Change Forum... Civil Aviation Travel, Polls & Prefs Tech/Ops Aviation Hobby Aviation Photography Photography Feedback Trip Reports Military Av & Space Non-Aviation Site Related LIVE Chat My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search
 Glide Ratio Of Airline Jets Compared To A Light Ac
 Jadedmonkeys From United States of America, joined May 2004, 67 posts, RR: 3Posted Tue Jun 22 2004 05:23:52 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 46470 times:

 I was reading this article on Netscape about a pilot who lost his job and wrote a book called "Ask the Pilot: Everything You Need to Know About Air Travel." Anyway one of the questions is: Q. If a large commercial jet loses total engine power, can it glide to a landing, or is it all over? A. Complete engine loss "is about as probable as a flight attendant volunteering to give you a shoe shine." He says that a large jet that has no power actually performs better than a light Piper or Cessna without power since it has a glide ratio that is almost double that of small planes. I know the glide ratio for the Cessna 172 I fly is 9:1 which is for every 1,000 feet of altitude I will cover about 9,000 feet which is 1.7 miles. so let's say a 737 has a glide ratio of almost double 9:1 like 17:1, if it's 10,000 feet in the air and 32 miles away from LAX, it will actually glide right onto a runway, I find that hard to believe. Are there any pilots out there who can confirm the glide ratio of any commercial jet? BTW I got that calculation by 10,000X17/5280
 NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 05:30:42 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 46459 times:

 This argument comes up a lot with my friends. Commercial airliners need thrust to create lift on the wings. The air flow over the wings lifts the aircraft in the sky. I feel a commercial airliner would stall after if lost power. Also if a commercial airliner did lose all engines and was gliding to a safe landing what would happen if it needed to maneuver while it came in? Sounds to me that a pilot that lost all engines would have to get it down fast and hope he didn't have to do much.
 Nearord From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 185 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 05:34:11 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 46452 times:

 You could find out by searching for the air canada stories from the 90's about the 767 that ran out of gas cause the fuel guys forgot to do the conversion. It glided to safety at an abandoned air force runway that was having a car race at the time. I don't really know the details, but I'm sure there were lots of stories about it. Btw, that sounds about correct at between 16-20:1 for the larger jets. It wouldn't stall as long as the nose start pitching down and altitude is traded for airspeed. Most airliners have a best glide speed of about 200-230 kts and normally cruise a lot faster than that. [Edited 2004-06-22 05:38:40]
 N766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8510 posts, RR: 23 Reply 3, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 05:34:59 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 46449 times:

 There have been at least 2 or 3 large jets that have glided to safety. I think they have a glide ratio is like 12:1 or something like that. One was a 767 and the other I know of an A330.[Edited 2004-06-22 05:35:19]
 This Website Censors Me
 Philsquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 05:41:18 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 46438 times:

 A typical commercial airliner will glide at a ratio of about 3:1. So if I were at 10000 feet and lost all my engines, I could expect to glide about 30 miles. On the aircraft I fly, the 744, at high gross weights, the ratio approaches almost 4:1, the aircraft doesn't want to come down at all. There is another problem in that on the two engine aircraft, you have a RAT which when extended will give hydraulic and or electrical. On most two engine aircraft the APU can be started in flight so you have another power source. On the 747/747-400, the apu can't be started in flight, although I would sure try, but there is no RAT either. So, you could glide some distance, but as you slowed down the engines would windmill at a slower speed. The flight controls are all hydraulic and the volume of fluid the pump puts out at low engine speeds would probably be insufficient to control the aircraft. Likely scenario, I don't think so. My guess is, just like the BA and KLM aircraft that encountered volcanic ash, is you'd get at least one engine restarted.
 N766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8510 posts, RR: 23 Reply 5, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 05:43:19 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 46431 times:

 A clean 727-200 has a glide ratio of 17:1. A clean MD-80 has a glide ratio of 28:1. A clean 747-200 has a glide ratio of 17:1 as well. http://www.gte.se/userfiles/129/GTE_Economical_Paper.pdf[Edited 2004-06-22 05:44:40]
 This Website Censors Me
 Ralgha From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 1614 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 05:43:57 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 46429 times:

