Coming to a GA Airport Near You... Pretty Cool

[svcta]

Making a legal restriction for perfectly capable airplanes from flying at their proper cruise altitudes simply because of their MMo would be asinine.

Why is that?

 

[siouxicide]

Why is that?

It's a lot better to be above the battlefield looking down than it is to be forced to fly through it. Thunderstorms, ice, turbulence..among other reasons. It'd be that much more unfortunate if it was a regulation holding up a perfectly capable airplane.
Take a CE-550, for example. Not a .72 airplane but capable of FL430, enough to get you above most nasty stuff or at least get a better view.

 

[BoilerUP]

Why is that?

Because your attempt to rid the upper flight levels of VLJs under the guise of efficiency would also eliminate the Citation I/II, as well as the CJ1 and maybe even the CJ2. All of these are capable airplanes and fly extremely well in the mid to upper 30s; the CJs even do the low to mid 40s.

Your regulation would eliminate the operating efficiencies of these airplanes, by forcing them to operate at lower altitude. It shoots their DOCs up and would likely cause many of these airplanes to be parked, putting even more people out of jobs. That'd be okay for you though, as you wouldn't have to be inconvenienced to slow to 250 IAS...

If a slower airplane is causing problems, 99 out of 100 times it is on an arrival or departure. In those situations (and even that odd time it's not) there are plenty of options:

1. Turn them off the arrival/departure
2. Descent them to an altitude below normal arrival/departure traffic
3. Put the slower jet on a prop arrival/departure, where it would mix better

The slower Citations have met every regulatory requirement for operating in the 30s and above, and do so safely and economically every day. Its a BIG sky out there...don't go throwing us all under the bus because of what happens into the larger metros...

 

[svcta]

Relax, boiler, I was asking a legit question, not throwing anyone under any bus.

I'll stick to it, though, that if the literally thousands (by their own predictions) of VLJs hit the upper flight levels it will routinely cause more capable airplanes to maneuver around them. What are airplanes going that slow doing climbing up to the high 30s or even low 40s doing? I think it's time for some cost benefit analysis if you're taking that airplane that far.

By the way, I'm prepared to lose this argument on basis of opinion. The occasional VLJ or whatever speed bump it is making up there is okay, whatever. But a few years ago there were predictions of, again, thousands of VLJs being built. It won't be nearly as "big a sky" with that much more saturation. I'm not that passsionate about it, it just seems logical to me.

 

[BoilerUP]

Relax, boiler, I was asking a legit question, not throwing anyone under any bus.

I'm plenty relaxed...this was an academic exercise only, but the Law of Unintended Consequences is what causes me to drive a stake through proposals like this unless then seem obviously tongue-in-cheek. Yours wasn't, and still does not appear to be, TIC.

I'll stick to it, though, that if the literally thousands (by their own predictions) of VLJs hit the upper flight levels it will routinely cause more capable airplanes to maneuver around them. What are airplanes going that slow doing climbing up to the high 30s or even low 40s doing? I think it's time for some cost benefit analysis if you're taking that airplane that far.

"Airplanes that slow" in the high 30s and low 40s are giving their operators good TAS and very low fuel burns. It's where they are designed to fly and operate most effectively and efficiently. Why should I or anyone else flying similar performing airplanes be forced to fly at FL270 with 370 KTAS and 1200pph burn when I can fly just as well at FL370 with 355 KTAS burning 900pph? The same argument could be made for airplanes like the PC12, TBM700, King Air family, etc.

While such an operational restriction may be "logical" to you, you've offered no compelling argument to support such a discriminatory operational regulation.

Again, there are options available to ATC that give them flexibility to mix aircraft with varying maximum and cruise speeds that don't involve a wholesale limitation creating undue hardship to many thousands of operators.

I've got no beef with ya', svtca...I just think you're good intentions about operational issues with VLJs (some that I share) are waaaaaaaaaaaaay off base on this.