Hi Tim, yes you’re correct, currently the TODA is not considered. The tool tries to reach V2/35’ by the end of the TORA.
While obviously not perfect, the logic here is that because SimBrief can’t account for obstacles (no obstacle database available), limiting ourselves to the TORA is more conservative. And when comparing with real-world tools (which do account for obstacles), using the TORA-only approach tended to give results that were the closest match.
This kind of makes sense when you think about it:
- Airports with a large split between TORA and TODA seem to be more likely to have obstacles along the takeoff path (perhaps they don’t bother to pave the clearway portion because of these obstacles).
- At these airports, real world tools initially take credit for the TODA, but often end up limiting their TOW due to obstacles instead.
- SimBrief arrives at a similar MTOW result by not taking credit for the TODA, which seems to (more or less) match the obstacle penalty that real-world tools give.
- At airports where TORA equals TODA, this tends to be associated with less obstacles in the takeoff path, so SimBrief ends up matching real world tools in both cases.
Obviously this approach is based on some pretty big assumptions, and there are surely airports without obstacles that have a long clearway for example. But I still think this is the best compromise since we (at least currently) don’t have any obstacle data.
And for what it’s worth, I strongly suspect EGLC would be very obstacle limited. I don’t have access to real world tools for this unfortunately, but I’d be shocked if they let you use the entire TODA without becoming obstacle limited instead. 
Best regards,