|
Hey Tony,
What is it with your fleet manager? He forget how to reply to emails or something? What a piece of work. Glad to see you're still doing well. |
Like most here, I can't see any benefit to cruising anywhere near FL410 in a 200.
Under normal conditions, the higher you are, the lower your True Air Speed will be and you won't save much fuel. Stay low, fast, and safe! AL |
Originally Posted by alvrb211
Under normal conditions, the higher you are, the lower your True Air Speed will be and you won't save much fuel.
The difference in fuel burn between those altitudes is probably 800-1000pph. |
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
(Post 729252)
At normal cruise mach (0.74-0.80M) and ISA, the difference in TAS between FL310 and FL410 is no more than 10-11kts.
The difference in fuel burn between those altitudes is probably 800-1000pph. The opportunity cost of flying a CRJ at FL410 is safety and time. The opportunity to save fuel on short routes following a long slooow climb is of little value. AL |
Originally Posted by alvrb211
(Post 729225)
Stay low, fast, and safe!
AL I had a captain take me to 370 in a 200 one day in the summer with convective activity around (THAT HE WANTED TO GO OVER!!!!). I about crapped a golden easter egg. I told him I was uncomfortable with it, but he did it anyways. :mad: |
Originally Posted by IrishTiger
I had a captain take me to 370 in a 200 one day in the summer with convective activity around (THAT HE WANTED TO GO OVER!!!!). I about crapped a golden easter egg. I told him I was uncomfortable with it, but he did it anyways
Was it a "fear of the unknown" because you had never been to the max "capped" ceiling of the plane before, or was it because the captain climbed when you felt the airplane simply didn't have the performance (climb weight & speed) to get up there? Do you have any idea what your weight & ISA temps were, as well as the mach when you started the climb & when you leveled off? What did you ultimately accelerate to after leveling off? I don't ask to pick on you, I'm genuinely curious. Its been a hair over 2 years since I've been in a CRJ cockpit, but don't most/all airlines have 1.3G charts up there? |
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
(Post 729002)
you hand flew the ENTIRE leg in RVSM airspace?
|
If memory serves, there was a chart in the 'wine list' binder that showed ISA vs. altitude with a resultant safe altitude.
|
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
(Post 729442)
Yes, since we took off at at FL290 and landed at FL290.:p
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
(Post 729442)
One of my last flights at SkW, I hand flew the entire trip in a -700 from OAK to LAX. Climbed to 370, and it felt very solid. Of course, that doesn't mean 410 would be the same.
|
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
(Post 729438)
Why were you uncomfortable going to FL370?
Was it a "fear of the unknown" because you had never been to the max "capped" ceiling of the plane before, or was it because the captain climbed when you felt the airplane simply didn't have the performance (climb weight & speed) to get up there? Do you have any idea what your weight & ISA temps were, as well as the mach when you started the climb & when you leveled off? What did you ultimately accelerate to after leveling off? I don't ask to pick on you, I'm genuinely curious. Its been a hair over 2 years since I've been in a CRJ cockpit, but don't most/all airlines have 1.3G charts up there? At FL370 in a 200 in summer, you really don't need to be trying to outclimb convective activity. Regardless of their mach # in the climb, if it was constant, their TAS was decreasing. Sounds like the Captain was experimenting. Al |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:05 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands