PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Questions (https://www.pprune.org/questions-67/)
-   -   Best rate of climb (https://www.pprune.org/questions/295627-best-rate-climb.html)

Dude~ 10th Oct 2007 11:07

What's the best rate of climb you've seen?
 
Had a positioning flight the other day where initial rate of climb was 5200 fpm which I thought was great! No doubt others have seen more so please post your best rate of climb in your aircraft! Zoom climbs count too as long as you make the distinction between initial ROC and zoom ROC!
(Maybe this thread has been done before but I tried searching for a thread on this subject but found nothing even using Google)

A Very Civil Pilot 10th Oct 2007 18:46

600 fpm - PA28 :ok:











(oh, and probably about 5500 fpm in a 737)
shouldn't this be in the 'Answers' forum, not questions? :p

Dufo 10th Oct 2007 19:10

150fpm.. Piper seneca I with one mixer inop :E
..and some 3000fpm+ in empty EMB120.

westinghouse 11th Oct 2007 08:48

500 fpm, airbus 340 at max wieghts.:ok:

Maude Charlee 11th Oct 2007 11:39

6000fpm+

Empty Dash 8 Q400. Most amusing. :E

Green Guard 15th Oct 2007 08:06

are you a robot or a pilot
 

Had a positioning flight the other day where initial rate of climb was 5200 fpm which I thought was great!
I think it was NOT great. It was stupid.
It may have been 5200'/min or 7200'/min becuse you were either ferry flight or short sector or underwight anyhow. SO why use ALL UP engine power for that TOW ? Have you ever heard for Flex T/O thrust or power ?
:ugh:

Check Airman 15th Oct 2007 19:40

Out of curiosity, what was your aircraft?

Dude~ 15th Oct 2007 19:49


I think it was NOT great. It was stupid....Have you ever heard for Flex T/O thrust or power ?
Steady with the judgment mate, I never said anything about max thrust - that was on reduced thrust!
Yes I have heard of 'Flex thrust' that's an Airbus thing I think - my aircraft doesn't have it, it uses a single de-rated alternate take off thrust.
Check Airman - its an Embraer 145.
Oh, did I say how fun it was?!:)

Dude~ 17th Oct 2007 10:11

You've gone very quiet Green Guard aren't you going to jump to any more conclusions?!

Green Guard 17th Oct 2007 14:04


Steady with the judgment mate, I never said anything about max thrust - that was on reduced thrust!
Unless you were on a 32 knots increasing headwind (or decreasing tailwind, (mind you: Not even a dumb duck would ever take off with that much of a tailwind), then my dear friend the ONLY thing left for your excuse is to call yourself a liar !

Clarence Oveur 17th Oct 2007 14:20

You are completely out of line Green Guard, and are frankly making yourself look like an idiot.

An edit or deletion would be a wise recourse.

Spitoon 17th Oct 2007 17:49


I think it was NOT great. It was stupid.
I'm not a professional pilot, just a simple controller, but I do think some people just want to suck the fun out of everything!

Come on Green Guard, have you never tried something in an aeroplane just to see what it can do? I'll own up to seeing just how high I could get in a SEP. Better still, tell us what you do for fun!

LH2 17th Oct 2007 19:19


Unless you were on a 32 knots increasing headwind (or decreasing tailwind
...and one wonders what, reduced thrust or not, does the wind component have to do with rate of climb? :confused:

Dude~ 17th Oct 2007 22:19


Unless you were on a 32 knots increasing headwind (or decreasing tailwind, (mind you: Not even a dumb duck would ever take off with that much of a tailwind), then my dear friend the ONLY thing left for your excuse is to call yourself a liar !
What an utterly absurd post! Ok I understand how an increasing headwind can give you a short term increase in rate of climb, but to call me a liar is just plain rude.

I took off on a calm night, 7 tons below MTOW and experienced a high rate of climb, although not even double a normal heavy take off climb rate. Who are you to question what happened? You weren't even there and even if you are an Embraer test pilot you wouldn't call me a liar because you would know what the aircraft could do. My, did I say how fun it was!

Cartman's Twin 17th Oct 2007 22:29

I'd have to agree Dude.

Best RoC I've seen on a civil a/c is 8000'/min from a F900 off EGLL for LFPG, mightily impressive and entertaining to boot.....

doubleu-anker 18th Oct 2007 17:00

For civilian A/C the Learjet 23/24 with turbo jet engines (coal burners) 10,000ft/min, initially. I have personally witnessed this.

Military A/C, well where does one start, Lightening or Typhoon?

TopBunk 18th Oct 2007 17:19

An empty 747-400 can be entertaining. I have seen the APFD go into altitude capture passing 3000 ft climbing to 6000 ft out of LHR. Taking off at about 200 tonnes even using max derate can be quite a handful, and is best handled by hauling off lots of power at 1000 ft agl.

Downwind to land at idle thrust is also quite entertaining, with the QOTS being very reluctant to slow down / go down. Often have to end up using the gear for drag.

As to absolute rates, I can't quantify it exactly, but would suggest that if full thrust were to be used, that something approaching 10,000 fpm would be achievable.

Empty 737-400 also quite amusing - remember positioning EGSS-EGLL and using full thrust for fun - ended up at about 5000 ft by the end of the runway:)

The Flying Pram 18th Oct 2007 18:07

At the other end of the spectrum my 21 year old flexwing usually manages 6-700ft/min, but one chilly winters day I got to 900ft from brakes off in 1 minute dead. I thought that was pretty good for 38 hp...
Been up to 10,000ft a couple of times too.

old,not bold 19th Oct 2007 18:12


At the other end of the spectrum
From the real bottom end of the spectrum, 600-700 fpm is NASA- type ROC.....

My Prentice took 65 minutes to get to the bottom of the airway at FL80 in 1967 on route Damascus - Baghdad ("aircraft outside airways risk being shot down" it said on the topo map), and that was with a head start, since Damascus is quite high up.

Dude~ 24th Oct 2007 12:21

I see that NATS have implemented a maximum rate of climb for civilian aircraft in the London and Scottish FIR/UIRs of 8,000fpm in class A to E airspace.

This came into force on 5th July 2007 and was partly as a result of an investigation into a near miss where TCAS couldn't keep up with the closing rates.

http://www.airproxboard.org.uk/docs/423/2003.pdf


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:16.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.