 This argument comes up a lot with my friends. Commercial airliners need thrust to create lift on the wings. The air flow over the wings lifts the aircraft in the sky. I feel a commercial airliner would stall after if lost power. Also if a commercial airliner did lose all engines and was gliding to a safe landing what would happen if it needed to maneuver while it came in? Sounds to me that a pilot that lost all engines would have to get it down fast and hope he didn't have to do much. You are dead, dead wrong. Airliners, just like any airplane, do not need thrust to create lift, they need angle of attack (not too much), and airspeed. If you lose power, then you sacrifice altitude to keep airspeed, i.e., you GLIDE. Airliners are generally much more streamlined than many GA propellor airplanes. They also don't have the windmilling prop after the engine dies, which is the equivilant of putting a solid disk on the front of the airplane as far as drag goes. When you feather a prop, you can feel the drag go away and the airplane goes a lot farther. Even if the prop doesn't feather (most single engine variable pitch airplanes), you can still feel the drag drop dramatically when you pull the prop control all the way out. Most people (even pilots) are surprised at how far an airplane will glide. I pulled the engine on one of my students and suggested we try for the airport over there. He said no way we could make that. I told him to give it a shot. Guess what, we made it easily, even had to throw out the flaps so we didn't overshoot.
 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
 QantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 24 Reply 7, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 05:55:32 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 46416 times:

 It all depends on the L/D (lift to drag) ratio of the aircraft in question... Cheers, QantasA332
 Bohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2775 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 05:59:45 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 46406 times:

 There was an Air Transat flight which lost all power after a fuel leak over the Atlantic a few years ago. It managed to land in the Azores. There was a program on TV about it recently but I can't remember which network it was on.
 Vorticity From United States of America, joined May 2004, 337 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 06:16:03 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 46391 times:

 Tan (glide_angle) = 1 (Lift/Drag) easily enough ... Tan (glide_angle)min = 1 (Lift/Drag)max The velocity for L/D max varies with altitude, but you can continue to derive basic performance equations and come up with the velocity needed for best glide slope at any altitude. A Gulfstream IV can make 82 miles by performance equations, at an angle of 3.964 degrees from 30,000 ft. Ideal velocity varies from 374 knots at 30,000 ft to 229 knots at sea level.[Edited 2004-06-22 06:16:56]
 Thermodynamics and english units don't mix...
 Areopagus From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1376 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 07:13:41 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 46372 times:

 Philsquares: A typical commercial airliner will glide at a ratio of about 3:1. So if I were at 10000 feet and lost all my engines, I could expect to glide about 30 miles. I think you mistyped. 10000 feet altitude is almost 2 miles, so if you glide about 30 miles, you have a 15:1 glide ratio.
 Jadedmonkeys From United States of America, joined May 2004, 67 posts, RR: 3 Reply 11, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 07:31:56 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 46366 times:

 I knew that they glided because if they didn't then they probably wouldn't even fly, but i didn't realize they really did have a glide ratio better than a light single engine airplane. 28:1 on an MD-80? WOW, that's really good. That means if I calculated correctly that if an MD-80 lost all power at FL 350 they would glide for 185 miles! That means if the aircraft is at FL 380 it can glide from Las Vegas to Los Angeles.
 Philsquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 09:38:36 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 46335 times:

 My mistake, you are correct. On an average weight 400 it is 15:1 a heavier weight 400 it approaches 20:1
 SailorOrion From Germany, joined Feb 2001, 2058 posts, RR: 6 Reply 13, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 11:22:10 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 46318 times:

 Most commercial airlines are at around 15:1 to 20:1 these days. SailorOrion
 Vzlet From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 839 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 13:25:29 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 46293 times:

 Glide ratio doesn't vary with weight changes, but at a heavier weight a given ratio will be achieved at a higher speed.
 "That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
 707cmf From France, joined Mar 2002, 4885 posts, RR: 28 Reply 15, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 14:37:27 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 46265 times:

 A typical commercial airliner will glide at a ratio of about 3:1. So if I were at 10000 feet and lost all my engines, I could expect to glide about 30 miles. On the aircraft I fly, the 744, at high gross weights, the ratio approaches almost 4:1, the aircraft doesn't want to come down at all. And you are a 747 captain ? Wow. I am but a lowly kilofox pilot (small prop), but let me remind you something : glide ratio has next to nothing to do with the load. An aircraft at full load will have roughly the same glide ratio as an empty one. First point. Second point, if you think a typical commercial airliner has a 3:1 ratio. may I ask you when was you last simulator checkride ? Heck, a 3:1 ratio is the ratio of a parachute ! A commercial airliner's ratio will be somewhere between 15 and 20. Nowhere near 4 (fortunately). That's your story and you stick to it, but heck, just by that post you really sound like an armchair captain. cheers, 707
 Philsquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 14:54:39 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 46253 times:

