DTWSAN
Topic Author
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 4:58 am

aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Sun Mar 19, 2017 2:17 am

what situations would it be worth igt?
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17641
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Sun Mar 19, 2017 2:55 am

One If the pilots have serious doubts about the aircraft's ability to fly. For example if all engines quit or if there's an obvious severe structural issue. The situation would have to be pretty dire. Rejecting after V1 is very bad feng shui.

Side note: "abort" is not a very common term in aviation. We would "reject" the take-off.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
OzzyPirate
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 2:27 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Sun Mar 19, 2017 3:00 am

In short, if the aircraft is unsafe or unable to fly. In other words, incapable of sustained flight.

Post-V1 rejects should not form part of any normal takeoff brief or considerations. I see a worrying number of discussions between supposedly experienced pilots on this topic, normally starting with "if you've got a really long runway and you know you'll stop...". The V1 speed exists for a reason, and is not open to interpretation.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17641
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Sun Mar 19, 2017 4:20 am

OzzyPirate wrote:
In short, if the aircraft is unsafe or unable to fly. In other words, incapable of sustained flight.

Post-V1 rejects should not form part of any normal takeoff brief or considerations. I see a worrying number of discussions between supposedly experienced pilots on this topic, normally starting with "if you've got a really long runway and you know you'll stop...". The V1 speed exists for a reason, and is not open to interpretation.


Well, "if you've got a really long runway and you know you'll stop..." then V1 = Vr so the point is moot. :D

But yes, you are right. The likelihood of a dual engine failure or some other such event after V1 is so low that you're adding risk to the take-off by briefing it and inserting doubt.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
OzzyPirate
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 2:27 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Sun Mar 19, 2017 4:38 am

Starlionblue wrote:
Well, "if you've got a really long runway and you know you'll stop..." then V1 = Vr so the point is moot.


Point taken but it's still discussed: V1 has been called (and the silent decision to go has been made) and as Rotate is called a fire bell goes off. You've still got 2.5km of runway ahead and you haven't rotated, do you reject?

The answer is of course no, but this is the kind of discussion I'm seeing.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 4276
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Sun Mar 19, 2017 5:52 am

OzzyPirate wrote:
Starlionblue wrote:
Well, "if you've got a really long runway and you know you'll stop..." then V1 = Vr so the point is moot.


Point taken but it's still discussed: V1 has been called (and the silent decision to go has been made) and as Rotate is called a fire bell goes off. You've still got 2.5km of runway ahead and you haven't rotated, do you reject?

The answer is of course no, but this is the kind of discussion I'm seeing.


On Boeing airplanes the alerts are inhibited at various points during takeoff. The Fire Bell is inhibited from V1 to 400 feet, IIRC. So your scenario wouldn't happen and there's a good reason for it.

Boeing manuals state the only reason you ever reject above V1 is if in the Captain's judgement the airplane is incapable of safe flight. This is consistent with what the experienced pilots on this thread have stated.
 
OzzyPirate
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 2:27 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Sun Mar 19, 2017 6:06 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
Boeing manuals state the only reason you ever reject above V1 is if in the Captain's judgement the airplane is incapable of safe flight. This is consistent with what the experienced pilots on this thread have stated.


Yes, including me.

If you read back, I'm giving a vague non specific example of the types of disturbing discussions I'm reading on forums lately. Replace fire bell with engine failure, I'm not getting into the fine details, just a general point that there are a few pilots out there who seem to think that V1 is up for discussion if there's lots of runway ahead.

And since you brought it up, the fire warning system is not inhibited on the 737NG, which is the only Boeing type I've flown.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17641
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:02 am

OzzyPirate wrote:
Starlionblue wrote:
Well, "if you've got a really long runway and you know you'll stop..." then V1 = Vr so the point is moot.


Point taken but it's still discussed: V1 has been called (and the silent decision to go has been made) and as Rotate is called a fire bell goes off. You've still got 2.5km of runway ahead and you haven't rotated, do you reject?

The answer is of course no, but this is the kind of discussion I'm seeing.

:shock: :shock: :shock:
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
User avatar
SaveFerris
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 5:42 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:36 am

Starlionblue wrote:
OzzyPirate wrote:
Starlionblue wrote:
Well, "if you've got a really long runway and you know you'll stop..." then V1 = Vr so the point is moot.


