Author Topic: climbing.......  (Read 2845 times)

Offline happylanding

  • Alpha Rooster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1079
climbing.......
« on: July 17, 2006, 08:51:02 PM »
Mates, I found a letter in the italian magazine volare that asks an expert the following:

"my instructor used to make me do climbings in the following way: from cruise I had to change power and asset til the new requested altitude. Now he asks me to make it in the following way: asset and slow down til 5/10 knots under the Vy, then the right power (I think it means cruise power). I do not undestand why I should lose energy before the climb". the expert's answer is as follows: "the new proceeding is much more correct. to change from cruise flight to climb, we have to vary the asset and speed, to obtain at the maximum continuous power, the agle of attack of maximum efficiency. the theorical procedure schedules to zoom (take the nose up?) to obtain the optimal speed to climb and give power as required. if during the maneuver the speed remains the same, given the power, you'll find yourself stabilized in the clim without any other correction."

The question is: I learnt to do climb from a cruise flight in the following way: full power, nose up at Vy or best perf speed on long range (I do not know how it's called: the speed you use that's higher that Vy but let you, in meantime you climb, go for a longer distance) trim. that means it looks like a third version, since nobody talks about trim in the article I tried to translate before. What do you think about it? Which do you consider to be the best way?
I give that landing a 9 . . . on the Richter scale.

Offline Gulfstream Driver

  • Chicken Farmer
  • Alpha Rooster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1070
Re: climbing.......
« Reply #1 on: July 18, 2006, 04:56:15 AM »
I assume we're talking about a cruise climb here...If you only need one or two hundred feet, just pitch up a little. 

I guess, technically, you can climb as the expert suggests, but why?  Flyboye can confirm or deny this, but I would bet that that's the jet answer.  In a recip, add power, pitch to your cruise climb, and trim, because you're going to need full power to climb anyway.  Theoretically, if you do it the expert's way, you shouldn't need to trim in the climb, and so won't have to re-trim when you go back to straight and level. 

Does that help?
Behind every great man, there is a woman rolling her eyes.  --Bruce Almighty

Offline happylanding

  • Alpha Rooster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1079
Re: climbing.......
« Reply #2 on: July 18, 2006, 08:08:51 AM »
I assume we're talking about a cruise climb here...If you only need one or two hundred feet, just pitch up a little. 
I guess, technically, you can climb as the expert suggests, but why?  Flyboye can confirm or deny this, but I would bet that that's the jet answer.  In a recip, add power, pitch to your cruise climb, and trim, because you're going to need full power to climb anyway.  Theoretically, if you do it the expert's way, you shouldn't need to trim in the climb, and so won't have to re-trim when you go back to straight and level. 
Does that help?

Yes, it helps, since now I see why you should decide for this climb even if I do not see any advantage :)
I mean, in the expert's suggested way you do not necessarily go full power, right? At least he doesn't state so. And why one should decide for a way to climb in which you avoid having to trim when you're up and straightening? I do not see any real advantage: if you have to climb for a long climb, I would not chose to do it with less than full power just because in that way I do not have to trim (isn't the performance "overstressed"?). And if you climb just for 100 ft or 200 ft I would not touch the trim for the climbing, since it's a really short hop, but go full power anyhow, then, when at the new requested altitude I would take the nose a small bit down to accelerate, then take the extra power away and trim (if necessary).
« Last Edit: July 18, 2006, 09:05:36 AM by happylanding »
I give that landing a 9 . . . on the Richter scale.