2 thrust lever to obtain at least 30 PSI at the starter valves and “Starting engine No. 1”…

Success again. I was truly impressed, however there was no time for sitting there admiring things. I finished the procedure; thrust lever No. 2 to idle, ENGINE MODE SELECTOR NORM, BLEED No. 1 ON, X-BLEED AUTO.

Then the after start flow. Speed brakes ARM, Rudder trim, press for 0.0, Flaps 2, THS to 24.4. After start checklist. Clear left, clear right. Ready to taxi…

Wait. Stop. There is something else I want to test before we roll. Flight Control function and hydraulic sources. So, GREEN and YELLOW hydraulic system pumps and PTU OFF…

Check the HYDRAULIC ECAM page to see that this is the case (some ECAM Warnings and Cautions going off there, too, on the E/WD, but the AIR COND warning is a bit weird, considering I’m only disabling hydraulics. Still WIP, I suppose)…

And then check FLIGHT CONTROL ECAM page. Unsupplied servos for the primary flight controls show up amber, as do the unsupplied spoiler actuators (which are G,Y,B,Y,G, same on both wings, easy to remember). Move the side stick around and check control movement. Then Flaps. I set CONF 1. Slats and flaps hydraulic supply is also easy to remember, it is in alphabetical order from front to back, B,G,Y. Like this; BLUE exclusively for slats, GREEN as dual redundancy actuation system for both slats and flaps, and YELLOW exclusively for flaps. Note, with GREEN and YELLOW offline, only the middile spoiler extends, and only the slats retract to CONF 1 + F. The flap position becomes amber because it cannot move, being unsupplied…

More of the same with the other systems…

PTU check…

It all checked out perfectly. Then I checked the Nose Wheel Steering. On this sim module, it turns out to be on the GREEN system, like the older A320s. All of them on our fleet have the NWS on the YELLOW system, except two older A319s, which have it on GREEN, like this. I don’t really have an idea what serial number this module represents, but in any case, either system for the NWS is acceptable. Now, if they had put it on BLUE, I’d raise an eyebrow. I turned all the hydraulic systems back on, enabled the PTU again, cleared out the ECAM of any residual cautions and warnings, and checked the STATUS “NORMAL”. Good to go, again.

Taxi to holding point RWY 15…thus far I’ve had a great deal of fun going through this module!

Editor’s Note – We’d like to thank @Cygon_Parrot for his fantastic insights into the Flight Factor A320 and how it measures up to reality. If you’d like to continue reading and get some airborne impressions, feel free to join the conversation where this article leaves off: HERE!

Flight Factor A320 Ultimate available: HERE

Laminar Research X-Plane 11 available: HERE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notable Replies

  1. oops! I see I wrote my little float down memory lane in the wrong spot. Great write-up @Cygon_Parrot. And by all accounts an amazing module.

  2. Sryan says:

    What are the opinions on its current state? It’s currently on sale, but still priced pretty steeply at $81.

  3. Yeah. I still haven’t pulled the trigger on it just because at that level of entry point, I feel I’d need to really dedicate some time to learning it properly.

  4. Probably answered further up in the thread…but anyone try it in VR and is it pretty operable?

  5. Sryan says:

    true that. Although if a plane is fun to fly, the hours come easily. I watched some vids and it seems to be in a good spot. I may have had a few hours for myself to spend simming anyway, so…

  6. Had a bit of time this evening…

    Subject for today. Flexing…

    No, no, Miss. Not that sort of flexing. Flexing with the Airbus.

    So, asks @Sryan, how do we calculate a Flexible Take Off assumed temperature for an Airbus A-320? Well, the short answer is…

    As a pilot, you do not.

    You read it off the RTOW (Regulatory Take Off Weight) tables, provided for you by your airline’s Operations Engineering Department, prepared using approved Airbus Industrie methods and tools. I HAVE to say this, please understand, before the fun starts.

    This basically boils down to an application called the FOVE (Flight Operations Versatile Environment). With FOVE, you input certain parameters, such as QNH, wind, runway, aircraft configuration, and TOW, among others. FOVE crunches this up, and spits out your V1/Vr/V2 and Flex Temperature for the given conditions. Now, pilots do not actually have FOVE. It is, as mentioned, and Operations Engineering tool, and the RTOW, produced by Opertaions Engineering using such resources as FOVE, is the pilot’s tool. Here’s an example of an RTOW…

    I saw, used and was trained on the FOVE tool exactly once; at the Initial A-320 course. They show it to you to allow you to know how this data is produced for the A-320. Then it ceases to be your concern. I have still got the training manual for the FOVE tool. Here is a random picture of a page from it, to give you an idea…

    You see, Airbus is very cagey about their data getting out in any great detail, because their competitors could use it for any number of… erm… “strategies”.

