Max Service ceiling for commercial airplanes

On Jan 30, 2:33 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
D Ramapriya wrote :



On Jan 30, 2:08 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
D Ramapriya wrote in
news:2ff47125-cffd-4909-b028-
:

On Jan 30, 8:41 am, WingFlaps wrote:
On Jan 30, 2:03 pm, wrote:

Out of curiosity I was wondering which civilian passenger
airplanes have the highest service ceilings? Wikipedia indicates
that some business jets have ceilings greater than 53000 ft or
so while the 747 has only 43000 ft. Also why do large aircraft
fly much lower than their service ceilings? Usually I never see
a large jet go beyond 37000 or so even on very long haul
flights. I assume they would be even more efficient if they flew
close to service ceilings on long haul flights.

Could be due to weight? When you fly across the Pacific the plane
can only get higher as fuel is burned.

Get higher? I thought that's what the continual small adjustments
effected by the trim wheels do to preclude, especially with the
AutoPilot engaged?

Huh?

Bertie

I meant to say that the AP will ensure that you keep flying at the
programmed altitude (through trim and throttle changes) instead of
letting the plane go higher with diminishing weight. Have I missed
something?

We get cleared to an altitude and have to hold that altitude to avoid
running into other airplanes. The autopilot does not just go where it
pleases.


My point exactly, in response to WingFlaps' "When you fly across the
Pacific the plane can only get higher as fuel is burned".

The AP will anon go where it pleases too on the next-generation
'Buses, albeit in exceptional circumstances. From what I've read, if
there's a TCAS warning, the decision will be taken out of the pilots'
hands and the AP will command as needed to avoid a collision.

Ramapriya

Remember the Concorde?

From Winipedia:

delta-winged ("OG delta wing") aircraft with four powerful Olympus
engines based on those originally developed for the Avro Vulcan
strategic bomber. The engines were jointly built by Rolls-Royce and
SNECMA. Concorde was the first civil airliner to have an analogue fly-
by-wire flight control system. It also employed a trademark droop
snoot lowering nose section for visibility on approach.

These and other features permitted Concorde to have an average cruise
speed of Mach 2.02 (about 2,140 km/h or 1,330 mph) with a maximum
cruise altitude of 18,300 metres (60,000 feet), more than twice the
speed of conventional aircraft. The average landing speed was a
relatively high 298 km/h (185 mph, 160 knots).
On Jan 29, 8:03 pm, wrote:
Out of curiosity I was wondering which civilian passenger airplanes
have the highest service ceilings? Wikipedia indicates that some
business jets have ceilings greater than 53000 ft or so while the 747
has only 43000 ft. Also why do large aircraft fly much lower than
their service ceilings? Usually I never see a large jet go beyond
37000 or so even on very long haul flights. I assume they would be
even more efficient if they flew close to service ceilings on long
haul flights.

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:44:29 -0800 (PST), D Ramapriya
wrote:


My point exactly, in response to WingFlaps' "When you fly across the
Pacific the plane can only get higher as fuel is burned".

The AP will anon go where it pleases too on the next-generation
'Buses, albeit in exceptional circumstances. From what I've read, if
there's a TCAS warning, the decision will be taken out of the pilots'
hands and the AP will command as needed to avoid a collision.

Ramapriya

Google "step climb".

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:44:29 -0800 (PST), D Ramapriya
wrote:

My point exactly, in response to WingFlaps' "When you fly across the
Pacific the plane can only get higher as fuel is burned".

The AP will anon go where it pleases too on the next-generation
'Buses, albeit in exceptional circumstances. From what I've read, if
there's a TCAS warning, the decision will be taken out of the pilots'
hands and the AP will command as needed to avoid a collision.

Oh - Hey Bertie, any TCAS system ever hooked up to feed autoflight? I
can't think of any.

