I agree. Remembering Boeing's VNAV is available at > 400 feet, setting the MD11's AA to 400 feet (or 1000) would essentially duplicate the 744's 1st/2nd segment TO speed profile. Still, we need to remember the real purpose of AA. Engine-out climb to miss that obstacle. An all-engines climb at V2+10 will provide a Significantly higher ROC than an engine-out V2 climb. Thereby, an all-engines V2+10 climb will achieve AA Much sooner (or in a shorter lateral distance) than an engine-out V2 climb. If the engines keep running this discussion really has no point, but that's not the point.An engine-out V2 climb is a Painfully slow affair. AA is not just an altitude. It's also a lateral distance from the V1 event. Forward-speed X Rate-of-climb will equal 30 (50?) feet above the tip of the down- range obstacle the airplane needs to clear (I.E., the airplane must be able to clear this obstacle even if an engine fails at V1+1). If an engine fails at any liner foot beyond the physical spot on the runway where V1+1 occurs, - additional - clearance over that obstacle will occur. So. if an engine fails (even) at lift-off, the obstacle clearance is made-in the-shade. If the engines are all still running at 400 feet, Boeing's VNAV starts trading off ROC for airspeed. That's the thinking for a Boeing . . . but also - could - be the thinking for Any TO that is seriously observing a V-speed based obstacle avoidance strategy.Other than for noise abatement, I'm curious about how RW crews handle 1-2 segment climb. The Boeing guys can punch in the AP anywhere above 400' cuz their capture AS is averaging up under their actual AS. No so with the MD. I agree that resetting AA to a lower alt works in the sim world, but it otherwise would have some very unforgiving real world consequences.

The RW procedures need to be looked into because this seems to go real deep now lolPaul