Boeing 737 Rate of Climb

"Dave Pitzer" <dpitzer.TakeThisOut@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:4958be61$0$1591$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> What is a typical Rate of Climb for the Boeing 737-400 immediately after
> take off. (Is this documented somewhere?)

Just looked on the Boeing site and did a search through some docs for "rate
of climb" or ROC but nothing came back. Probably because it varies depending
on load, temperature, operational requirements, etc.

Based on what I have observed in FS9 with the PMDG 737NG I would say
typically around 4000-4500 feet per min but I have seen it go up to just
over 5000 briefly.

--
Iain
Rugby, UK

I was going to say the same thing about load, weather, etc
however here is the Statistical Loads Data for Boeing 737-400 Aircraft
in Commercial Applications.
http://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/ar98-28.pdf

Phase of Flight
Conditions at Start of Phase
Taxi Out Initial condition
Takeoff Roll Acceleration > 4 kts/sec for a minimum of 12 seconds
Departure Time at liftoff; flaps extended (squat switch off)
Climb Flaps retracted; rate of climb ™ 250 ft/min. for at least 1
minute
Cruise Flaps retracted; rate of climb ˜ 250 ft/min. for at least 1
minute
Descent Flaps retracted; rate of descent ˜ -250 ft/min. for at least
1minute
Approach Flaps extended; rate of descent < 250 ft/min. for at least 1
minute


Cheers,
Chris

Dave Pitzer writes:

> What is a typical Rate of Climb for the Boeing 737-400 immediately after
> take off. (Is this documented somewhere?)

The rate of climb for a 737 depends on a lot of things. Like all twin-jet
airliners, it can climb like the proverbial bat out of hell if it's lightly
loaded--climb rates in excess of 6000 feet are possible.

For some reason, announced climb rates are hard to find for large jets.
Perhaps precisely because they depend on so many things, and perhaps also
because the maximum climb rate is higher than anyone would ever need, and so
need not be pointed out. This is different from small piston aircraft, which
sometimes have climb rates so lame that you really need to know their rates
just so that you don't get stuck in a bad situation.

I think the 757 might hold the record for most alarming climb rate, even in
regular service. They often seem to be climbing at a 45-degree angle if they
aren't heavily loaded.

kNiGhThAwK writes:

> KSNA has a theme park nearby that owns the land and airspace above
> it and prohibits any aircraft nearing it ...

Private property owners cannot prohibit their airspace to anyone. However,
Disneyland has special regulations that apply to it (imposed by the Federal
government, although Disney may have lobbied for it).

Interesting. I know for a fact that Disney petitioned Congress and
Congress finally accepted. Any property owned by Disney is a no fly
zone, with a "shoot down first, ask questions later" type clause. No
ad-planes can fly, and any plane violating will be considered an act of
terrorism. They were able to put themselves on the same 'No Fly'
category as our national defense bases, Army, Naval, Marine, Coast
Guard, Pentagon, White House, etc. I personally do not know if another
private firm has done such a thing, but if a company can get a way with
cleaning up a crime scene involving a fatality and disposing of
evidence, then something is going on (of course, I think after long
litigation they are now required to keep private LEOs on the premises to
prevent something like this happening next time). Disneyland is its own
country and operates as a city within a city with little or no influence
from city, county, state, or federal. The best lawyers in the world work
for Disney, LOL.

Mxsmanic wrote:
> kNiGhThAwK writes:
>
>> KSNA has a theme park nearby that owns the land and airspace above
>> it and prohibits any aircraft nearing it ...
>
> Private property owners cannot prohibit their airspace to anyone. However,
> Disneyland has special regulations that apply to it (imposed by the Federal
> government, although Disney may have lobbied for it).

"Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic.RemoveThis@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:j0bil4tbmrt681rruf1jpaimd94ccrfe56@4ax.com...
> Dave Pitzer writes:
>
> I think the 757 might hold the record for most alarming climb rate, even
> in
> regular service. They often seem to be climbing at a 45-degree angle if
> they
> aren't heavily loaded.

What a bullshit.... read the manual and you will know about the pitch
limits. So ... don't just spread figures that have no reference to reality.
People might even believe it.

Oskar

Oskar Wagner writes:

> "Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic.RemoveThis@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:j0bil4tbmrt681rruf1jpaimd94ccrfe56@4ax.com...
> > Dave Pitzer writes:
> >
> > I think the 757 might hold the record for most alarming climb rate, even
> > in
> > regular service. They often seem to be climbing at a 45-degree angle if
> > they
> > aren't heavily loaded.
>
> What a bullshit.... read the manual and you will know about the pitch
> limits.

Read my post carefully and you'll see "seem to be" in the text.

> So ... don't just spread figures that have no reference to reality.
> People might even believe it.

Not if they read carefully.

Ya ya, you will NEVER change .... now you're definitely added to my ignore
list.

Oskar

"Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic RemoveThis @gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:62hpl4h1f8ds04v9g6j637b4nc25qbceui@4ax.com...
> Oskar Wagner writes:
>
>> "Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic RemoveThis @gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>> news:j0bil4tbmrt681rruf1jpaimd94ccrfe56@4ax.com...
>> > Dave Pitzer writes:
>> >
>> > I think the 757 might hold the record for most alarming climb rate,
>> > even
>> > in
>> > regular service. They often seem to be climbing at a 45-degree angle
>> > if
>> > they
>> > aren't heavily loaded.
>>
>> What a bullshit.... read the manual and you will know about the pitch
>> limits.
>
> Read my post carefully and you'll see "seem to be" in the text.
>
>> So ... don't just spread figures that have no reference to reality.
>> People might even believe it.
>
> Not if they read carefully.