Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site poseidon.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!poseidon!brent
From: brent@poseidon.UUCP (Brent P. Callaghan)
Newsgroups: net.aviation
Subject: Re: Commercial aircraft power-to-weight
Message-ID: <1375@poseidon.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 2-Jan-86 09:01:40 EST
Article-I.D.: poseidon.1375
Posted: Thu Jan  2 09:01:40 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 3-Jan-86 01:49:12 EST
References: <59200011@trsvax>
Organization: AT&T Information Systems, Lincroft NJ
Lines: 24

Last year I spent a couple of days watching a friend of
mine at his work.  He is an air traffic controller at
Prestwick in Scotland.

We were in a good position to observe the climb rates of
various commercial jets on the radar data tag for each
aircraft.

The clear winner was the Boeing 757.  I think the 737
was next best.
Sorry, I can't recall what the actual rate of climb was.

He had a liking for fast climbing aircraft,
the less time an aircraft is changing it's altitude - the
easier it is for him.

From my own experience, the 737 seems to give the
steepest deck angle.
-- 
				
Made in New Zealand -->		Brent Callaghan
				AT&T Information Systems, Lincroft, NJ
				{ihnp4|mtuxo|pegasus}!poseidon!brent
				(201) 576-3475