Refresh my memory...

F

flyinhood

Pre-Flight
Joined
Jun 17, 2015
Messages
47
Location
Ft. Worth, TX
Display Name
Display name:
flyinhood
You are taking off from a non towered airport IFR. There is a climb gradient for the runway you intend to use. You have no intention to visually climb over the airport and the wx is below the " or 400-2" or whatever is listed.

As part 91 you legally don't need to adhere to the gradient, even though you should.

True or False?
 
You could take off in 0/0 as part 91. But again, should you?

Not sure about climb gradient. I would hope you legally have to adhere it it :eek: Still learning.
 
I don't think I even understand the premise. Most climb gradients are established so that you don't hit something. Why would you even want to consider not complying with one?

Isn't that like saying "I am VFR. I see a mountain ahead. Do I have to turn away, or can I run into the mountain if I wish?"
 
I don’t understand the question either, but the answer is you’re not legally bound to the weather minimums, but you’d be a Darwin Award candidate if you ignore the climb gradient.
 
flyinhood said:
zero / zero I'm aware, the climb gradient is what I'm after.
Click to expand...
Yes, legal part 91 unless you accepted a SID in which case you are obligated to follow minimums in SID.
 
I'd be looking at the plate, if it has a triangle T the airport has IFR takeoff minimums, and/or an ODP (obstacle departure procedure). It would be wise to know these things.

stem-1.jpg
 
Correct. Now as a part 91 operator, are you required to meet the climb gradient? Again I'm asking about "Legally", not Safely.

I also don't take singles down to mins, or fly around at Class G wx mins. I'm asking a legal question.

This was taken from the AOPA article I posted above:

"If, however, we find nonstandard takeoff minimums or a published ODP, we need to carefully study the information. Although we are not required to follow takeoff minimums or departure procedures while operating under FAR Part 91, it is important to realize that those procedures exist to protect us during departures. Sometimes, certain runways are not authorized, or a higher ceiling and visibility is required in order for a pilot to avoid obstacles visually. Other times, a steeper climb gradient will be required or a specific departure course will be defined. Whatever the departure procedure requires, we should have a solid plan to remain clear of all the obstacles and terrain."
 
Last edited:
flyinhood said:
https://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/inst_reports2.cfm?article=6198

here is a short well written article that generated the question after I sent a student on his initial IFR.
Click to expand...
It’s kind of like the statement in my world that climb gradients are all-engine requirements, and you’re not required to adhere to them if an engine fails on your multi engine airplane.

While it’s technically true, you are morally and legally responsible for not hitting stuff, so you need to have a plan. If you can’t come up with a plan that will keep you from hitting stuff with an engine failure, you probably better be able to fly the plan that the FAA has determined will keep you from hitting stuff with an engine failure.

...and if it generated that question, I’d say the article is not well written. ;)
 
Last edited:
@flyinhood I was just about to post that quote from the article you linked. Paragraph 6. "Although we are not required to follow takeoff minimums or departure procedures while operating under FAR Part 91..." the author seems to answer your question. Do you question his accuracy? ;)

Best,
Nathan
 
Takeoff mins. The author doesn't say takeoff mins or climb gradient.

Mauleskinner, The question was posed to my IFR student on a checkride. I am not sure I am in agreement with what the student remembers the DPE saying. This is why I thought I would see what you guys think. Again, we are talking legally. Not good judgement or risk management.
 
flyinhood said:
Takeoff mins. The author doesn't say takeoff mins or climb gradient.

Mauleskinner, The question was posed to my IFR student on a checkride. I am not sure I am in agreement with what the DPE. This is why I thought I would see what you guys think. Again, we are talking legally. Not good judgement or risk management.
Click to expand...
What did the DPE say?
 
My student thinks the DPE said that you DO have to meet the climb gradient regardless if you are 91.
 