D Ramapriya wrote in
:

On Jan 30, 2:33 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
D Ramapriya wrote
innews:24252c28-895a-44da-bd25-

m:



On Jan 30, 2:08 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
D Ramapriya wrote in
news:2ff47125-cffd-4909-b028-
:

On Jan 30, 8:41 am, WingFlaps wrote:
On Jan 30, 2:03 pm, wrote:

Out of curiosity I was wondering which civilian passenger
airplanes have the highest service ceilings? Wikipedia
indicates that some business jets have ceilings greater than
53000 ft or so while the 747 has only 43000 ft. Also why do
large aircraft fly much lower than their service ceilings?
Usually I never see a large jet go beyond 37000 or so even on
very long haul flights. I assume they would be even more
efficient if they flew close to service ceilings on long haul
flights.

Could be due to weight? When you fly across the Pacific the
plane can only get higher as fuel is burned.

Get higher? I thought that's what the continual small
adjustments effected by the trim wheels do to preclude,
especially with the AutoPilot engaged?

Huh?

Bertie

I meant to say that the AP will ensure that you keep flying at the
programmed altitude (through trim and throttle changes) instead of
letting the plane go higher with diminishing weight. Have I missed
something?

We get cleared to an altitude and have to hold that altitude to avoid
running into other airplanes. The autopilot does not just go where it
pleases.


My point exactly,

No, it wasn't. you said that the AP will ensure that you keep flying at
the programmed altitude throught trim and throttle changes.
It won't.


in response to WingFlaps' "When you fly across the
Pacific the plane can only get higher as fuel is burned".

The AP will anon go where it pleases too on the next-generation
'Buses, albeit in exceptional circumstances. From what I've read, if
there's a TCAS warning, the decision will be taken out of the pilots'
hands and the AP will command as needed to avoid a collision.



You're talking straight out of your ass.


Bertie

Peter Clark wrote in
news
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:44:29 -0800 (PST), D Ramapriya
wrote:

My point exactly, in response to WingFlaps' "When you fly across the
Pacific the plane can only get higher as fuel is burned".

The AP will anon go where it pleases too on the next-generation
'Buses, albeit in exceptional circumstances. From what I've read, if
there's a TCAS warning, the decision will be taken out of the pilots'
hands and the AP will command as needed to avoid a collision.

Oh - Hey Bertie, any TCAS system ever hooked up to feed autoflight? I
can't think of any.


Jesus. you wouldn't want that at the moment. there will probably come a
time, but this guy is just spouting **** he;s read in Flight International
with no understanding of what's going on.


Bertie

if the plane can go higher vs. the plane being commanded to go higher are
two different things.

"D Ramapriya" wrote in message
...
On Jan 30, 2:33 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
D Ramapriya wrote
:



On Jan 30, 2:08 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
D Ramapriya wrote in
news:2ff47125-cffd-4909-b028-
:

On Jan 30, 8:41 am, WingFlaps wrote:
On Jan 30, 2:03 pm, wrote:

Out of curiosity I was wondering which civilian passenger
airplanes have the highest service ceilings? Wikipedia indicates
that some business jets have ceilings greater than 53000 ft or
so while the 747 has only 43000 ft. Also why do large aircraft
fly much lower than their service ceilings? Usually I never see
a large jet go beyond 37000 or so even on very long haul
flights. I assume they would be even more efficient if they flew
close to service ceilings on long haul flights.

Could be due to weight? When you fly across the Pacific the plane
can only get higher as fuel is burned.

Get higher? I thought that's what the continual small adjustments
effected by the trim wheels do to preclude, especially with the
AutoPilot engaged?

Huh?

Bertie

I meant to say that the AP will ensure that you keep flying at the
programmed altitude (through trim and throttle changes) instead of
letting the plane go higher with diminishing weight. Have I missed
something?

We get cleared to an altitude and have to hold that altitude to avoid
running into other airplanes. The autopilot does not just go where it
pleases.


My point exactly, in response to WingFlaps' "When you fly across the
Pacific the plane can only get higher as fuel is burned".

The AP will anon go where it pleases too on the next-generation
'Buses, albeit in exceptional circumstances. From what I've read, if
there's a TCAS warning, the decision will be taken out of the pilots'
hands and the AP will command as needed to avoid a collision.

