A question about the Lightning's and Phantom's climb performance

Ah thank you very much TonyT. I’ll check it out.

One would suggest you jo8n this site and ask here, you will actually be asking ex Lightning. Pilots and ex phantom pilots…

the term u may see WIWOL is an anagram for.   When I was on Lightning’s 

Linky

https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/

I am trying to ask specifically about the numbers tbf, as much as I’d love a phantom vs lightning argument, I have a feeling it would devolve into “you’re wrong, I’m right, nananana boo boo” very quickly.

According to the operating notes it appears that the F 4 climbs quicker than the F 6 Lightning, yes. My experience is that the American manufacturers always put the best light on their aircraft performance. 
 

If you really want to stir some discussion of Lightning v F 4 you could do worse than ask a question on PPRUNE in the Military forum… off you really want some fun, try the WIWOLS website.

Ah, thank you for your feedback, I think I understand what you mean now. Unless I were to find the Vx and Vy for each aircraft, I can’t definitively say that one aircraft out-climbs the other, but would it be fair to say that if each aircraft climbs according to their flight manuals, the Phantom has the advantage in a sustained climb and then give an explanation of Vx and Vy? 

I would like to note, I’ve found that the Phantom slightly out-accelerates the Lightning from 0.65 mach to 0.9 mach, despite the aforementioned disadvantages it’s at with its configuration. I’ve heard from some places on the internet that British flight manuals tend to use modest estimates based on performance data, do you think this may be the case?

Thank you for all of your help.

Not ICA. ISA = International Standard Atmosphere, formally adopted for aviation circa 1958. ICAO = International Civil Aviation Organisation, belongs to the UN, who in the 1990s adopted the aviation standard ISA and made minor changes to produce their own ‘standard’ version of the atmosphere. There is also an American standard atmosphere too… perhaps adjusted for the $ or smog in LA – I don’t know.

Both aircraft climb tables are reduced/produced to ISA, but the tables use the ICAO model – subtle difference to your wording.

Again, the manuals you are referring to for the climb speed and (thus) time to climb do not indicate if the climb speed at Vx or Vy. Vx is the best angle of climb speed, and Vy is the best rate of climb speed.

Unless you can establish BOTH figures are for Vx or Vy, you cannot say that one type out-performs the other in a climb.

Orcal. The Lightning’s climb is at 450 knots, until the plane reaches 0.87 mach, at which it continued until 36,000 ft. The Phantom climbs at 322 knots, until it reaches 0.93 mach, which is what the manuals say they should climb at. Also both manuals mention ICAO and I don’t see anything to do with ICA.

Hi H. Perhaps you mean ISA rather the ICAO?

Was the climb for both types at Vx or Vy? 

A useful foundation for study is A C Kermode’s ‘Mechanics of Flight’.   Good luck.

http://soaneemrana.com/onewebmedia/MECHANICS%20OF%20FLIGHT%20BY%20A.C%2…

Oracal. I compared the time from sea level to 36,000 ft, for both aircraft using reheat, both at ICAO. Sorry if I didn’t make that clear.

H. There is more than one climb speed for each aircraft type. Also, is the climb being made at max dry thrust, in reheat or other power setting? Without knowledge of the possible variables you may be left comparing apples with pears.