[Username Protected]

Anyone else have their jet call out not enough runway on the takeoff roll? This airplane has so much useless and (Username Protected)gerous technology it's no wonder people are crashing it off the ends of runways. To get this callout on a perfectly fine takeoff, with over 500 feet of extra distance available between performance numbers and runway available, is ridiculous. And if there truly wasn't enough runway, then why did the FMS accept my numbers?? I continued the takeoff of course, but not without a slight hesitation - it's never good to be put in the position to disregard CAS messages and warnings and I've never flown a jet which teaches you negative training as much as this one. Constant erroneous windshear warnings, FMS TO/land disagrees, ROAAS not available, telling you that you are landing on what is not a runway when the runway is clearly there and is in the database.... but don't worry, the solution will be a new software load which has been promised for two years ?

[Username Protected]

Anyone else have their jet call out not enough runway on the takeoff roll? This airplane has so much useless and (Username Protected)gerous technology it's no wonder people are crashing it off the ends of runways. To get this callout on a perfectly fine takeoff, with over 500 feet of extra distance available between performance numbers and runway available, is ridiculous. And if there truly wasn't enough runway, then why did the FMS accept my numbers??

Where in the takeoff roll did this happen? Did you do a rolling takeoff with a rounded entry to the runway? Not squaring off the entry to centerline and doing a rolling takeoff with slower power addition could pretty easily use up 500 feet of asphalt.

[Username Protected]

I used maybe 59-75ft for lineup, and did a static takeoff. So nowhere near the 500 feet extra available.

[Username Protected]

Anyone else have their jet call out not enough runway on the takeoff roll? This airplane has so much useless and (Username Protected)gerous technology it's no wonder people are crashing it off the ends of runways. To get this callout on a perfectly fine takeoff, with over 500 feet of extra distance available between performance numbers and runway available, is ridiculous. And if there truly wasn't enough runway, then why did the FMS accept my numbers?? I continued the takeoff of course, but not without a slight hesitation - it's never good to be put in the position to disregard CAS messages and warnings and I've never flown a jet which teaches you negative training as much as this one. Constant erroneous windshear warnings, FMS TO/land disagrees, ROAAS not available, telling you that you are landing on what is not a runway when the runway is clearly there and is in the database.... but don't worry, the solution will be a new software load which has been promised for two years ?

To really offer any constructive comments, we would need to have a look at your performance numbers for that particular event. I'm happy to discuss offline if you want to share those.

(Username Protected)
https://www.(Username Protected)aviation.com

[Username Protected]

(Username Protected),

One of the biggest issues on the aircraft is people that do not understand the technology, nor do they make the effort to open the manuals and read as it "looks the same as my old 300". I have had this with more than one customer. Many of the issues you describe here are mentioned within the manuals, or within the FOLs/OBs.

As for the FMS accepting what you've put in it; rubbish in, rubbish out. Were you perhaps on a displaced threshold. Did the declared distance match the FMS number? There could be numerous reasons. Ultimately, if you know that you are safe, then you disregard like you did and then work out after. I will put money on a database error that may have gone unnoticed, or perhaps a TODA that is reduced from the total distance available.

Windshear is too sensitive....agreed. Doesn't seem as bad on 3305.07.

FMS TO DISAGREE: Something programmed in the FMS doesn't agree with what is actually happening.

FMS LAND DISAGREE : Most commonly because performance numbers are calculated at top of drop, and a shortcut results in a 100lb difference in fuel burn and therefore it requires recalculation. This is described in the manuals. When intercepting the final approach track, that's when I recalculate, and I never have an issue with this any more.

ROAAS warns are predominantly given when people are not fully configured on final approach. Once gear and flap are down, then this vanishes. This has already been corrected on load 3305.07.

Do you have details on the airfields that "aren't" in the database as such? I can feed this back to various teams to look at.

[Username Protected]

You can use FlySto to see your takeoff performance.

[Username Protected]

If I had to guess, your takeoff numbers were valid, but the airplane may be giving a warning on your balanced field length which it considers takeoff runway.

I’ve also seen a scenario that there may be an obstacle depending on your lift off point and it will give the warning.

What airport was this at?

[Username Protected]

(Username Protected)gerous? No. Overly protective? Yes.