 Ben From Switzerland, joined Aug 1999, 1391 posts, RR: 50 Reply 17, posted Tue Jun 22 2004 17:39:52 UTC (10 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 46203 times:

 707cmf, That was a typo by Philsquares. You probably hadn't seen the correction (reply 12) before you posted your message.... Thanks for all the information, Phil. You said: You will find the heavier aircraft takes more distance to descend. OK just to clarify that point. Are you saying that the aerodynamics are actually better at a higher speed? I would guess that is the case but have not reached that subject in my studies/exams yet. It comes up towards the end I think. It is virtually impossible to tell a 'lay person' about the relationship between weight, airspeed and glide range. Yes, a 300t aircraft does glide better than a Cessna.. they think you're weird.
 Top Of Page Change Forum... Civil Aviation Travel, Polls & Prefs Tech/Ops Aviation Hobby Aviation Photography Photography Feedback Trip Reports Military Av & Space Non-Aviation Site Related LIVE Chat Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

 Similar topics: More similar topics...
Experience Of Flying International Compared To Dom posted Fri Oct 15 2004 04:09:18 by Flyboy80
The Cost Of The 777 Compared To Its Competitors posted Sun Feb 22 2004 19:03:27 by Dreamcraft
Brazil To Finance Domestic Sales Of Embraer Jets posted Thu Aug 17 2006 12:50:54 by Lumberton
CVG Fares Very High Compared To Rest Of Nation posted Thu Jul 27 2006 18:37:32 by DAYflyer
Economics Of The 767-300ER Compared To The 787-8? posted Tue May 30 2006 15:35:07 by OyKIE
AC's A321 Y Seating Compared To A319/A320s? posted Thu Apr 13 2006 19:25:45 by Samurai 777
Improved Performance Of MEL Compared To SYD posted Sat Jan 21 2006 01:30:10 by Antskip
Has Any Airline Been Able To Get Out Of Chapter 11 posted Wed Sep 28 2005 03:04:32 by BA747
New Season Of Airline: What To Expect? posted Sun May 1 2005 21:16:06 by S12PPL
The Price Of Cab/Parking/Lodge Compared To Airfare posted Thu Mar 24 2005 04:21:14 by Aviationhack
Airline Pricing Compared To Other Modes Of Travel posted Sat Oct 6 2007 01:17:37 by SkyguyB727
Experience Of Flying International Compared To Dom posted Fri Oct 15 2004 04:09:18 by Flyboy80
The Cost Of The 777 Compared To Its Competitors posted Sun Feb 22 2004 19:03:27 by Dreamcraft
Ratio Of "Mainline" To "Regional" In US Majors? posted Sat Mar 13 2010 10:38:57 by viscount630
Airline Catering Now Compared To Then posted Fri Nov 16 2007 19:51:03 by AFGMEL
China To Rein In Growth Of Airline Industry posted Wed Aug 15 2007 23:08:09 by TKV
Ratio Of Engine Diameter To Fuselage Diameter posted Tue Jun 26 2007 16:37:32 by N14AZ
Length Of Time It Takes To License Airline? (UK) posted Tue Jan 9 2007 05:22:05 by DCAYOW
Brazil To Finance Domestic Sales Of Embraer Jets posted Thu Aug 17 2006 12:50:54 by Lumberton
CVG Fares Very High Compared To Rest Of Nation posted Thu Jul 27 2006 18:37:32 by DAYflyer
Experience Of Flying International Compared To Dom posted Fri Oct 15 2004 04:09:18 by Flyboy80
The Cost Of The 777 Compared To Its Competitors posted Sun Feb 22 2004 19:03:27 by Dreamcraft
Ratio Of "Mainline" To "Regional" In US Majors? posted Sat Mar 13 2010 10:38:57 by viscount630
Airline Catering Now Compared To Then posted Fri Nov 16 2007 19:51:03 by AFGMEL