    But this is the sim world, right? There is a way, hidden in the FCOM, and not some site that gives you the numbers as mysteriously as the RTOW. You get to do some work.

    Some Preliminary Stuff…

    Let us establish some things, first. This is going to be for the CFM 56-5B4. Now, @Sryan, you probably know a lot of this already, but I have to be reasonably complete. With that said, I might also have a slightly unorthodox approach to explaining this, as I will be trimming of a bit of the “blinding science” padding that surrounds this topic in order to be practical. Text book learners, please be tolerant.

    Like most high-bypass turbines these days, the CFM has (at least, for now) a couple of limitations. The first of these is something called a Flat Rating, and then there is the thermal limitation. Let us expand…

    Any such engine has mechanical (physical) limitations. Let us face it, it is a bunch of metal flying around an axis, and if it goes around too fast, it will begin to shed parts through material failure under centrifigal force. Just to give you these book limitation numbers (which include a margin to actual material failure), they are;

    N1 - 104% = 5,200 rpm.
    N2 - 105% = 15,180 rpm.

    On an ISA day, sea level, the engine will produce 12,010 dekaNewtons of force at these figures, roughly equal to 27,000 lbf, which is the book thrust of the CFM 56-5B4. Even if atmospheric temperature (lower) conditions would allow the engine to run at higher rpm than this, without infringing on the thermal limitation and consequently producing more power, it should not be done. Therefore, this is the Flat Rating. Now, just to confuse matters a bit, engineers express the Flat Rating as a temperature. They are not wrong in a sense, of course, but for the sake of simplicity, this explanation initially gets the point across effectively and reasonably accurately.

    In Airbus jargon, the Flat Rating is known as T-Ref. For the CFM 56-5B4, it is equal to ISA + 29º C. Now, here is why it can be considered a temperature rating.

    Gas turbines, like the core of the CFM that drives the fan, are susceptible to the temperature of the air they intake for the combustion. There are some physics laws that describe this, but to stay simple, if you intake air at a given temperature and thrust setting (max rated), you will get a reasonably predictable higher temperature at the exhaust, through compression and combustion. If you only increase the temperature of the air being taken in, the exhaust temperature will also rise. If you keep increasing the air temperature going into the engine, you will eventually get to a point where the resultant exhaust temperature causes damage to the hot end of the engine.

    You have reached the thermal (EGT) limit. If the outside air temperature rises above that of T-Ref (ISA + 29), we would need to reduce thrust to avoid going through that thermal limit. This does not mean the engine cannot be run (or the aircraft operated) above a real OAT that exceeds T-Ref, however, only that it cannot be run at its maximum thrust rating anymore. For all intents and purposes, the power the engine produces can be reduced up to 40% (for the -5B4) while adhering to the thermal limitation, and the aircraft still be operable (even considering a One Engine Inoperative scenario), with a corresponding TOW penalty.

    In a nutshell, the Flat Rating temperature is the point along the scale of increase of OAT where the mechanical limitation meets the thermal limitation, beyond (higher OAT) which power must be reduced.

    There is a limit to how high the OAT can be. The engine (-5B4) reaches the 40% reduction limit at approximately ISA + 40º C. That is called T-Max, in Airbus jargon. At sea level, T-Max is 55º C OAT. If it gets to be that hot, the aircraft should not fly.

    Now, what is Flex?

    Assumed temperature thrust reduction. As we have stated, the aircraft can safely take off with quite a bit less than full thrust, if its real TOW is below MTOW for the conditions. In other words, it could take off at a given real TOW even if the OAT were much higher. So, why not pretend we are at the MTOW for a higher OAT? The engine would use less fuel, and would not be straining against max rated thrust. We just need to feed the engine the temperature data so that the FADEC will not violate the temperature limits for the “assumed” temperature of that MTOW limit.

    Now, because weight is a factor in this, the Flex temperature we can give the FADEC can be higher, even, than T-Max, if the aircraft is light enough. The limit of how much more than T-Max we can give the FADEC is known as T-MaxFlex, again, in Airbus jargon. It can be as high as ISA + 70º C (that is, up to 85º of Flex, at sea level).

