How Do We Compare?
EFB-Pro utilizes a
“net-ified” SID or departure procedure for lateral and vertical obstacle
clearance. This provides an ever
increasing margin of safety as the flight progresses on one engine and places
the aircraft in the enroute structure at the end of the procedure.
As to runway analysis,
beyond the $1000+ / year / tail number cost*, our major concern revolves around
the narrow takeoff path that the climb analysis is based. Having reviewed
and attempted personally multiple V1 cuts in numerous level 5 aircraft
simulators, it is evident that a problem exists, for real-world operations,
maintaining centerline path and “just in time” clearance of obstacles with
unexpected one engine inop scenarios.
Runway Analysis does not
provide clearance along a gradient. It provides clearance of specific obstacles
(each subsequent obstacle is cleared by 35 feet on the net path, i.e. just in
time) with a greatly reduced lateral margin. Thus the aircraft at max
weight could still be clearing obstacles by 35 feet many miles from the
airport. SEE DIAGRAMS BELOW.
Though runway analysis meets
the AC120-91 criteria, as does EFB-Pro, it creates a much higher false sense of
security. Additionally, runway analysis evolved out of the airline
industry whereby crews are routinely trained on ALL airports of
departure. This is a totally different operational environment than Part
135, 91K and 91 operations. On demand charter and corporate flight departments
never know which airports they might depart. Recurrent training will
realistically only involve a small percentage of the actual airports of
departure. As stated above, having witnessed numerous simulator V1 cuts
by highly experienced crews, we would hope that this issue not be
underestimated and analyzed realistically.
One flight department put it
this way; “If the obstacle clearance and lateral limit
protection of an “all engine operating” departure involved with a SID is
acceptable, why would anyone want a narrower path and reduced vertical clearance
with one-engine inop?”
Feature
|
EFB-Pro |
AGP |
|
Weight
& Balance |
|
|
|
Graphical W&B Entry |
Y |
N |
|
W&B Envelop Shown |
Y |
N |
|
Allows for Actual and
Standard Weights |
Y |
N |
|
CG Envelop Curtailment
(per AC 120-27E) |
Y |
N |
|
Standard Weights adjusted
for Winter/Summer |
Y |
N |
|
CG shift due to fuel burn
shown graphically |
Y |
N |
|
Complies with AC 120-27E |
Y |
N |
|
Transmit W&B via email |
Y |
N |
|
Print W&B |
Y |
N |
|
Landing Distance
Assessment (60% and 15%) |
Y |
N |
|
Performance
Calculations |
|
|
|
Follows AFM Obstacle
Clearance Procedure |
Y |
Y* |
|
Takeoff Max Wgt analysis
above 2nd Segment |
Y |
Y* |
|
Transition Segment
Considered (level and acceleration) |
Y |
Y* |
|
Calculates Max Wgt if weight
entered is too high |
Y |
N |
|
SID and Known Obstacles
are treated the same |
N |
NA |
|
Thrust Time Limit used to
limit gradient |
N |
N |
|
Calculates Distance and
Time between Airports |
Y |
N |
|
Print TOLD card ( PC
platform only) |
Y |
N |
|
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
Contains Airport Lat/Long
info |
Y |
N |
|
Optional Airport, FBO,
Runway, Hotel info |
Y |
N |
|
Stores multiple aircraft
in same program |
Y |
N |
|
Conversion Calculator
(JetA Gals to Lbs etc) |
Y |
N |
|
System
Requirements |
|
|
|
Operates on Palm |
Y |
N |
|
Operates on PocketPC |
Y |
Y |
|
Operates on Windows Mobile
(PPC version) |
Y |
Y |
|
Operates on EFB/Laptops/PC |
Y |
N*** |
|
Support |
|
|
|
800 Phone number for Sales |
Y |
N |
|
800 Phone number for
Support |
Y |
N |
|
Office is staffed M-F 9-5 |
Y |
Y |
|
Price |
|
|
|
Base Price |
$399 |
$1140/YR** (per a/c) |
|
*Just in time clearance ** As on November 2006 *** Web-based only |
|
|


