Alexis wrote:
Yes, when there is no performance chart for a high OAT then interpolating is not allowed, they have to have a chart – at least that is what I have heard about the Airlines. Performance itself should not be a problem.
Performance certainly is a problem at many airports, particularly those which are hot, high, and in the hills. It’s usually the One Engine Inoperative second segment climb that’s so degraded you have to either reduce loading (fuel or pax) or wait till it’s cooler.
It is a matter of certification – a new aircraft type has to be flown within a certain performance envelope which will later be presented in the limitation section of the POH. Therefore those high and hot resp. cold weather tests.
See FAR part 25 section 1527
the extremes of the ambient air temperature and operating altitude for which operation is allowed, as limited by flight, structural, powerplant,
functional, or equipment characteristics, must be established
The Bombardier CRJ was testflown to temperatures up to including 118°F acc. to the article in “Wired” – that should be expressed in the limitations section of the POH.
At temps of 119°F and above they must stay on the ground. I think above those 118° performance as well as system limits approach each other in another kind of “coffin corner”.
Airbus A330 has a max temp of 55°C or 131°F from minus 2000ft P.A. to sea level, decreasing rapidly with altitude (e.g. 35°C at 10.000ft P.A.)
IIRC the negative temp side of the environmental envelope -73,4°C as minimum temperature (Boeing & Airbus) is a system limit dictated by the manufacturer of the cockpit windows.
The upper limit for fuel temperature is + 60°C (Airbus).
Wasn’t there a Diamond Katana aircraft with some kind of turkey fryer thermometer that popped up on the upper wing surface when the temp was above ~40°C ?
