6500' I can nae nae..10000' you must be cray cray

I don't know if it's the same feeling but in my Navy days crossing the Pacific I felt funny being 5,000' above ground in a boat. Weird I know...
 
If terrain permits, I like to cruise close (ish) to the ground so I can get a great view!
 
jordane93 said:
If terrain permits, I like to cruise close (ish) to the ground so I can get a great view!
Click to expand...
Same here. I've always preferred low to high. Then I got this job...

I've taken an airplane to 47,000'. Stuff looks small from there.
 
Cpt_Kirk said:
In NA pistons, I choose anything between 8,000 and 12,000 and that's it.
Click to expand...

Seems like every type and engine has a kind of sweet spot from 6500' up to 12k or so. I've been up in the 14-16k on a long run, and while it's nice and cool, there's really no benefit to climbing up there for a 4 hour trip. Of course, when I go over the rocks, I get all I can get, my minimums are 2500' AGL in mild winds, and 3500' in windy conditions.
 
docmirror said:
Seems like every type and engine has a kind of sweet spot from 6500' up to 12k or so.
Click to expand...

A chart like this help you visualize how TAS increases with altitude for any given power setting, up to the point that power setting can no longer be achieved.

Cruise%20Performance%20Chart%20(True%20Airspeed),%20Langley%20Flying%20School.gif


So, all things being equal, if you've decided to cruise at 75% power, that's most efficiently done at about 7,500'. And so on.
 
FastEddieB said:
A chart like this help you visualize how TAS increases with altitude for any given power setting, up to the point that power setting can no longer be achieved.
Click to expand...

Gosh,,,, really?! Like - I never knew. Hmmmm, the things you learn online.

:ohsnap:
 
Everskyward said:
Same here. I've always preferred low to high. Then I got this job...

I've taken an airplane to 47,000'. Stuff looks small from there.
Click to expand...
47K must have been awesome though like seeing the curvature of the Earth.
 
Everskyward said:
We were discussing whether or not we could see it...
Click to expand...

I've been to FL450 once. I was pretty sure I could see it. My pictures seems to reflect it. I'll let some nerd figure out whether I was actually seeing it or not.
 
docmirror said:
Geez, are none of you skiers? I spend 4+ hours on the slopes at 9-12k' working my butt off and I'm an old man. Yeah, I hurt afterward, but I'm up there beating the snow into submission. :yes:
Click to expand...
My wife and I have assisted more than one visitor to Colorado suffering the effects of hypoxia and dehydration (not previously mentioned but also an issue at high altitudes) on the slopes.
 
FastEddieB said:
A chart like this help you visualize how TAS increases with altitude for any given power setting, up to the point that power setting can no longer be achieved.

Cruise%20Performance%20Chart%20(True%20Airspeed),%20Langley%20Flying%20School.gif


So, all things being equal, if you've decided to cruise at 75% power, that's most efficiently done at about 7,500'. And so on.
Click to expand...

So at 7500' DA full throttle = 75% power
 
midlifeflyer said:
My wife and I have assisted more than one visitor to Colorado suffering the effects of hypoxia and dehydration (not previously mentioned but also an issue at high altitudes) on the slopes.
Click to expand...

And the ability to perform physically at altitude is a different matter than the ability to perform mentally. And flying is mostly a mental activity.

As noted before, what I notice is a gradual degradation in mental capacity and problem solving ability.
 
BarryCooper said:
So at 7500' DA full throttle = 75% power
Click to expand...

Exactly. Properly leaned, of course*.

Similarly, if you wanted the most range for 65% power, it would be found just over 10,000'. And so on.

Assuming no wind or other factors at play of course.


*Better to say "full power" since many pilots operate LOP, keeping full throttle while controlling power with mixture.
 
jordane93 said:
Post some pics if you have!
Click to expand...
I don't have any pics. Will try to remember for next time (which isn't very frequent). However, I don't think pics tell the whole story because a wide-angle lens will distort the horizon. I guess the only way to do it would be to put something with a straight edge against the horizon while the pic is being taken.
 
I was terrified the first time I went up to 10000 feet. I was in a Cessna 150.

I was alone and all I could think of was that the controls kept feeling lighter and lighter the higher i got. I thought that at some point I was just going to fall out of the sky. Seriously, that's what I thought. I kept going though.

Facing your fears as you expand your experience is the hardest part of becoming a pilot. Also the most rewarding.

After a little more experience, the higher I got the more I relaxed.

Gary
 
I think I had my certificate for a month or so and did a cross country flight to a friend's ranch in Mariposa Ca. Coming home I was nervous about a mountain range I needed to cross. I got my 172H 145 HP plane up to 11K. I was really nervous up there but glad I did it. I learned a lot from it. I was so focused on crossing the range high enough and at a 45 degree angle I didn't notice until setting up to land I was full rich. I knew the plane felt low on power, it never occurred to me to lean her out. That was a lesson I won't forget.

I was on a maintance test flight with my CFI in a G550. They took it up to 50,000. I really hope I never see that altitude again.
 
Luvrv8 said:
I think I had my certificate for a month or so and did a cross country flight to a friend's ranch in Mariposa Ca. Coming home I was nervous about a mountain range I needed to cross. I got my 172H 145 HP plane up to 11K. I was really nervous up there but glad I did it. I learned a lot from it. I was so focused on crossing the range high enough and at a 45 degree angle I didn't notice until setting up to land I was full rich. I knew the plane felt low on power, it never occurred to me to lean her out. That was a lesson I won't forget.

I was on a maintance test flight with my CFI in a G550. They took it up to 50,000. I really hope I never see that altitude again.
Click to expand...


Why not? Anything below the Armstrong line would be fun.
 
Lndwarrior said:
I was terrified the first time I went up to 10000 feet. I was in a Cessna 150.

I was alone and all I could think of was that the controls kept feeling lighter and lighter the higher i got. I thought that at some point I was just going to fall out of the sky. Seriously, that's what I thought. I kept going though.

Facing your fears as you expand your experience is the hardest part of becoming a pilot. Also the most rewarding.

After a little more experience, the higher I got the more I relaxed.

Gary
Click to expand...

The first time I got anywhere near that was in an LSA. I believe I was closing in on 9000 feet in a Skycatcher. The tailwind was awesome, on the way back I flew at half that due to the headwind heh..
 
The only thing that makes me nervous about being high is fire. Plus icing can be an issue even in the warmest parts of the summer.

Sitting at FL250, looking down, it's like...damn that's a long ways I have to go down before I can get out of this thing if it starts on fire.

Took me awhile to get fast at reading an altimeter in the flight levels as well.
 
Everskyward said:
Only 100' higher than I am here sitting at my computer in my house...
Click to expand...

My house in New Mexico is at 6600 feet. Summer time density altitudes can reach 11,000 at the airport here. Even my truck is turbo charged.
 
In my 182 my go to altitude is 10k if the direction of flight allows me up there, and the winds are reasonable that's where I go. I love it up there. Better tas for a given fuel burn. People don't just cruise around for fun at 10k and flight train it's usually only people going places on flight plans so that's another thing I like.
 
JustinD said:
In my 182 my go to altitude is 10k if the direction of flight allows me up there, and the winds are reasonable that's where I go. I love it up there. Better tas for a given fuel burn. People don't just cruise around for fun at 10k and flight train it's usually only people going places on flight plans so that's another thing I like.
Click to expand...

Plus, yea don't have to worry about that stupid 250 KIAS speed limit! Am I right??
 
MAKG1 said:
For reasons I don't entirely understand, I have a much easier time above 10,000 feet in a 172 than in a PA28. And it doesn't seem to depend on engine size.

Above 10,000, hypoxia may indeed become a concern, especially at night.

My record in a 172 is 13,500 MSL (for less than 30 minutes) to try to escape moderate turbulence in a mountain pass. You can get higher, but you have to use rising air to your advantage.
Click to expand...

My record is damn near 15K in a 172. Wasn't trying to escape turbulence but got caught in rising air. Cruise was at around 11.5'. Certainly something I wouldn't do intentionally. Kept thinking to myself.... jeesh... at what point will the wings fall? Had my wife in the right seat and a husky in the back on a pnp mission. Nothing I could do but hold her wings level and airspeed in the green, and descend after things stabilized.
 
docmirror said:
Geez, are none of you skiers? I spend 4+ hours on the slopes at 9-12k' working my butt off and I'm an old man. Yeah, I hurt afterward, but I'm up there beating the snow into submission. :yes:
Click to expand...

Ever ski Utah? Let me know if you do. Alta/Bird are my favs here.
 
Damn... Trouble posting the pic. It was from 350, but could see a little curve. The camera does enhance that.
 
Taken from A 165 horse Fairchild 24. at 13,000' western Wy. crossing the Rockies
 

Attachments

  • The Big Red One 009.jpg
    The Big Red One 009.jpg
    159.9 KB · Views: 38
Taken from a C-170-B at 10,000' Wasatch Range north wet of SLT.
 

Attachments

  • Texas Trip 99 031.jpg
    Texas Trip 99 031.jpg
    145.9 KB · Views: 22
Apple chips at 16K. They popped between 17K and 18K. Smoky skies last August at 16K.
 

Attachments

  • _HTI259820150813_1270 (Medium)a.jpg
    _HTI259820150813_1270 (Medium)a.jpg
    111.9 KB · Views: 39
  • _HTI3152 (Medium)a.jpg
    _HTI3152 (Medium)a.jpg
    70.8 KB · Views: 36
If I stayed at 6500' for most of my 1hr+ flights I'd hit a mountain. 10k is my happy place.

I've had my 180hp Mooney up to 15k before, but I was surrounded by clouds so I couldn't see the ground anyways.
 
I've been up to FL200 several times just for fun and for TAS benefits. But at that altitude I'm seeing 120 to 125 KIAS so it can heat up in the summer (even at 24 F!). Cowl flaps open makes it OK.

The world looks small, the horizon is far away and sometimes indistinct. Class A is a great place to cruise.

That said, I often can't justify the trip up there. The TR182 has a problem with oil temps and in the summer I can't get more than 500 fpm without heating up the oil too much. So going up super high takes a long time even from Denver. I usually don't bother. I like the 10k to 12k range. No need for O2 and I'm flying "downhill" heading east anyway. No justification to go up high unless I can pick up a sick tail wind or avoid turbulence (and turb avoidance is my most common reason for going up - wife hates turb).
 
Here's FL190 from July 5, with a weird phenomenon that had me puzzled at first. It looks like a surface to air missile but it's actually a contrail chemtrail + shadow. Pretty cool looking.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1568.JPG
    IMG_1568.JPG
    1.3 MB · Views: 69
Seen that one before.

Not religious, but kinda looks like the finger of God, or something.

One time over S FL, Karen and saw a strangely geometric cloud pattern ahead.

Let me see if I can dig up a photo.
 
FastEddieB said:
Seen that one before.

Not religious, but kinda looks like the finger of God, or something.

One time over S FL, Karen and saw a strangely geometric cloud pattern ahead.

Let me see if I can dig up a photo.
Click to expand...

For clouds that look like fingers of God, it's much better to go to the Hubble Space Telescope.

carina_hst.jpg


Yes, that's real. It's a 20 year old blow-up of a small region in the Carina Nebula.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top