Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Climb Limit Weights


Notices
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Climb Limit Weights

Old 3rd October 2008 | 15:53
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Sandy Surroundings!
Climb Limit Weights

Need some info and explanation on the difference between the Approach Climb Performance and Landing Climb Performance on a twin!

Thkx
TwinJock is offline  
Reply
Old 3rd October 2008 | 20:40
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
From: Australia
The "Approach Climb" is essentially for the configuration that you would set the aircraft to if a missed approach was carried out during approach, i.e. Gear UP and the Flaps retracted to the "Go-Around" setting, typically a setting routinely used for Takeoff. With OEI, the minimum Gross Gradient is 2.1% (Note that PANS-OPS minimum obstacle-clear gradient is 2.5%, be careful!)

The "Landing Climb" is with ALL engines operating in the Landing Configuration, i.e. Gear DOWN" and Flaps left at the Landing Flap setting. Minimum required gradient is 3.2%.

In Short, Approach Climb is intended to cover you for a 1 Engine Inoperative Missed Approach, and Landing Climb for the All engines missed approach. (There's a bit more to it than that, but that's the basics).

Regards,

Old Smokey
Old Smokey is offline  
Reply
Old 4th October 2008 | 05:20
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: Sandy Surroundings!
Thanks Smokey!

Does it imply that the Approach Climb Performance is always more limiting than Landing Climb Performance on a twin?
TwinJock is offline  
Reply
Old 4th October 2008 | 05:45
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,420
Likes: 1
From: AEP
My notes from long ago...

Sorry - old fart here - but yes, I remember the approach climb is always the limiting factor.
This with 2, 3 or 4 motors. I did not study requirements for planes with 5...
Balked landing climb is not limiting.
xxx

Happy contrails
BelArgUSA is offline  
Reply
Old 4th October 2008 | 08:19
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
From: Australia
BelArgUSA got it right, no further comment necessary

(Mind you, the law of "Stating things categorically" dictates that somewhere "out there", there's a weird aircraft where the Landing Climb MIGHT be more limiting, but like my "old fart" colleague, I can't think of any

Regards,

Old Smokey
Old Smokey is offline  
Reply
Old 4th October 2008 | 14:18
  #6 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,188
Likes: 6
From: La Belle Province
How about a fixed UC aircraft, where both approach climb and landing climb have the drag of the UC? Then it depends if the drag saved by retracting to the approach flaps is more than the power lost by a single engine loss?
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Reply
Old 4th October 2008 | 20:16
  #7 (permalink)  
100 Countries Visited
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 5,552
Likes: 25
From: ME
BelArgUSA, check your notes again for the B747 Classic.... the landing climb becomes more limiting at high altitudes and temperatures..... At least with the RB211......

How many days left?

Mutt
mutt is offline  
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.