How airliners climb

[cencal83406]

Originally Posted by Chris_Ford

But you don't hold yourself to the standards put forth in your FOM? Look, all you have to say is "I HAVE NO PROBLEM BLATANTLY DISREGARDING THE FOM ON ISSUES I DEEM UNIMPORTANT"
I think disregarding company policy is pretty unprofessional. You sound like a few Pinnacle pilots a few years ago who 410d it.
O........kay...... So let's hypothetically say I have no 121 experience...
You're telling someone who isn't in the airline business that it's okay for pilots to decide which rules they want to follow? That sets a horrible example. How about you do your damn job the way it's supposed to be done, and despite what you think, that's the way your company says, end of story.
I might be 22, but at least I know how to conjugate the verb "fly"

I must be confused but you can fly a constant speed in VS mode (you just gotta tweak it is all....) all the captains I've flown with put it in VS mode to get ballpark 290 pretty quick out of ten so the airplane doesn't do the porpouise crud.

And hey what's wrong with FL410 In the right airplane of course. I never really understood what was so cool about it.... heck I've been to FL430... all it means is less TUC if the airplane explosively decompresses.

--btw before someone claims I'm dangerous (yeah I shaved with a Mach 3 the other day)... FL410 wasn't in a CRJ.... Citation Excels and CJs cruise fine at 43.

[Nick]

I say, the lower the better.

Less hazardous crap like ozone down there.

[cencal83406]

Originally Posted by Nick

I say, the lower the better.

Less hazardous crap like ozone down there.

Isn't there a way better chance of not getting skin cancer below something like 27K???

I can't imagine it's good for us to be in the 30s with no sunglasses even with no direct sunlight - did anyone see how quick that guy on Discovery Channel got snowblind on Everest?!

[AP2B]

Minus the bickering(ishness), I've greatly enjoyed this thread. It's nice to read some "how it's done" type stuff.

[Nick]

Originally Posted by cencal83406

Isn't there a way better chance of not getting skin cancer below something like 27K???

I can't imagine it's good for us to be in the 30s with no sunglasses even with no direct sunlight - did anyone see how quick that guy on Discovery Channel got snowblind on Everest?!

I never, ever let myself be in direct sunlight at cruise altitude.

My plane, just an RJ, even has a few pages in the limitations section about ozone and the maximum flight times allowed at various latitudes. We don't fly it far enough north to really be affected by it, from what I see on the chart, but I sure would like to know from people like Staplegun if it is at all a consideration on the polar routes. The trop is low up there so that may be a fuel consideration but I'd like to know about all the harmful rays and ozone too.

[SoCalAprch]

I don't know too much about the OZONE stuff. I think it is bad juju for the plane to fly through it? I didn't go over it too much or at all because as said before we dont go far enough north to have it become an issue. What does it do to cause a limitation to be put on the plane? I think someone said its bad for the engines but I may be thinking of something else.

[Doug Taylor]

Originally Posted by Cptnchia

No wonder I'm always getting slowed down and vectored around regional jets! By the way, the 757/767 will climb at .75. The ERs will do even better than that. Of course I fly them domsetically, so we're alot lighter than what Doug is used to.

Pretty light to FRA, field elevation to FL370 in about 13 minutes, even with a couple of level offs.

On the mad dog, it was 250 to 10K, 310-ish to mach transition, then about .73-.74 to cruise, depending of course on cost index.

Some of the cost indices have been running higher in the winter time westbound of out Europe in order to get the more favorable altitudes across the tracks... Sometimes as high as .83 on the tracks and indices as low as 50.

[Cptnchia]

Originally Posted by Doug Taylor

Sometimes as high as .83 on the tracks and indices as low as 50.

50! The highest I've seen so far domestically is 22. We usually get between 18 & 20.

[ppragman]

Interesting thread so far. Here's my $.02

As for flying the prof's, it depends. If you have no other reason to fly different than the profile than you want to, then, welllllllllll......that might not be the best reason. However, if you have a rationale for it, that makes good common sense, then fly how you need to fly. Don't mindlessly follow any profile or technique. Understand why, and if you have to adjust accordingly.

For example:

Our company specifies 180KIAS (be1900) in the climb up to 10K then maintain 500fpm all the way up to the flight levels. However, if you climb at 180Kias on a day where its warm enough for icing (alaska) then you won't make 10 grande. You'll have so much ice on the wings after climbing at about an average of 1200fpm that several captains who strictly adhere to the profs have had to turn back.

