Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Highest/lowest  
User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2740 posts, RR: 2
Posted (9 years 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1656 times:

Which a/c has the highest/lowest climb out rate?

[Edited 2005-11-26 18:21:26]

[Edited 2005-11-26 18:21:53]


אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMiamiair From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1635 times:

Highest: McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle or English Electric Lightning

Lowest: Anybody's guess

You really need to be a bit more specific.


User currently offlineXXXX10 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 777 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1620 times:

Highest commercial a/c, was probably Concorde, did over 10,000 fpm on her.

Lowest is hard to say I bet the A340 is in there somewhere


User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 15
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1614 times:

Quoting XXXX10 (Reply 2):
Lowest is hard to say I bet the A340 is in there somewhere

a DC-10-10 LOADED.


User currently offlineStirling From Italy, joined Jun 2004, 3943 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1606 times:

Lowest Rate of Climb?

The Wright Flyer. That sucker barely got off the ground...but aren't we all glad it did!



Delete this User
User currently offlineAirfoilsguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1584 times:

Highest rate of climb: U.S. space shuttle.
Lowest rate of climb: spruce goose


User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2740 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1562 times:

Yes, I have to be more precise.I speak about current commercial airliners.


אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1446 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.
User currently offlineJush From Germany, joined Apr 2005, 1636 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1430 times:

400 ft/min. That would be ridiculously slow. That must be great as a passenger as you can clearly see the ground for a loooong time.

Regds
jush



There is one problem with airbus. Though their products are engineering marvels they lack passion, completely.
User currently offlineFlyabunch From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 517 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1425 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.

Mike


User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1418 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.
User currently offlineBohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2749 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1404 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" Big grin on climb performance.

Best - 757

Worst - A UTA DC-10-30 fully loaded heading to PPT. That beast barely cleared my house.  Smile
2nd worst - A fully loaded Mexicana 727. That one set off all the car alarms in my neighborhood.


User currently offlineMiamiair From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1385 times:

What about a DC-6 at 90K TOW, on 100LL, on a warm, humid MIA morning?

User currently offlineLY777 From France, joined Nov 2005, 2740 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1298 times:

the 757 seems to climb quickly


אמא, אני מתגעגע לך
User currently offlineJarheadK5 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 216 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1218 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....



Cleared to Contact
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Highest/lowest
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
What GA Plane Has Highest 100LL Cap? posted Sun Jul 9 2006 16:16:09 by KDTWflyer
Highest Winds You've Seen In A Metar? posted Thu Feb 16 2006 02:13:43 by FLY2HMO
Hey Pilots: What's Your Highest Altitude posted Fri Oct 31 2003 21:13:24 by Lehpron
Highest Quality Engines posted Tue Aug 26 2003 09:46:43 by BOEING747400
Highest Altitude In A C-172? posted Fri Apr 11 2003 17:23:51 by NiteRider30
Whats The Highest You Picked Up An ILS Beam posted Fri Sep 20 2002 14:37:14 by Trent_800
Highest Thrust For 747-400 posted Tue Jun 26 2001 06:20:52 by Hkniceguy
Lowest Power Setting And! posted Thu Apr 19 2001 03:58:44 by Bryan Becker

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format