Point taken but it's still discussed: V1 has been called (and the silent decision to go has been made) and as Rotate is called a fire bell goes off. You've still got 2.5km of runway ahead and you haven't rotated, do you reject?

The answer is of course no, but this is the kind of discussion I'm seeing.

:shock: :shock: :shock:


My exact reaction when I read that...

On the 747 the fire bell, Master Warning light and associated EICAS message(s) are indeed inhibited from V1 to 400'.
 
OzzyPirate
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 2:27 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:00 pm

Hope you guys aren't aiming any of this shock at me directly. I agree with everything that's been said in this thread.
 
26point2
Posts: 905
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 6:01 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Sun Mar 19, 2017 2:47 pm

Here's one... L-1011 rejected take-off after airborne. Didn't turn out so well. I'm sure there are others.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TWA_Flight_843
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17641
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:53 am

OzzyPirate wrote:
Hope you guys aren't aiming any of this shock at me directly. I agree with everything that's been said in this thread.


Not at all. I'm as baffled as you are that this discussion is happening.

Certainly we can sit and discuss this sort of thing from a theoretical perspective, but out there in the real world a high speed reject is one of the riskier things we do. It's not something you really want to fiddle with on the fly.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
OzzyPirate
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 2:27 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:54 am

Starlionblue wrote:
Not at all. I'm as baffled as you are that this discussion is happening.

Certainly we can sit and discuss this sort of thing from a theoretical perspective, but out there in the real world a high speed reject is one of the riskier things we do. It's not something you really want to fiddle with on the fly.


My apologies, I misinterpreted.

Exactly.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 4276
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Mon Mar 20, 2017 8:23 am

SaveFerris wrote:
Starlionblue wrote:
OzzyPirate wrote:

Point taken but it's still discussed: V1 has been called (and the silent decision to go has been made) and as Rotate is called a fire bell goes off. You've still got 2.5km of runway ahead and you haven't rotated, do you reject?

The answer is of course no, but this is the kind of discussion I'm seeing.

:shock: :shock: :shock:


My exact reaction when I read that...

On the 747 the fire bell, Master Warning light and associated EICAS message(s) are indeed inhibited from V1 to 400'.


The 737 doesn't have the takeoff inhibits that the EICAS models do, so both of you are correct.

Advisory messages are inhibited from 80 knots to 400 feet. The Caution aural and Master Caution light is inhibited from 80 knots to 400 feet also (but no the Caution message text on EICAS). The hi/low COMM chime is inhibited from set of takeoff thrust to 800 feet (IIRC). Warnings are inhibited at V1 but there are a few exceptions on a few models. For example, CONFIG RUDDER is inhibited much earlier on the 787 and KC-46, at least. I'd have to look to remember the details.
 
RetiredWeasel
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 8:16 pm

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:30 pm

Starlionblue wrote:
One If the pilots have serious doubts about the aircraft's ability to fly. For example if all engines quit or if there's an obvious severe structural issue. The situation would have to be pretty dire. Rejecting after V1 is very bad feng shui.

Side note: "abort" is not a very common term in aviation. We would "reject" the take-off.


Except for the military and former military trained pilots. Every military aircraft I flew, the term was 'Aborted Takeoff' or 'Abort'. It's hard to get out of your system once transitioning to civil aircraft operations.
 
113312
Posts: 643
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:09 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:57 pm

A high speed reject is a tricky and dangerous maneuver and that is one of the reasons it is a decision tasked to the Captain. While most policy agree that a high speed reject, and certainly one near or past V1, should only be done if the aircraft cannot fly. Those are great words but very hard to assess in a moment of decision. Certainly, a collision during takeoff or a landing gear collapse could be considered. But even a significant vibration might not indicate a loss of flight capability but a problem with a wheel/brake that might hinder stopping capability. It's nearly impossible to look out of the windscreen, during takeoff, and eyeball stopping distance. That judgement is gained through landings where you are at landing weight and configuration. A high speed reject is really a max effort "hail Mary" maneuver where you do it 100% correct and hope you stop before the end. All too often, high speed rejects result from startle effect of a sound, feel, or warning light even though the aircraft is capable of flight. In reality, most reasons to reject a takeoff happen fairly early in the takeoff run.
 
