Vx or Vy climbout to increase chances of return to field?

Bonchie said:
Looking at his last chart where he decides Vx and Vy are not appropriate for takeoffs, I'd be in the trees at my airport if I only gained 50 feet 3500 feet past the liftoff point.
Click to expand...

I agree - but the reason I posted the link was the graphs of time-to-altitude and distance-to-altitude graphs for the Bonanza. The difference in slopes for the Vx and Vy speed amount to between 10% and 15%. In trying to fly over the proverbial 50 ft obstruction, that translates into 5 ft difference. That's not enough difference worth arguing over or pondering on.

So getting the airspeed anywhere between Vx and Vy seems to me "good enough" for most practical purposes - even at shorter runways.
 
Jim Logajan said:
I agree - but the reason I posted the link was the graphs of time-to-altitude and distance-to-altitude graphs for the Bonanza. The difference in slopes for the Vx and Vy speed amount to between 10% and 15%. In trying to fly over the proverbial 50 ft obstruction, that translates into 5 ft difference. That's not enough difference worth arguing over or pondering on.

So getting the airspeed anywhere between Vx and Vy seems to me "good enough" for most practical purposes - even at shorter runways.
Click to expand...

Sure. I agree with that.

I fly on the numbers mostly because it's habit, but there's pretty much no practical danger between Vx and Vy in 99.999% of takeoffs.

The only thing I disagreed with was his pretty definitive statement about those speeds not being appropriate for takeoff. They are certainly appropriate at some airports.

I do agree, that if you've got the runway and obstacle clearance, his way of taking off is probably safer in heavier HP aircraft and certainly more comfortable for passengers. Like he said...if you are at Vx/Vy in a Bonanza at 200-300 feet, you are dead if the engine quits.
 
Last edited:
hindsight2020 said:
This was hashed out a year or so ago. I believe the answer was Vy for puny spam cans, and zoom climbs for RVs...
Click to expand...

Mazda is gonna seek legal action against the Zoom Climb, I think they copyrighted the Zoom Zoom Zoom for their commercials.

Of course this all in jest, or is it?
 
tmyers said:
Mazda is gonna seek legal action against the Zoom Climb, I think they copyrighted the Zoom Zoom Zoom for their commercials.
Click to expand...

Actually, they can only seek 1/3 legal action...
 
Now why didn't I think of that?

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk
 
I use Vy. What I think is really gonna make or break you if you ever get put in the situation is how fast you recognize what is going on, get the turn started, and how aggressive of turn you use/are able to use. The problem I see with using Vx is that you don't get enough horizontal distance between the threshold of the runway you took off on and yourself and could risk going off the end of the runway. With Vy I have a greater stall margin and am able to make a more aggressive turn which will more than likely be necessary.

Case in point:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-C5E9qj52w
 
I get low altitude passing traffic because guys think flying low over rivers and streams is fun. What they don't factor in is that guys like me coming off a strip in the trees can't see them. Vx does not provide good maneuverability. It has a use but that's very limited. If you don't need to use Vx to clear obstacles you're better off not using it.
 
Vy to pattern altitude and then a cruise climb for best cooling. Vx is for obstacle clearance.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Why on earth would you do that?

Climb out at VYSE in most high performance twins this time a year and your cylinder temps are going to be pushing 400F.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't understand where Vyse comes into this at all unless you lose one.:dunno: Vy and Vyse are not the same speed, and I never needed all the climb the 310 would give.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top