How Do You Climb

[CharlieTango]

It also does not apply if you are 3,000 feet or less above the surface.

Where is where I spend my time in an LSA, unless I am crossing a deep valley or have to escape the conditions.

CTLSi, that limit is MSL not AGL and has an AGL exception.

[CTLSi]

......

[CTLSi]

......

[drseti]

If flying cross country you are regulation bound to adhere to the hemispheric rule

I could be mistaken, but I was under the impression that the hemispheric rule was a recommendation in the AIM, not a regulation in the FAR. Can someone closer than I to an FAR/AIM confirm this for me?

Edit - never mind, I see further down the thread that somebody already posted it:

The hemispheric rule applies to all VFR cross country flying as described under 14 CFR 91.159 - VFR cruising altitude or flight level.

[MrMorden]

If flying cross country you are regulation bound to adhere to the hemispheric rule

I could be mistaken, but I was under the impression that the hemispheric rule was a recommendation in the AIM, not a regulation in the FAR. Can someone closer than I to an FAR/AIM confirm this for me?

I was under the impression it is a "requirement" and not a "recommendation" if above 3000ft AGL.

For cruise only, of course, if you are ascending or descending, or maneuvering such that your heading is crossing the lines between hemispheres, this doesn't/can't apply.

[CharlieTango]

CT, are you saying you fly below 3k feet on 400nm flights?

Yup,

Example, I depart Mammoth and climb for 6 miles to the Sierra Crest and then turn left. I then fly over 100 miles southbound on the west side of the crest. I do that cruise at ~ 1,000 AGL with the terrain mostly at 10,000' Lots of smooth lift on that route. When The southern Sierra begins to fall away from my altitude I head for Van Nuys where I am either descending or < 3000' AGL or both. Reverse that for flight home and you have 400nm with no hemispheric rule applying.

I gave a ride to the local DPE, from Palo Alto to Mammoth and the Colonel asked me to maintain 500' AGL the whole route. Soaring skills were needed.

[drseti]

Looks like that would be a great ride on the windward side of the Sierras. Wouldn't be such smooth sailing on the lee side.

[3Dreaming]

Cecil, you are the one that said hurry up to altitude because of the hemispheric rule. I have been well aware of the hemishperic rule for over 50 years. It hasn't changed. It does not apply while climbing or descending, so as usual, you are wrong.

You insist on perverting the point. No one is talking about climbing or descending in regard to cruise flight. I gave cruise flight as one reason to climb steadily and purposefully in order to reach cruise altitude to adhere to the FAR. You add nothing to these discussions.

You are still adhering to the CFR's regardless of how you climb until you reach cruising altitude, even if you stop some place in the middle for what ever reason.

[designrs]

You are still adhering to the CFR's regardless of how you climb until you reach cruising altitude, even if you stop some place in the middle for what ever reason.

Like when I "step-climb" to gain airspeed.

[3Dreaming]

When you reach your altitude, lower the nose to level, let your speed increase, then reduce throttle to cruise and trim.

I find this to be true for most airplanes, however it doesn't work well in the CT. Most people who try this in the CT wind up overshooting their altitude by 200-300 feet before they get the climb stopped. In the pattern I found reducing power 50 feet before pattern altitude works well.

[MrMorden]

When you reach your altitude, lower the nose to level, let your speed increase, then reduce throttle to cruise and trim.

I find this to be true for most airplanes, however it doesn't work well in the CT. Most people who try this in the CT wind up overshooting their altitude by 200-300 feet before they get the climb stopped. In the pattern I found reducing power 50 feet before pattern altitude works well.

I agree for a climb to pattern, where you are generally at best climb rate. For a leisurely cruise climb, you can nail it pretty closely without having to pull the throttle. The problem in the pattern is the CT is a great climber, and has a decidedly nose-low sight picture compared to other airplanes. At WOT you have to nose it over a lot more than you would normally think is correct to arrest the ascent in a CT.


When climbing I generally pick a steady climb rate that will meet my goals. On takeoff that is almost always a maximum performance climb. Climbing up to cruise I usually pick a speed 80-100kts that will give me a nice steady climb rate and good engine temperatures, then level and accelerate at my target altitude. I would save step climbing for a situation where I am climbing out of terrain and need maximum rate of climb for significant periods of time but have the opportunity to level off periodically to keep the engine temps happy. But it is all just personal preference.

[CharlieTango]

I would save step climbing for a situation where I am climbing out of terrain and need maximum rate of climb for significant periods of time but have the opportunity to level off periodically to keep the engine temps happy. But it is all just personal preference.

Sometimes climb requirements are dictated by terrain. Whenever that is the case you probably screwed up.

[MrMorden]

I would save step climbing for a situation where I am climbing out of terrain and need maximum rate of climb for significant periods of time but have the opportunity to level off periodically to keep the engine temps happy. But it is all just personal preference.

Sometimes climb requirements are dictated by terrain. Whenever that is the case you probably screwed up.

Mostly disagree. If I want to get over the mountains to the north of me, I have to climb up about 4000ft. My climb requirements in that directions are dictated by terrain...but I have about 30 miles to make that requirement. That doesn't mean I screwed anything up, just that I have to get to that altitude by the time I get there. All flights require some climb performance dictated by terrain, even if just to clear the trees at the departure end of the runway!

In the terrain you fly in, There are probably a lot of circumstances where if you are relying on your airplane's climb performance to pull your fat out of the fire, you almost certainly *have* screwed up in your flight planning somewhere.

So I agree with your statement in the case of high, close terrain, but not with regard to climbing over all terrain in general.

[3Dreaming]

I agree for a climb to pattern, where you are generally at best climb rate. For a leisurely cruise climb, you can nail it pretty closely without having to pull the throttle. The problem in the pattern is the CT is a great climber, and has a decidedly nose-low sight picture compared to other airplanes. At WOT you have to nose it over a lot more than you would normally think is correct to arrest the ascent in a CT.

With some time in the airplane leveling off and hitting your altitude is not a problem. I guess I was speaking about someone who is new to the airplane. Also when approaching cruise altitude you can start lowering the nose a little sooner than in the pattern, so as to approach your desired cruise altitude with a little less rate of climb.

[CharlieTango]

So I agree with your statement in the case of high, close terrain, but not with regard to climbing over all terrain in general.

Not to pick nits but to make my point clear:

I probably should have said that "whenever your only option is to rely on climb performance then you have already screwed up."

In your example you have choices, you can continue to climb as needed or you can turn towards lower terrain. Obstacles at the end of the runway do put many in a climb or die situation, with our CTSWs, not so much, I can usually abort if performance becomes an issue.

When near the terrain in high mountains I choose to always have a turn towards lower terrain available to me at all times. Rotors, lost performance and lost engines are all considerations especially when climbing at max performance to barely clear a ridge.