What types of factors come into account when planning takeoff performance for dual engine aircraft under FAR 23, compared to the aircraft with certified takeoff distances under FAR 25
Obviously, the margin for light aircraft would be less, but does this difference make a significant change in the required (legal) distance or is it less that it seems?
The single biggest difference is that FAR 25 has rules that pertain to wet runways. Aside from that, FAR 25.113(a) uses the greater of two tests to determine accelerate-stop distance:
...while 23.55(a) is more or less equivalent to 25.113(a)(1).
Comparing the three methods, the rules are mostly comparable. The only major difference is that under Part 25 "a distance equivalent to 2 seconds at the $V_1$ for takeoff from a dry runway" (25.113a.1.iv and 25.113a.2.iii) must be added to the other factors.
Because aircraft certified under Part 25 must use the greater of two different tests and add a distance equivalent to 2 seconds at $V_1$, accelerate-stop distances will likely be greater than for Part 23-certified designs that are otherwise similar.
What types of factors come into account when planning takeoff performance for dual engine aircraft under FAR 23, compared to the aircraft with certified takeoff distances under FAR 25 Obviously, the margin for light aircraft would be less, but does this difference make a significant change in the required (legal) distance or is it less that it seems?
Aircraft certification is covered by 14 CFR 23 and 25, what parts cover aircraft engines?
FAR 91.3 says: Aircraft approach category means a grouping of aircraft based on a speed of VREF, if specified, or if VREF is not specified, 1.3 Vso at the maximum certificated landing weight. VREF, Vso, and the maximum certificated landing weight are those values as established for the aircraft by the certification authority of the country of registry. The categories are as follows...) Category D: Speed 141 knots or more but less than 166 knots. (5) Category E: Speed 166 knots or more. So an aircraft category never changes because it is always Vref at max landing weight. What
Here are a few thoughts: 'Real' accidents happen much too seldom to be of any real measure, and they would have to be compensated for the number of passenger kilometers as well to be objective. Large airlines may have be involved in more accidents, but they have more aircraft. Many airlines low down on the reports had accidents many years ago. Avherald and the like may be good sources but emphasize that they don't report on all accidents. Different jurisdictions have different reporting requirements. What is a fair and unbiased method of measuring airline safety?
It seems that you would use full power for takeoffs, but when I have heard of airline pilots using less than full power on takeooff. Wouldn't it be safer to use full throttle?
occupant protection. The airplane will descend under the canopy at less than 1700 fpm and ground impact is expected to be equivalent to dropping from a height of 13 feet (about 4 meters...Some light aircraft now have airframe parachutes. If a pilot does have to pull the chute on a Cirrus (for example), is the aircraft flyable or at least repairable after landing or is it a write-off? What G forces are involved in the impact? I realize that there are lots of possible variables here, but let's assume that the parachute deploys correctly and in plenty of time for a stabilized
This is related to the recent disappearance and the fact that some claim the plane's black box to be deeply under water and that's why it cannot be located
From take-off performance calculations I remember that the take-off and initial climb was expressed in a number of segments. Each segment had its own performance requirements. I presume they are described in some FAR / JAR but I don't know whether to look under certification or operational requirements. What are the segments and how are they demarcated? Do they differ for aircraft types (propeller vs. turbofan, number of engines?) Are these segments used for certification, operationally or both?
These are calculations which I use to know when to descend and the Rate: Multiply the ALT of feet to lose by 3 and $Groundspeed\div2\times10$ will give you your required rate of descent for a 3° glide slope. For example: FL350 to FL100 => 25,000 ft down $25\times3=75$, so start at 75 nm GS = 320 kts => $320\div2\times10=1,600$ => -1,600 fpm is your desired rate of descent. How do I calculate without using tangents for degrees, other than 3: 2,5; 4; 5 ...? In my last question I got it wrong, even though through math the answer was correct.
I know that under FAR Part 135, specific approval is required for an RNAV SID/STAR (given via an OpSpec), but what about Part 91? Does the aircraft/pilot have to be approved, and if so how is the approval obtained?