Ramapriya

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:19:58 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

Peter Clark wrote in
news
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:44:29 -0800 (PST), D Ramapriya
wrote:

My point exactly, in response to WingFlaps' "When you fly across the
Pacific the plane can only get higher as fuel is burned".

The AP will anon go where it pleases too on the next-generation
'Buses, albeit in exceptional circumstances. From what I've read, if
there's a TCAS warning, the decision will be taken out of the pilots'
hands and the AP will command as needed to avoid a collision.

Oh - Hey Bertie, any TCAS system ever hooked up to feed autoflight? I
can't think of any.


Jesus. you wouldn't want that at the moment. there will probably come a
time, but this guy is just spouting **** he;s read in Flight International
with no understanding of what's going on.

Yea, I figured that. I didn't know if there was something special in
the 380, but I couldn't think of any product where TCAS would jump in
and override the MCP.....

Peter Clark wrote in
:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:19:58 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

Peter Clark wrote in
news
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:44:29 -0800 (PST), D Ramapriya
wrote:

My point exactly, in response to WingFlaps' "When you fly across the
Pacific the plane can only get higher as fuel is burned".

The AP will anon go where it pleases too on the next-generation
'Buses, albeit in exceptional circumstances. From what I've read, if
there's a TCAS warning, the decision will be taken out of the
pilots' hands and the AP will command as needed to avoid a
collision.

Oh - Hey Bertie, any TCAS system ever hooked up to feed autoflight?
I can't think of any.


Jesus. you wouldn't want that at the moment. there will probably come
a time, but this guy is just spouting **** he;s read in Flight
International with no understanding of what's going on.

Yea, I figured that. I didn't know if there was something special in
the 380, but I couldn't think of any product where TCAS would jump in
and override the MCP.....

No, and in fact we're required to disconnect everything, including the
autopilot to ensure we stay outside of the TCAS "doghouses" which are
red boxes that apear on the flight director. We just pitch the airplane
out of them. The autothrotles aren't considered to be up to the task
either. ( sorry don't know if you nw this, just for th ebenifit of
anyone who's wondering wtf we're talking about.)

Berti

On Jan 30, 3:48*pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
D Ramapriya wrote :

On Jan 30, 2:33 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
D Ramapriya wrote
innews:24252c28-895a-44da-bd25-







m:

On Jan 30, 2:08 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
D Ramapriya wrote in
news:2ff47125-cffd-4909-b028-
:

On Jan 30, 8:41 am, WingFlaps wrote:
On Jan 30, 2:03 pm, wrote:

Out of curiosity I was wondering which civilian passenger
airplanes have the highest service ceilings? Wikipedia
indicates that some business jets have ceilings greater than
53000 ft or so while the 747 has only 43000 ft. Also why do
large aircraft fly much lower than their service ceilings?
Usually I never see a large jet go beyond 37000 or so even on
very long haul flights. I assume they would be even more
efficient if they flew close to service ceilings on long haul
flights.

Could be due to weight? When you fly across the Pacific the
plane can only get higher as fuel is burned.

Get higher? I thought that's what the continual small
adjustments effected by the trim wheels do to preclude,
especially with the AutoPilot engaged?

Huh?

Bertie

I meant to say that the AP will ensure that you keep flying at the
programmed altitude (through trim and throttle changes) instead of
letting the plane go higher with diminishing weight. Have I missed
something?

We get cleared to an altitude and have to hold that altitude to avoid
running into other airplanes. The autopilot does not just go where it
pleases.

My point exactly,

No, it wasn't. you said that the AP will ensure that you keep flying at
the programmed altitude throught trim and throttle changes.
It won't.


So the AP's FD Altitude Controls do what?


The AP will anon go where it pleases too on the next-generation
'Buses, albeit in exceptional circumstances. From what I've read, if
there's a TCAS warning, the decision will be taken out of the pilots'
hands and the AP will command as needed to avoid a collision.

You're talking straight out of your ass.

Bertie


Very old hat... http://tinyurl.com/jfwe6.

Ramapriya