I think the pic is responsible for obstacle clearance. So yes, you can takeoff 0 / 0, but than you have to meet the climb gradient. If the verbiage is xxx / mile OR 400 / 2, than you need that 400 feet and 2 mile vis to See and Avoid the obstacle that created that climb gradient to miss the obstacle. Option 3 is to Visually Climb Over the Airport (which I have never done in 12K flight hours). Hope this helps
 
Under 91.175 there is no requirement for Part 91 operations.


f) Civil airport takeoff minimums. This paragraph applies to persons operating an aircraft under part 121, 125, 129, or 135 of this chapter.

(1) Unless otherwise authorized by the FAA, no pilot may takeoff from a civil airport under IFR unless the weather conditions at time of takeoff are at or above the weather minimums for IFR takeoff prescribed for that airport under part 97 of this chapter.

(2) If takeoff weather minimums are not prescribed under part 97 of this chapter for a particular airport, the following weather minimums apply to takeoffs under IFR:

(i) For aircraft, other than helicopters, having two engines or less—1 statute mile visibility.

(ii) For aircraft having more than two engines— 1⁄2 statute mile visibility.

(iii) For helicopters— 1⁄2 statute mile visibility.

(3) Except as provided in paragraph (f)(4) of this section, no pilot may takeoff under IFR from a civil airport having published obstacle departure procedures (ODPs) under part 97 of this chapter for the takeoff runway to be used, unless the pilot uses such ODPs or an alternative procedure or route assigned by air traffic control.

(4) Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph (f)(3) of this section, no pilot may takeoff from an airport under IFR unless:

(i) For part 121 and part 135 operators, the pilot uses a takeoff obstacle clearance or avoidance procedure that ensures compliance with the applicable airplane performance operating limitations requirements under part 121, subpart I or part 135, subpart I for takeoff at that airport; or

(ii) For part 129 operators, the pilot uses a takeoff obstacle clearance or avoidance procedure that ensures compliance with the airplane performance operating limitations prescribed by the State of the operator for takeoff at that airport.

(g) Military airports. Unless otherwise prescribed by the Administrator, each person operating a civil aircraft under IFR into or out of a military airport shall comply with the instrument approach procedures and the takeoff and landing minimum prescribed by the military authority having jurisdiction of that airport.
 
Clip4 said:
Under 91.175 there is no requirement for Part 91 operations.


f) Civil airport takeoff minimums. This paragraph applies to persons operating an aircraft under part 121, 125, 129, or 135 of this chapter.

(1) Unless otherwise authorized by the FAA, no pilot may takeoff from a civil airport under IFR unless the weather conditions at time of takeoff are at or above the weather minimums for IFR takeoff prescribed for that airport under part 97 of this chapter.

(2) If takeoff weather minimums are not prescribed under part 97 of this chapter for a particular airport, the following weather minimums apply to takeoffs under IFR:

(i) For aircraft, other than helicopters, having two engines or less—1 statute mile visibility.

(ii) For aircraft having more than two engines— 1⁄2 statute mile visibility.

(iii) For helicopters— 1⁄2 statute mile visibility.

(3) Except as provided in paragraph (f)(4) of this section, no pilot may takeoff under IFR from a civil airport having published obstacle departure procedures (ODPs) under part 97 of this chapter for the takeoff runway to be used, unless the pilot uses such ODPs or an alternative procedure or route assigned by air traffic control.

(4) Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraph (f)(3) of this section, no pilot may takeoff from an airport under IFR unless:

(i) For part 121 and part 135 operators, the pilot uses a takeoff obstacle clearance or avoidance procedure that ensures compliance with the applicable airplane performance operating limitations requirements under part 121, subpart I or part 135, subpart I for takeoff at that airport; or

(ii) For part 129 operators, the pilot uses a takeoff obstacle clearance or avoidance procedure that ensures compliance with the airplane performance operating limitations prescribed by the State of the operator for takeoff at that airport.

