OS
Yes, I did, but it applied to a certain beast that didn't meet all the civil requirements. Can you guess?
Regards to turning departures, up to a point (30 degrees) the loss of performance is kind of linear. That is, shallower bank angles lead to less loss of performance but more time getting the required turn equals, or closely equals, a higher bank angle with greater performance loss but less time spent turning. 15 degrees is the standard compromise, I believe, because most FAR 25 planes can do that bank angle at V2 without causing margin problems.
Today, departing Rifle, CO, while I had a APG Company runway analysis for CL60 departure, it was interesting to load the SID gradients and level-off heights. Loading the standard level-off height and noting the EO gradient in the FMS and then reloading the SID "top of gradient" height, it was about 15% loss in gradient going from 1500 QFE level-off to 4400 QFE level-off. Airport elevation was 5540 MSL.
Speaking of the Galaxy, departing Anderson AFB, Guam with a 600 drop to the ocean, we had ex-bomber guys who figured we didn't have to meet AFM minimum climb gradients (WAT limit) because there was nothing to hit. They were disabused of this idea, by me amongst others. True, BUFFs did sometimes disappear after lift-off (level-off?) and reappear several miles downrange.
GF