Talk:Rate of climb

Criticism 2008

Serious editing required here. A number of incorrect statements and statements made without reference to the limited conditions under which they are correct (dVx/dz dependent upon shape of power available curve and upon Mach number effects at higher altitudes and velocities, bias of weight influence on props vs. jets, etc.) Should also have a few integrals for calculating total time between two levels, influence of supercharging, etc. (Weirpwoer (talk) 22:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC))

Anglo-saxon

The article says that ft/min is mainly used in Anglo-Saxon countries, while elsewhere m/s was common. That is, at least, unexact. Since most GA aircrafts are built in the U.S., ft/min is worldwide a most common unit for the ROC. For Germany, I can say that only sailplanes (and maybe parachutes) express their ROC in m/s. Even ultralight aircrafts, mostly build in Germany, use ft/min for ROC and ft for altitude. 62.225.191.42 (talk) 10:06, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Glide Path

Glide path has absolutely nothing to do with rate of climb. It might be important information, but if so it deserves a page of its own as it is completely unrelated to any rate of climb. Solidpoint (talk) 04:59, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Sources

I can't imagine that www.flashcardmachine.com is an acceptable source for quoting in Wikipedia. --BjKa (talk) 10:51, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Merge?

Since this article basically explains the angle of climb as well, I think it would be best to merge that little stubby article into this one. --BjKa (talk)