    Remember, the higher the Flex Temperature, the less thrust the engine is limited to produce.

    So. How do we know how high we can take a Flex Temperature to reduce power? That is down to the TOW, which translates into how low we can get the V speeds (V1, Vr and V2) for a given TOW while increasing the Flex, from conservative values, until we either hit a VMC, VMU, or T-MaxFlex limit. It is a special case, though. We might see that in action some other time.

    Those are the limits to keep in mind. Here they are, again, in brief;

    T-Ref = ISA + 29
    T-Max = ISA + 40
    T-MaxFlex = ISA + 70
    Flex temperature must never be lower than T-Ref.
    Flex temperature must never be lower than the actual OAT.
    Flex must never be used if the take off is performed from a contaminated runway (standing water, slush, snow, ice).

    Finally, NEVER believe you are obligated to remain at Flex power once you have started a take off using it. If conditions require, for example if there are indications of wind shear and you are passed V1, you ALWAYS have TOGA thrust available to save the day. If there are doubts, FIREWALL the sucker if you are over V1, or REJECT if below V1 or VMCG. And NEVER take off on the assumption you are going to have both engines all the way. Flex power is actually enough to get you through a One Engine Inoperative scenario rotation if it occurs during a take off, yes, but if you are using extreme values, it is probably better to be safe than sorry. Do not forget the second segment gradient, there.

    Now, Let the Fun Begin…

    As we do not have any RTOW for sims, there is a table way to establish Flex Temp, V1, Vr, V2 provided in the FCOM. It is there for situations when you might have had to divert to a airport for which you do not have RTOW, to get you out of a corner. It is a bit rudimentary and limited, compared to the RTOW, but it works just fine. That is what we will use here for a couple of examples.

    First, let us assert a simple scenario. We will not be doing too much interpolation for this one.

    Airbus A-320:
    TOW = 68.4 tonnes
    Flap Config 2

    Runway:
    Elevation = Sea level
    Length = 8,000 ft
    Slope = 0.7% uphill

    Conditions:
    Wind = 10 knot head wind
    QNH = 29.92
    Temperature = 30º C

    Now, let us look at these tables…

    They establish the Minimum Control Speeds (VMC) for V1, Vr, and V2. Good to know, because you may never assign these speeds any lower than these under any circumstance. Get them, for a sea level airport, CONF 2.

    V1 = 113, Vr = 117, V2 = 121

    Now let’s look at this table…

    It establishes the minimum (VMU / VMCA) V2 for a given TOW, CONF 2. Find the closest weight to our TOW (65 t) at SL.

    V2 = 134

    What this means. If, when we do the calculation, our V2 comes out lower than 134 KIAS, we must use 134 as our V2.

    Now for the Runway Correction. Have a look at this table…

    Start with the wind. We have an 8,000 ft long runway with a 10 knot head wind. You will see the correction is to add 31 feet for each knot of head wind. With 10 knots HW, that means 310 ft, right? Add that to the original runway length…

    8,000 ft + 310 = 8,310 ft.

    Now, look at the slope effect. We have a 0.7% uphill runway. Each 1% of uphill will theoretically shorten the runway by 1,205 ft, for an 8,000 ft runway. As we only have half a percent, then the result will be…

    1,205 ft x 0.7 = 843.5 ft (say, 844 ft)

    Subtract that from our last runway length result…

    8,310 ft - 844 ft = 7,466 ft

    That was easy. Our apparent (corrected) runway, with its conditions considered, is now 7,466 ft long. We can now go ahead and see what MTOW limit this gives us. Check out this table…

    Look at the TEMP column. Find 30º C down it. Move across to the 7,000 and 8,000 corrected runway columns (as our corrected runway length is between these to values, we will interpolate them). Find these values…

    7,000 ft at 30º C box:
    MTOW = 75.1 t

    8,000 ft at 30º C box:
    MTOW = 79.3 t

    Lets interpolate. This one is easy. As the resultant corrected runway falls almost exactly between the tabulated values, we can just do a simple mean average (in reality, this case is rare)…

    MTOW = (75.1 t + 79.3 t) / 2 = 77.2 t

    So, what does this mean? At TOGA, you could theoretically get an aircraft weighing 77.2 t off the runway. As our aircraft’s TOW is only 68.4 t, we are away with weight to spare. Now we can use that extra weight in our favour to FLEX! Here is how we do it.