The book minimum speed for icing is 160Kias. When I penetrate a layer on an icy day, I pitch for 160 so I can get through in about half the time and don't have to fight it. Is it safe? yes. Is it professional? yes. Does it stray from the company procedures....yes.

That being said, I'm a FO. If the captain wants to pitch for 180, more power to him, but I get a little jervous and nerky with all the ice building up and our performance rapidly dropping off.


What I'm saying is "use your head!" Don't just do things for "#####s and giggles," but you are still pilots and are entitled to some say about the operation of the airplane while you're at the wheel. Safety first, company money second, personal desires third.

[rjmore]

The company keeps track of my cosmic radiation exposure for me. I can look it up online and see what the calculated exposure was for the last year. Once it gets too high I guess I get some time off!

[NJA_Capt]

Originally Posted by ppragman

The book minimum speed for icing is 160Kias. When I penetrate a layer on an icy day, I pitch for 160 so I can get through in about half the time and don't have to fight it. Is it safe? yes. Is it professional? yes. Does it stray from the company procedures....yes.

That being said, I'm a FO. If the captain wants to pitch for 180, more power to him, but I get a little jervous and nerky with all the ice building up and our performance rapidly dropping off.

Just a consideration. 160 is your minimum speed for flight in icing. Maximum is up to you. When you start loading up with ice it takes more performance to maintain speed. If you are at 180kias and start loading up, you still have some margin above your min icing speed. If you are climbing at your min icing speed and load up, you most likely won't have the power to continue climbing. As you mentioned above: Would you rather be at 180 with performance rappidly dropping, or at 160 with perf dropping?


Good discussion. I haven't considered "climbing" at min icing speed for a long time, because we climb 100 kts above min icing speed. For us it is more of an arrival/approach consideration.

[SkiHigh2002]

Originally Posted by rjmore

The company keeps track of my cosmic radiation exposure for me. I can look it up online and see what the calculated exposure was for the last year. Once it gets too high I guess I get some time off!

Isn't that the little plastic thing the FedEx pilots wear on their lanyards? I think one of them told me once it was for exposure to radiation.

[rjmore]

Originally Posted by SkiHigh2002

Isn't that the little plastic thing the FedEx pilots wear on their lanyards? I think one of them told me once it was for exposure to radiation.

Could be, for us it is a calculation I think. However they do it they are required by the HKCAD to keep track.

[mikecweb]

I assume the FedEx pilots are wearing Dosimeter badges and that is for the nukes in the back of the plane. We wear the same badge. Keeps track of total radiation exposure each month.

[seagull]

Originally Posted by mikecweb

I assume the FedEx pilots are wearing Dosimeter badges and that is for the nukes in the back of the plane. We wear the same badge. Keeps track of total radiation exposure each month.

This is true.

[bLizZuE]

I love the vibe this thread has got going. Can't wait to join that workforce.

[mikecweb]

Originally Posted by bLizZuE

I love the vibe this thread has got going. Can't wait to join that workforce.

Come fly freight. As long as you are in and out of the chocks on time we really don't give a crap how you got there.
Seriously, I've flown at FL180 on a 300 mile leg to make a deadline and I didn't hear one thing about it.

[NJA_Capt]

Originally Posted by mikecweb

As long as you are in and out of the chalks on time......

(emphasis added)

Sorry, gotta bust your chops.....

Chalk = soft porous sedimentary rock

Chock = block or wedge used to keep something from moving.

[mikecweb]

Originally Posted by NJA_Capt

(emphasis added)

Sorry, gotta bust your chops.....

Chalk = soft porous sedimentary rock

Chock = block or wedge used to keep something from moving.

huh?

[ppragman]

Originally Posted by NJA_Capt

Just a consideration. 160 is your minimum speed for flight in icing. Maximum is up to you. When you start loading up with ice it takes more performance to maintain speed. If you are at 180kias and start loading up, you still have some margin above your min icing speed. If you are climbing at your min icing speed and load up, you most likely won't have the power to continue climbing. As you mentioned above: Would you rather be at 180 with performance rappidly dropping, or at 160 with perf dropping?


Good discussion. I haven't considered "climbing" at min icing speed for a long time, because we climb 100 kts above min icing speed. For us it is more of an arrival/approach consideration.

That's a good point, however, depending on the thickness of the layer, often times you won't be able to climb all the way through it, and you'll be stuck and have to go back through it. Which, is very spooky. Thankfully though, the serious icing won't start back up again for another month or so.