China To Rein In Growth Of Airline Industry posted Wed Aug 15 2007 23:08:09 by TKV
Ratio Of Engine Diameter To Fuselage Diameter posted Tue Jun 26 2007 16:37:32 by N14AZ
Length Of Time It Takes To License Airline? (UK) posted Tue Jan 9 2007 05:22:05 by DCAYOW
Brazil To Finance Domestic Sales Of Embraer Jets posted Thu Aug 17 2006 12:50:54 by Lumberton
CVG Fares Very High Compared To Rest Of Nation posted Thu Jul 27 2006 18:37:32 by DAYflyer
Airline Pricing Compared To Other Modes Of Travel posted Sat Oct 6 2007 01:17:37 by SkyguyB727
Experience Of Flying International Compared To Dom posted Fri Oct 15 2004 04:09:18 by Flyboy80
The Cost Of The 777 Compared To Its Competitors posted Sun Feb 22 2004 19:03:27 by Dreamcraft
Ratio Of "Mainline" To "Regional" In US Majors? posted Sat Mar 13 2010 10:38:57 by viscount630
Airline Catering Now Compared To Then posted Fri Nov 16 2007 19:51:03 by AFGMEL
China To Rein In Growth Of Airline Industry posted Wed Aug 15 2007 23:08:09 by TKV
Ratio Of Engine Diameter To Fuselage Diameter posted Tue Jun 26 2007 16:37:32 by N14AZ
Length Of Time It Takes To License Airline? (UK) posted Tue Jan 9 2007 05:22:05 by DCAYOW
Brazil To Finance Domestic Sales Of Embraer Jets posted Thu Aug 17 2006 12:50:54 by Lumberton
CVG Fares Very High Compared To Rest Of Nation posted Thu Jul 27 2006 18:37:32 by DAYflyer
The Cost Of The 777 Compared To Its Competitors posted Sun Feb 22 2004 19:03:27 by Dreamcraft
Ratio Of "Mainline" To "Regional" In US Majors? posted Sat Mar 13 2010 10:38:57 by viscount630
Airline Catering Now Compared To Then posted Fri Nov 16 2007 19:51:03 by AFGMEL
China To Rein In Growth Of Airline Industry posted Wed Aug 15 2007 23:08:09 by TKV
Ratio Of Engine Diameter To Fuselage Diameter posted Tue Jun 26 2007 16:37:32 by N14AZ
Length Of Time It Takes To License Airline? (UK) posted Tue Jan 9 2007 05:22:05 by DCAYOW
Brazil To Finance Domestic Sales Of Embraer Jets posted Thu Aug 17 2006 12:50:54 by Lumberton
CVG Fares Very High Compared To Rest Of Nation posted Thu Jul 27 2006 18:37:32 by DAYflyer
Ratio Of "Mainline" To "Regional" In US Majors? posted Sat Mar 13 2010 10:38:57 by viscount630
Airline Catering Now Compared To Then posted Fri Nov 16 2007 19:51:03 by AFGMEL
China To Rein In Growth Of Airline Industry posted Wed Aug 15 2007 23:08:09 by TKV
Ratio Of Engine Diameter To Fuselage Diameter posted Tue Jun 26 2007 16:37:32 by N14AZ
Length Of Time It Takes To License Airline? (UK) posted Tue Jan 9 2007 05:22:05 by DCAYOW
Brazil To Finance Domestic Sales Of Embraer Jets posted Thu Aug 17 2006 12:50:54 by Lumberton
Ratio Of Engine Diameter To Fuselage Diameter posted Tue Jun 26 2007 16:37:32 by N14AZ
Length Of Time It Takes To License Airline? (UK) posted Tue Jan 9 2007 05:22:05 by DCAYOW
Brazil To Finance Domestic Sales Of Embraer Jets posted Thu Aug 17 2006 12:50:54 by Lumberton
Airline Catering Now Compared To Then posted Fri Nov 16 2007 19:51:03 by AFGMEL
China To Rein In Growth Of Airline Industry posted Wed Aug 15 2007 23:08:09 by TKV
Ratio Of Engine Diameter To Fuselage Diameter posted Tue Jun 26 2007 16:37:32 by N14AZ
Length Of Time It Takes To License Airline? (UK) posted Tue Jan 9 2007 05:22:05 by DCAYOW
Brazil To Finance Domestic Sales Of Embraer Jets posted Thu Aug 17 2006 12:50:54 by Lumberton