![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Stan, It guess I was too lazy to try to compute the flight plan several
different ways. Your note, and one other made me dust off the math knowledge and do some of that there fancy ciphering (hearing "weeeee dogies" in the background...said with hillbilly accent, of course). For a mythical plane that climbs 1000 fpm at 100 nm/hr and cruises at 150 nm/hr and a service ceiling of 20,000 ft. Comparing flight at 1000 ft agl versus 18,000 agl....for a 100nm trip one's tailwind would have to be about 40nm better at 18,000 compared to 1000 ft. For a trip distance of 200, the tailwind would only need ot be about 14nm/hr more favorable. For a 700 mile trip (one that I will be making fairly often), the winds only need to be about 3nm/hr more favorable. Now, I just hope the mythical heater is powerful enough so that I do not freeze my butt off at those altitudes. -Sami Stan Prevost wrote: I generally run several flight plans at different altitudes, accounting for the differences in true air speed, wind speeds, and time to climb and descend. More often than not, I find that the extra time to climb uses up the gains in TAS at altitude, and winds are the only factor that make a significant difference. If the flight is long, say 3-4 hours, then the climb can be worth it, but for less than a couple of hours, it usually is not. I fly behind a turbocharged engine and have built-in oxygen, so I can go anywhere up to 18-20K, but usually stay below 12K or so unless there is a net advantage due to wind. I like to stay high enough to keep from having to switch from centers to approach controls all the time and to get above the haze layer for a smoother ride. But sometimes the high winds just force you down into the turbulence and traffic at 3-4K. Stan "O. Sami Saydjari" wrote in message ... When planning a flight against the wind, how to you pick the best altitude when trying to minimize flight time? If I read my performance charts correctly, my aircraft (Piper Turbo Arrow III -- service ceiling 20,000 ft) seems to gain about 2 nts of *true* airspeed for every 1000 feet you go up. Firstly, does that sound about right to folks? I assume that this effect is from the decrease in air friction at high altitudes (even though the prop also has less air to "push on"). So, unless there is some other factor, I think this means that if the winds increase at anything higher than 2 nts per 1000 feet, I am best off staying at the Minimum Enroute Altitude. Is that right? My experience thus far suggests that most of the time, the winds aloft speed increase far faster then 2 nts per 1000 feet, so, in general, it is unlikely that I will do much better than staying at the absolute minimum altitude. Is that consistent with other folks' experience? -Sami |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Optimal Frequency of Lessons | David B. Cole | Aerobatics | 18 | October 28th 04 12:50 AM |
Sparkplug picking tool | Michael Horowitz | Home Built | 3 | November 1st 03 01:51 PM |
Center vs. Approach Altitudes | Joseph D. Farrell | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | October 21st 03 08:34 PM |
Picking up a Clearance Airborne | Brad Z | Instrument Flight Rules | 30 | August 29th 03 01:31 AM |