    Look at this table again…

    Look down the two columns under the 7,000 ft and 8,000 ft corrected runway until you find two MTOW values either side of our aircraft’s real TOW (68.4 t). Then move across to the temperature column. The row at 55º looks fair, right? The values are…

    7,000 ft at 55º C box:
    MTOW = 68.0 t
    Limit Codes = 3/9 (ignore, for now)
    V1/Vr/V2 = 133 / 135 / 138

    8,000 ft at 55º C box:
    MTOW = 71.1 t
    Limit Codes = 2/3 (ignore)
    V1/Vr/V2 = 139 / 139 / 143

    Interpolate the speeds…

    V1 = (133 + 139) / 2 = 136 KIAS
    Vr = (135 + 139) / 2 = 137 KIAS
    V2 = (138 + 143) / 2 = 141 KIAS (rounded up)

    None af those speeds are below the VMU/VMC limits we calculated earlier, so we can use them. And our FLEX temperature, to answer the original question posted by @Sryan is;

    55º C

    That is, the row we found our real TOW in. Put all that in your MCDU Take Off Perf page, for CONF 2.

    Happy Flexing!

    PS: @Sryan, I noticed you had a bit of trouble on that post actually setting the thrust levers to the FLEX position, and ended up taking off at TOGA. If you are using FLEX, only advance the levers to this detent…

    Your FMA should look like this…

    All the best!

  7. Thanks for the post- but it started way better than it ended! :laughing:

  8. What? You mean that wasn’t the best bit of leisurely fun you’ve ever had? :smiley:

    But no worries; it was an answer to a member for a very specific curiosity. Much as I would like to say “yeah, it is easy, just guess a number between T-Ref and T-MaxFlex, and you are good”, it unfortunately does have a process, if you have to revert to doing it without the RTOW, for whatever reason. Actually, there is a lot more that could follow on, but I had already been typing for an hour.

    Over on the Where are You photos thread there might be something a bit more interesting, in a moment.

  9. Sryan says:

    Woah thanks a lot for that, @Cygon_Parrot! Looking forward to putting it to use on my next leg!

    And yes, i have the throttles figured out :slight_smile: First CLACK gives you climb, Second CLACK gives you flex/mct and the last one gives you TOGA. I was just mentioning some issues I had when I was first learning her.

  10. That’s very interesting. So is the standard procedure for an engine failure to advance the throttle lever to TOGA on every V1 cut or climb scenario?

  11. No. Flex is sufficient enough to handle a company specific EOSID (engine out sid ).

    Though, if you got it (more power) why not use it? but its not a requirement.

  12. That’s an article-worthy post! You guys are too good!

  13. :point_up_2: Exactly what @Bogusheadbox said.

    I’m very glad you picked up on it, though, as it is a comment based on specific experience, and in part is the reason behind the triggering of this…

    I do realize this is probably known generally on the forum, so I’ll be very condensed. OEI-SIDs conform to the four segments, which must guarantee the greater gradient of the regulatory minimum gradient one engine inoperative climb performance (as defined in FAR Part 25, for example) or at least a 35 foot clearance to terrain from the net gradient that may be along the path, if these obstacles impinge on the regulatory gradients. If the latter is an issue, then the MTOW must be reduced to assure the climb / clearance requirement. There are several charts (graphs) for it, which would have been part two of the original post directed at @Sryan.

    Here is one, for close obstacles, at CONF 2. Everyone will get the idea just looking at it…

    Generally, at an airport without any significant terrain, the regulatory gradients complied with give you plenty of room as you climb away on one engine, and you feel quite comfortable with FLEX. The story changes a bit at places like Quito, Bogotá, and La Paz, where there is significant terrain. Further to that, there are turns to be executed during the OEI-SID (on the first two mentioned) while you are still performing the second segment, followed by unavoidable proximity to terrain afterwards.

    The difference between the comfort of being at 1,500 ft afe at a flat terrain airport, and at a minimum of 35 feet agl over surrounding terrain is worth living, at FLEX power, if you are an adrenaline junky. Then there are always considerations of katabatic winds and general thermal activity further eroding that 35 foot screen.

    Therefore for us, at the mentioned airports, establishing TOGA as soon as possible to increase our terrain clearance, in the event of a One Engine Inoperative scenario, is mandatory.

    Again, @BeachAV8R, thanks for picking up on it!

    PS:

    LOL! Thanks for the kind words! :smiley:

Continue the discussion forums.mudspike.com

Participants