Max rate to my final altitude (as permitted by ATC) all the time, every time.

Whatever my final altitude is, I will either be going faster than I can at lower altitude, or burning less fuel, or both. I want to go fast and burn less fuel as quickly as I can.

I have not heard any passenger complaints (and I've asked.) People who might not be comfortable are guided to forward-facing seats, which they generally self-select anyay.

Which they should be based on the type of flying they do.

Think of the freight dogs slogging King Airs, day in and day out through all weather. For better or worse, they can't afford or don't want a PC-12. They are flying 40 year old airframes, who's only value is the motor pulling them forward. They may not have upgraded glass panels and may only have a non WAAS GPS as backup to the their NAV radios. The risk profile of an airframe changes as more are in use with more varied operators.

I am sure Textron is looking at all the pilots "upgrading" to older 501 and 560 and wondering how much their potential liabilities have gone up with owner flown older aircraft. We should be happy they continue to support all these older types. I know in the helicopter world, one of the big dramas playing out is Airbus looking to pull the type certificate of Lamas - https://verticalmag.com/features/airbus ... -for-lama/

Few reasons I cruise climb in the PC-12. 1) to get there faster-I’m told to fly it as fast as I can, not as fuel efficient as I can. 2) sit in the rear facing seats, and it’s uncomfortable climbing at Vy, it’s much more comfortable climbing at a steeper angle facing forward. 3) forward visibility is virtually gone climbing at Vy in the cockpit.

In the end though, sacrificing only 475fpm, (1925fpm vs 1450fpm and that’s at 22°c) climbing at 190 TAS vs 140 TAS is worth it to me. Realistically, I see 1500-2000fpm cruise climbing this time of year in a 5 blade until the low teens, then more like 1400 to the early flight levels. I’m often stopping though at 17,500/16,500’.

We always climbed in the bars, past obstacles and 1k AGL (bars/vx/VY as needed) transitioned to 150kts in the 12

I guess I'm not yet convinced that cruise climb is always faster. The plane that climbs at Vy will certainly accelerate to max speed sooner, and spend more time there during the trip.

Does anyone fly a plane that shows overall trip times for cruise climb vs Vy climb?

I guess I'm not yet convinced that cruise climb is always faster. The plane that climbs at Vy will certainly accelerate to max speed sooner, and spend more time there during the trip.

Does anyone fly a plane that shows overall trip times for cruise climb vs Vy climb?

I guess I'm not yet convinced that cruise climb is always faster. The plane that climbs at Vy will certainly accelerate to max speed sooner, and spend more time there during the trip.

Does anyone fly a plane that shows overall trip times for cruise climb vs Vy climb?

Depends on the distance and wind. But here is a very normal flight for me.

Which they should be based on the type of flying they do.

Think of the freight dogs slogging King Airs, day in and day out through all weather. For better or worse, they can't afford or don't want a PC-12. They are flying 40 year old airframes, who's only value is the motor pulling them forward. They may not have upgraded glass panels and may only have a non WAAS GPS as backup to the their NAV radios. The risk profile of an airframe changes as more are in use with more varied operators.

I am sure Textron is looking at all the pilots "upgrading" to older 501 and 560 and wondering how much their potential liabilities have gone up with owner flown older aircraft. We should be happy they continue to support all these older types. I know in the helicopter world, one of the big dramas playing out is Airbus looking to pull the type certificate of Lamas - https://verticalmag.com/features/airbus ... -for-lama/

[/quote]


How high are you holding 2k FPM @ 180kts??[/quote]

Well I climb in pitch mode at about 7° so the speed will be bleeding off. 7° will hold the cruise climb profile given the speeds on the climb chart. So not like I’m climbing 180KIAS all the way up by any means.

How high are you holding 2k FPM @ 180kts??[/quote]

Well I climb in pitch mode at about 7° so the speed will be bleeding off. 7° will hold the cruise climb profile given the speeds on the climb chart. So not like I’m climbing 180KIAS all the way up by any means.[/quote]


When I was going medevac we’d just go IAS 150kts on departure, worked well for most everything, and fuel burn and all was not a factor, just speed

I haven’t met many who climb in pitch mode, outside of some proline planes that don’t handle a IAS climb well

How high are you holding 2k FPM @ 180kts??

Yes and No. As I understand it, if a tort lawyer can show a (replaced) component younger than 18 years was the cause of an accident, the component manufacturer can be on the hook - which could be Textron for example.

GARA also doesn't take the manufacturer off the hook for people injured on the ground by a crash according to Mike Busch - https://www.avweb.com/ownership/the-sav ... liability/

Never been fan of climbing in IAS (or FLC), but I get as long as it’s safe, what the boss says is golden

IAS climb is THE safest way to climb. High altitude stalls are no joke and with IAS mode it is impossible to stall if you get distracted. In my plane I capture 200 KIAS and let her go. Every 5k feet I slowly remove 5 knots from the target. Even my 1970's AP does it perfectly. Now trying to do a 2,000fpm VS descent while riding the barber pole? Porpoise City.... So I descend in pitch mode and make small adjustments to target 2k.

Back to the max rate vs cruise climb. I dug around in my performance charts.

Max Rate climb at 10,500 lbs, sea level to FL350.
18 mins 406 lbs 59 nm

Cruise climb at 10,500 lbs, sea level to FL350.
24 mins 519 lbs 111 nm

So I'm arriving at FL350 6 minutes sooner but 52 miles behind. At 365 KTAS I can cover 36.5 miles in 6 minutes so at the 24 minute mark I am 15.5 miles behind the cruise climb plane. Also I will burn 95 lbs in that 6 minutes which makes the fuel savings only 18 lbs. So it seems like a wash really - with cruise climb you gain 2 minutes and while burning and extra 18 lbs of fuel.

Obviously this ignores wind. Depending on what the wind is doing that 6 extra minutes at the higher altitude could make more of a difference.