BravoOne
Posts: 1975
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:40 pm

RetiredWeasel wrote:
Starlionblue wrote:
One If the pilots have serious doubts about the aircraft's ability to fly. For example if all engines quit or if there's an obvious severe structural issue. The situation would have to be pretty dire. Rejecting after V1 is very bad feng shui.

Side note: "abort" is not a very common term in aviation. We would "reject" the take-off.


Except for the military and former military trained pilots. Every military aircraft I flew, the term was 'Aborted Takeoff' or 'Abort'. It's hard to get out of your system once transitioning to civil aircraft operations.


Keep in mind that some multi cultural, and non English native speaker operators like Qatar, have adopted the term STOP as just about everyone knows what that means regardless of their native language..
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17641
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Tue Mar 21, 2017 12:58 am

BravoOne wrote:
RetiredWeasel wrote:
Starlionblue wrote:
One If the pilots have serious doubts about the aircraft's ability to fly. For example if all engines quit or if there's an obvious severe structural issue. The situation would have to be pretty dire. Rejecting after V1 is very bad feng shui.

Side note: "abort" is not a very common term in aviation. We would "reject" the take-off.


Except for the military and former military trained pilots. Every military aircraft I flew, the term was 'Aborted Takeoff' or 'Abort'. It's hard to get out of your system once transitioning to civil aircraft operations.


Keep in mind that some multi cultural, and non English native speaker operators like Qatar, have adopted the term STOP as just about everyone knows what that means regardless of their native language..


At my company, the captains says "STOP!" but the maneuver is a rejected take-off.

Did not realize about the military. Learn something everyday.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
Max Q
Posts: 5853
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Mon Mar 27, 2017 4:24 am

After V1 you GO, you've just become a test pilot if you attempt to stop after that speed and it usually ends badly.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
AA737-823
Posts: 5076
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2000 11:10 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Mon Mar 27, 2017 4:55 am

Well, it's easy for everyone to sit in an armchair and say, "Well, a pilot should always do this, and never do that," etc etc etc.
But until you're in the actual situation.....
I'd say that a person has to VERY QUICKLY make a high-stakes decision based on the information he/she has at the time.
Everyone is ignoring the most recent post-V1 RTO that comes to my mind, in which an MD-80 driver discovered his elevator was jammed.
Many people- myself included- were quick to question his decision, until WE had all the facts. That airplane wasn't going to leave the ground, if the runway stretched from Michigan to Mongolia.
So he rejected at nearly 20 KIAS above V1.
And it was the right decision.
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 924
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Mon Mar 27, 2017 10:41 am

This is another topic that seems to be come up far too often on these forums.

Up to V1, you stop.

Post V1, barring an unflyable aircraft (a "bang" isn't enough), you go.

It's not difficult.

Image
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 4276
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Mon Mar 27, 2017 4:33 pm

AA737-823 wrote:
Well, it's easy for everyone to sit in an armchair and say, "Well, a pilot should always do this, and never do that," etc etc etc.
But until you're in the actual situation.....
I'd say that a person has to VERY QUICKLY make a high-stakes decision based on the information he/she has at the time.
Everyone is ignoring the most recent post-V1 RTO that comes to my mind, in which an MD-80 driver discovered his elevator was jammed.
Many people- myself included- were quick to question his decision, until WE had all the facts. That airplane wasn't going to leave the ground, if the runway stretched from Michigan to Mongolia.
So he rejected at nearly 20 KIAS above V1.
And it was the right decision.


This doesn't conflict with what the rest of us are saying. In the Captain's judgement the airplane was incapable of safe flight. According to Boeing guidance that was a valid reason to reject above V1.
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 1993
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Tue Mar 28, 2017 6:07 pm

The recent accident involving the Michigan basketball team is a perfect example ...

They went to rotate, the airplane didn't rotate, and since it was obviously not flying, they aborted ... and ended up 1000ft off the end of the runway.

Pretty much a textbook example of exactly what happens.
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 4276
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:27 pm

litz wrote:
The recent accident involving the Michigan basketball team is a perfect example ...

They went to rotate, the airplane didn't rotate, and since it was obviously not flying, they aborted ... and ended up 1000ft off the end of the runway.

