X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:30:48 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: <5zq@cox.net> Received: from eastrmmtao105.cox.net ([68.230.240.47] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.13) with ESMTP id 3544449 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:08:00 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.240.47; envelope-from=5zq@cox.net Received: from eastrmimpo01.cox.net ([68.1.16.119]) by eastrmmtao105.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20090311220724.BPYN17104.eastrmmtao105.cox.net@eastrmimpo01.cox.net> for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:07:24 -0400 Received: from newness ([72.219.212.112]) by eastrmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id Ry7P1b0092S3sm002y7PQ7; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:07:23 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=zglHt5EsDXAA:10 a=Xgs4g3QhQPsA:10 a=CpNOQ1KxtS9fQNbUWvUA:9 a=8O7_RBeKJu1K54R85soA:7 a=ZMA7A6XoXJ4ts9SmCsHGb_9mc4EA:4 a=eZLSmJVMEtUA:10 a=ffqhRgr4tjEG6jDe2lQA:9 a=SVhPTST4A_pgrKOTW_IA:7 a=pXXJlciyN3wk7ytU81l_Ve7pyEwA:4 a=AfD3MYMu9mQA:10 X-CM-Score: 0.00 X-Original-Message-ID: From: "Bill" <5zq@cox.net> X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: LOP vs ROP Climb: Time and Fuel Burn (LIVP) X-Original-Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:07:33 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0022_01C9A274.404AA6B0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0022_01C9A274.404AA6B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: [LML] LOP vs ROP Climb: Time and Fuel Burn (LIVP)Hi Jeff, I like reading everyone's opinions here on the list. Even more than = that, I like reading hard data. Thanks for sharing your data with us = Jeff, good stuff. Just a small technical note, 500 fpm climb is not = required by ATC, we just need to notify them when we can't maintain 500 = fpm. (AIM 5-3-3-1c)=20 a. The following reports should be made to ATC or FSS facilities without = a specific ATC request: 1. At all times. (c) When unable to climb/descend at a rate of a least 500 feet per = minute. Bill Harrelson N5ZQ 320 1,650 hrs N6ZQ IV under construction The VSI was chosen to produce at least a minimum 500 fpm climb = (notably required by ATC), hence a lower forward IAS when LOP. ------=_NextPart_000_0022_01C9A274.404AA6B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: [LML] LOP vs ROP Climb: Time and Fuel Burn = (LIVP)
Hi Jeff,
 
I like reading everyone's opinions here = on the=20 list. Even more than that, I like reading hard data. Thanks for sharing = your=20 data with us Jeff, good stuff. Just a small technical  note, 500 = fpm climb=20 is not required by ATC, we just need to notify them when we = can't=20 maintain 500 fpm. (AIM 5-3-3-1c) 

a. The following reports = should be=20 made to ATC or FSS facilities without a specific ATC=20 request:

1. At all=20 times.

(c) When = unable to=20 climb/descend at a rate of a least 500 feet per = minute.

 
Bill Harrelson
N5ZQ 320 1,650 hrs
N6ZQ  IV under = construction
 
 
 
<snip>  The VSI was chosen = to produce=20 at least a minimum 500 fpm climb (notably required by ATC), hence a = lower=20 forward IAS when LOP.<snip>  =
------=_NextPart_000_0022_01C9A274.404AA6B0--