[Username Protected]

What's (Username Protected)gerous is the headline of this thread.. that's a bit dramatic

[Username Protected]

What's (Username Protected)gerous is the headline of this thread.. that's a bit dramatic

Agree, I retitled the thread "G3000 calling out not enough runway on takeoff roll" which is more appropriate to the discussion on hand.

[Username Protected]

I´m a Mexican aviation student of 59 years old, I put a order for a new Phenom 100 to be delivery on the final quarter of 2024, expecting that some time in the future, I could flight it.

I congratulate all of you for your comments and knowledge, I was worry when I begin to read the headline of the initial comment, after the rest of the participants comments, I turn calm.

Thanks to all that give the time and knowledge for people like me that " is begining in this incredible profesion and activity ", Any help that I can bring from Mexico, be my Guest please
sincerely
Sr. (Username Protected) ph 00528117999989 San Pedro Garza Garcia email (Username Protected)(Username Protected)[email protected]

[Username Protected]

What's (Username Protected)gerous is the headline of this thread.. that's a bit dramatic

We are selling the airplane as of this week. The service is horrendous, parts availability is horrendous, and losing both AHRS along with yaw damper and other critical systems due to a simple GPS outage is not just unacceptable, that truly is (Username Protected)gerous. Having to fly dead reckoning on complicated RNAV arrivals in green needles is just silly. I've seen six GPS outages in our Phenom, and know of five others in one other I fly. I'ts pretty sad when a GPS outage is a serious emergency. And to say it isn't (Username Protected)gerous to have a "Runway too short" callout after you've passed the 70 knot abort threshold at which aborts should only be performed for certain items, of which this callout is not one, is certainly (Username Protected)gerous. Being overly protective is the job of the pilot, and of correct numbers being input into aircraft systems. Callouts and alerts which contradict those systems is both confusing, and (Username Protected)gerous.

[Username Protected]

Having to fly dead reckoning on complicated RNAV arrivals in green needles is just silly.

...also, illegal...

[Username Protected]

We are selling the airplane as of this week. The service is horrendous, parts availability is horrendous, and losing both AHRS along with yaw damper and other critical systems due to a simple GPS outage is not just unacceptable, that truly is (Username Protected)gerous. Having to fly dead reckoning on complicated RNAV arrivals in green needles is just silly. I've seen six GPS outages in our Phenom, and know of five others in one other I fly. I'ts pretty sad when a GPS outage is a serious emergency.

I've been in the Phenom almost 5 years and and flown over a dozen different airframes. Then longest dual GPS failure I've seen was under 30 seconds. That occurred in nearly the same location departing DFW a few weeks apart on 2 different airframes. The system is not perfect, but we learn the limitations during initial and they're available in all of your publications -- as well as how to react to the problems.

Parts are a pain, but improving. I also deal with Textron on parts, they're not having a great time still either. This isn't just an Embraer issue.

My Embraer service rep is even less useful than the hair on my knuckles, but I have a fantastic independent shop and service team that knows how to navigate through all that for me. I will confidently take my Phenom just about anywhere. Maybe you need to find that kind of shop and support for yours. It's truly a great plane. However simplified and "electronic" the avionics are, it's not bad at all.

[Username Protected]

Hence, my point. Having all available nav go bye bye while in weather on an RNAV arrival just sucks.

...also, illegal...

[Username Protected]

I have to agree with (Username Protected) is the GPS dependency. I am also selling my aircraft because I have been in situations where GPS has failed and it _could_ have become quite (Username Protected)gerous. (See my other threads). If GPS jamming and spoofing becomes more prevalent in the USA and Europe Embraer is going to have to do something about it. As long as gpsjam.org is a happy green where most Phenoms fly, I don't think much will change.

OpsGroup did just post on issues with GPS in Mexco Cty. Interesting that Mexico city is green as of today on gpsjam.org.

Like (Username Protected), I am selling my Phenom 300 because (a) I need more range but also (b) GPS jamming and spoofing create safety issues that take the plane outside of my comfort zone for IMC conditions.

I am moving to a Praetor 600 so I'm not as frustrated with Embraer as he is.

My opinion (reiterated) is GPS jamming and spoofing scenarios (in all phases of flight) should be a standard part of initial and recurrent training.

-(Username Protected)