Pretty much a textbook example of exactly what happens.


What were his choices? What would have happened if he hadn't RTO-ed?

I'm RTO-ed above V1 in the simulator and easily stopped on the runway. Presumably it's fairly accurate. Of course it's a simulator. If I end up in the Allied Grocer building at BFI or in the San Francisco Bay, you push a button and resent.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:43 pm

Airline crews rarely have the actual take-off field length required, just weight and an hunch how close TORR is to TORA or how close ASDR is to ASDA. Probably, in twins, it is very rare TORR is within 2,000' of TORA, so stopping is technically feasible, if an unknown. Nobody, in civil cockpits, have any idea what "refusal speed" is for the operation, either. In the C-5, the pilots and engineers figured out take-off data, seven ways to Sunday- actual Vmcg including wind and runway surface contamination, Vmcg for both 3-engine and 2-engine cases, refusal and brake energy speeds. It also required 20-30 minutes for a departure with a obstacle and a thorough understanding of the physics involved.

GF
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 1993
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Wed Mar 29, 2017 5:43 pm

BoeingGuy wrote:
litz wrote:
The recent accident involving the Michigan basketball team is a perfect example ...

They went to rotate, the airplane didn't rotate, and since it was obviously not flying, they aborted ... and ended up 1000ft off the end of the runway.

Pretty much a textbook example of exactly what happens.


What were his choices? What would have happened if he hadn't RTO-ed?



They pulled back to rotate, and the airplane did not rotate; e.g. : it literally would not fly ... it was either try and stop, or go off the end of the runway at takeoff speed.

As it was, they DID get it slowed down enough, that the 1000ft offroad excursion wrecked the undercarriage, but the fuselage stayed intact, and everyone was able to safely evacuate.
 
User avatar
Siren
Posts: 621
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 6:50 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Wed Mar 29, 2017 9:53 pm

Another post-V1 reject - and in this instance, the NTSB sided with the crew and stated it was the correct decision. This happened in 2011, with an Omega Tanker 707-321B.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ia-356905/

And the NTSB link: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Acc ... AB1301.pdf

Plane lost two engines during takeoff - the engine separated from the pylon and apparently took a second engine with it. They were at maximum weight. The plane wouldn't fly...

From the NTSB report:
At rotation speed, the captain rotated the airplane to an initial target pitch attitude of 11o airplane nose up. Shortly after liftoff, when the airplane was about 20 feet above the runway and about 7,000 feet down the runway, all three crewmembers heard a loud noise and observed the thrust lever for the No. 2 (left inboard) engine rapidly retard to the aft limit of the throttle quadrant. The captain stated that he applied full right rudder and near full right aileron to maintain directional control and level the wings, but the airplane continued to drift to the left. The captain reported that he perceived the airplane would not continue to climb and decided to “put it back on the ground.”
Witnesses and a cell phone video from another Omega 707 crewmember observing the takeoff indicated that the No. 2 (left inboard) engine separated and traveled up above the left wing as the airplane was passing abeam taxiway A2. The inlet cowling for the No. 1 (left outboard) engine separated immediately thereafter, consistent with being struck by the No. 2 engine nacelle.
The airplane began to descend with the remaining three engine power levers at maximum power, and the left wing dipped slightly (Pratt & Whitney indicated that loss of the inlet cowling on the No. 1 engine would increase drag, effectively resulting in less than zero thrust output). The captain said he lowered the nose and leveled the wings just as the airplane touched down on the runway between taxiway A2 and A1. The airplane made multiple contacts with the runway before drifting left and departing the runway surface before the airplane reached taxiway A1. The airplane crossed taxiway A and came to rest in the marsh area.


This is one of those one-in-a-million type of events. It has to be something *catastrophic* to abort a takeoff after you've rotated and lifted off... these guys managed to live through it.
Siren: 32 year old single white female based @ KLAX. Aviation nerd, political wonk, disability rights activist, German car enthusiast, Californian Independence leader & evangelist
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 4869
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: aborting takeoff AFTER V1

Thu Mar 30, 2017 10:11 am

As long as you do not loose both engines on a twin, 2 on a Trijet or 3 on a modern quad or loose major strucutural or control elements, you go. So only if you are sure the plane won´t fly.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, skyhawkmatthew and 2 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos