CosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2222 posts, RR: 16 Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1350 times:
Quoting XXXX10 (Reply 2): Lowest is hard to say I bet the A340 is in there somewhere
SlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 71 Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1182 times:
Quoting LY777 (Reply 6): Yes, I have to be more precise.I speak about current commercial airliners.
Most four-holers are dogs. It is a natural function of the way the performance criteria are written in the certification rules - being predicated on the loss of one engine. Twins have to meet them after losing 50% of their total thrust, four-holers have to meet their criteria after losing only 25% of theirs. Don't know much about the 747-400 but there is at least one regular here who does! The BAe-146 was a hog for sure. 747-100 is said to be the pig of the whole jet fleet.
I once passed one (B741)) more than a hundred and ten nautical miles out of San Francisco on his way to Asia. It was just wallowing out of eleven thousand feet. That is a whopping 100 feet of climb for every nautical mile made good, not counting any additional maneuvering they'd done. That equates to a climb rate, at an average of 250 knots of just about four hundred feet per minute - on ALL FOUR engines. I'd expect most twinjets to exceed that at max gross weight with only one engine running.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
Flyabunch From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 513 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1161 times:
To add about the slow rates on old 741's and 742's, I can recall standing at SFO and watching the transpacific flights barely make it over the hills northwest of the airport. The first time I saw it, I thought the guy was going in. And then 15 minutes later, a second one followed almost the same path. They sure seemed like they were working hard for the altitude.
SlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 71 Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1154 times:
Quoting Flyabunch (Reply 9): I can recall standing at SFO and watching the transpacific flights barely make it over the hills northwest of the airport.
I was just thinking about the same thing. I'm pretty sure the one I saw 110nm out (near Point Arena California) had departed off 28 Left or Right and out through that slot. Not all departure procedures have to consider obstacles that far out.
The strange one however, is departing the opposite direction, on the 1-0s. Most runways at SFO, being cool and at sea level, do not have much in the way of restrictions. In the rare event of a departure off runways 10 Left or Right there is something of an anomaly.
On 10R (I think I've got the L/R correct) there is no particular problem - weight limits are driven by structural up to maybe 70 degrees or so, then maybe by second-segment. Of the right, there is a pretty big hit. (on the analysis from some vendors) We've studied this at length and think it is based on Mount Lick. Basically, if you took off on that runway, lost an engine, climbed on runway heading with no wind drift, for 29 nautical miles and did not climb above 4200 feet you would hit a single protruding peak in the Diablo Range.
Well, in my opinion, if you took off, lost an engine, flew 29 miles in a straight line - in defiance of your departure clearance - and did not climb above 4200 feet you deserve to crash into a mountain.
A turn short of, say, 25 miles would save you. A turn of one degree right after flap retraction would save you. But there you are - a smoking hole right below the observatory!
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
Bohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2430 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1140 times:
I used to live in San Bruno, CA just 3/4 mile from the end of 28L at SFO. Living directly under the takeoff path of a major airport made me an "expert" on climb performance.
Best - 757
Worst - A UTA DC-10-30 fully loaded heading to PPT. That beast barely cleared my house.
2nd worst - A fully loaded Mexicana 727. That one set off all the car alarms in my neighborhood.
JarheadK5 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 216 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 954 times:
Quoting SlamClick (Reply 7): 747-100 is said to be the pig of the whole jet fleet.
In '94, I rode a dirty, worn-out Tower Air 747-100 from MCAS El Toro to Kadena AB, via Anchorage and Yokota. T/O out of El Toro and Anchorage felt like the slowest aviation events EVER. At ET, I was really starting to think we were gonna end up in Foothill Ranch....
Sponsor Message: 
From France, joined Nov 2005, 2456 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 777 posts, 
From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, 
From Germany, joined Apr 2005, 1636 posts, 
on climb performance.
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