(g) Military airports. Unless otherwise prescribed by the Administrator, each person operating a civil aircraft under IFR into or out of a military airport shall comply with the instrument approach procedures and the takeoff and landing minimum prescribed by the military authority having jurisdiction of that airport.
Click to expand...
The OP seems to be asking about the climb gradient, not the visibility. Unless the PIC owns the airplane, everything in it, and whatever the airplane would hit by not complying with the climb gradient, carries no passengers, and ensures that no persons are on or near his property, not complying with the climb gradient is a clear violation of 91.13, and is therefore illegal, immoral, dangerous, and idiotic.
 
Last edited:
If the climb gradient involved is part of a departure procedure that was included in your clearance (typically a SID, but I have heard of ATC clearances involving ODPs as well), then the climb gradient would by definition be part of the ATC instruction that you would be required to follow. I hope I don't need to provide the reference requiring us to comply with ATC instructions.
 
My impression is that you don't have to follow the ODP or the SID, unless assigned, and that this includes climb gradients for part 91. My opinion is that you would be foolish not follow the ODP or SID assigned or not, and confirm your airplane can meet the performance requirements detailed in IMC conditions. This was seared into my memory on my long IFR cross country when we landed in Rutland VT, on what was a snowy night with about 500 foot ceilings. Not a good place to be taking off from without guidance. I keep a chart of the climb gradient performance easily accessible in FF just so I can make sure the airplane can perform as required as part of my preflight for IFR flights.
 
With regard to what you don’t need to comply with, the FAA says the weather minimums are the part that’s applicable only to air carrier ops, not the climb gradient. From the IPH:
Weather and the Departure Environment
Takeoff Minimums
While mechanical failure is potentially hazardous during any phase of flight, a failure during takeoff under instrument conditions is extremely critical. In the event of an emergency, a decision must be made to either return to the departure airport or fly directly to a takeoff alternate. If the departure weather were below the landing minimums for the departure airport, the flight would be unable to return for landing, leaving few options and little time to reach a takeoff alternate.
In the early years of air transportation, landing minimums for commercial operators were usually lower than takeoff minimums. Therefore, it was possible that minimums allowed pilots to land at an airport but not depart from that airport. Additionally, all takeoff minimums once included ceiling, as well as visibility requirements. Today, takeoff minimums are typically lower than published landing minimums, and ceiling requirements are only included if it is necessary to see and avoid obstacles in the departure area.
The FAA establishes takeoff minimums for every airport that has published Standard Instrument Approaches. These minimums are used by commercially operated aircraft, namely Part 121 and Part 135 operators. At airports where minimums are not established, these same carriers are required to use FAA-designated standard minimums: 1 statute mile (SM) visibility for single- and twin-engine aircraft, and 1⁄2 SM for helicopters and aircraft with more than two engines.
Aircraft operating under 14 CFR Part 91 are not required to comply with established takeoff minimums. Legally, a zero/ zero departure may be made,
Click to expand...
Regarding climb gradients, the IPH says:
The published climb gradient, obstacle or otherwise, is treated as a plane which must not be penetrated from above until reaching the stated height or has reached the en route environment (e.g., above the MEA, MOCA). Departure design, including climb gradients, does not take into consideration the performance of the aircraft; it only considers obstacle protection for all aircraft. TERPS criteria assume the aircraft is operating with all available engines and systems fully functioning. Development of contingency procedures, required to cover the case of an engine failure, engine out procedures (EOPs) or other emergency in flight that may occur after liftoff, is the responsibility of the operator. When a climb gradient is required for a specific departure, it is vital that pilots fully understand the performance of their aircraft and determine
if it can comply with the required climb. The standard climb of 200 ft/NM is not an issue for most aircraft. When an increased climb gradient is specified due to obstacle issues, it is important to calculate aircraft performance, particularly when flying out of airports at higher altitudes on warm days.
Click to expand...
There is no indication here that the FAA sees any difference between private and commercial operations regarding the climb gradient.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top