Re: Concord Climb rate ?

Date:         23 Aug 98 14:34:05 
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
References:   1 2 3 4 5
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1998.1284@ohare.Chicago.COM>, Tom Turton <> wrote:
> Karl Swartz wrote:
> > I was on a UA 757 flying SFO-LAX a few years ago and, listening on
> > channel 9, heard our pilots request a higher altitude.  ATC granted
> > the request on the condition that we could do at least 3000 fpm --
> > we could, and as I recall gave them better than 4000 fpm.  So, I
> > seriously doubt the accuracy of Tom's numbers.
> Boys, boys, boys -
> I never claimed those to be MAX climb rates - only representative
> numbers as published in an FAA document.  It is my "assumption" that
> those are probably nominal climb rates that the aircraft can "always"
> make (high weight, close to cruising altitudes??).   Obviously, a
> lighter weight airplane flying on a nice crisp clear day at lower
> altitude, can probably burn through those numbers.  I merely posted them
> as a starting point - hoping that someone else might have a source of
> better data than mine (i.e. a flight ops manual).

cowboy's comment; what the hell are we trying to find out here, initial rates
of climb or the time to height. It will depend on power to weight ratio, ie,
as stated above, the lighter the aeroplane the higher it can climb but the
longer it takes. There will be consistency if we presume the aeroplane is
operated correctly and is climbed to the optimum altitude for the weight.
That's what a PERFORMANCE MANUAL will indicate. They all go well at the start
but at the end they are staggering a bit.If KS was on one that could, off the
bat,at altitude, find 3000 plus fpm then it must have been suffering an
altitude blockage and was way to light for the altitude at which it was

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----   Create Your Own Free Member Forum