172 N Climb Performance

With regard to maintaining Vx, Roger, here is a quote from the Seattle FSDO
"Plane Talk," a quarterly publication put out by the Safety Program Manager.
"Orville" is Kurt Anderson, an NTSB accident investigator with 20 years
experience in investigating accidents in the mountainous northwest:

"Dear Orville:

I read with interest 'Practical Density Altitude" in the first issue of
Plane Talk. Why would you want to hold max rate of climb airspeed to clear
an obstacle when max angle of climb will get you to a higher altitude in
less linear distance"
Don Holliday

Dear Don:
I'm really glad you asked that question. Remember the situation. You were
tasked to take off from a high density altitude airport and the challenge
was to clear a ridge four miles away. Since the ridge is four miles away,
you have room to maneuver. By climbing at best rate, you will get more feet
per minute than by climbing at best angle. This means you will attain an
altitude which permits safe crossing of the ridge sooner (fewer minutes)
than if you had climbed at best angle. As a result, even if you do S turns,
you are on your way with a minimum of Hobbs time.

Additionally, by climbing at best rate, you can see better over the nose,
you get better engine cooling, and you have a large cushion over stall than
if you used best angle. I use best angle ONLY when there is no room to
maneuver.
Orville"

Kurt has demolished a lot of old-wives tales about density altitude in
safety seminars around here. Another of his hot buttons is climbing at the
book airspeed in spite of the fact that it is affected by both weight and
density altitude. He is not in favor of pilots writing airspeeds down on a
card for easy reference unless they take those variables into account.

Just another point of view.

Bob Gardner

"Roger Long" om wrote in
message ...
160 no pants.

--
Roger Long
Corky Scott wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 00:38:28 GMT, "Roger Long"