VyCurve Climb performance & awareness

The figure gallery

Nearly two hundred figures. One grammar. No decoration.

A VyCurve site indexes every figure, table and map it publishes in a single cross-linked Chart Library, so a reader can find the one that answers their question instead of hunting through chapters. This page is a sampler: one example of most of the forms, drawn in the same grammar the product uses, with the question each one exists to answer.

Observed signal Reference or cohort Middle half Terrain Below a stated threshold Small sample

Navy is what you are meant to inspect; graphite is the context it is measured against; green is the ground; red appears only below a threshold the caption states. Learn it once and every figure below reads without a legend.

21Climb and approach profiles over terrain
33Backing tables — evidence, not a failed chart
17Distributions, because a median hides a spread
11Maps, each with the same caption discipline

Counts describe the shipping Chart Library. Every figure reproduced below is synthetic and illustrative, drawn for Fairview Airfield (FAA), a fictional demonstration field.

The shape of a flight

Profiles, envelopes, tapes and cross-sections

The signature form: altitude against distance, drawn over the terrain it was flown across. Almost every chapter has one, and they all share a vertical scale so the eye can carry a comparison from page to page.

The climb, runway by runway

Profile · small multiples
The climb, runway by runway One shared scale — the eye compares, no toggle required End 27 n = 3,090 End 9 n = 1,300 End 33 n = 400 End 15 n = 200 A longer bar or a higher curve is a busier or a steeper end — never a better-flown one. Distance from the runway → · height above the field ↑

Fig. 1. Small multiples beat a toggle. Four runway ends on one shared scale, so the comparison happens in the eye rather than in the reader's memory.

Both halves of the flow, on one axis

Profile · cross-section
Both halves of the traffic flow, on one axis Arrivals from the left, departures to the right, each anchored where it physically was arrivals departures runway 27 0 500 1,000 1,500 profiles behind each ¼ mile 2.6 mi out threshold 2.6 mi out

Fig. 2. Arrivals and departures radiating outward from the runway deck, each anchored where it physically was, with a support strip counting the profiles behind every quarter mile.

The observed corridors, side by side

Profile · corridors
The observed corridors, side by side Clustered from accepted full-distance profiles · one shared scale West, over the bench n = 214 departures lowest average 940 ft AGL Northwest, valley exit n = 168 departures lowest average 1,180 ft AGL East, over town n = 96 departures lowest average 720 ft AGL Corridors describe where aircraft went — never where they should have gone

Fig. 3. Clustered from full-distance profiles: the paths aircraft actually fly, each captioned with its member count and its lowest average height above ground.

One flight, end to end

Height tape
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 departure cruise descent three pattern laps landing One flight, end to end Height above the field (ft)

Fig. 4. The height tape: departure, cruise, descent, three pattern laps and the landing, in a single unbroken read. Useful precisely because it hides nothing.

Distributions

Because a median hides the thing worth seeing

Wherever the record could show one number it prefers to show the spread behind it — and to mark a small sample rather than quietly dropping it or implying a precision it does not have.

Climb score by engine class

Box plots
Climb score by engine class Box is the middle half · bar the median · hatch marks a small sample 100 85 70 55 40 25 Piston ≤200 hp n = 512 Piston 201–300 n = 388 Piston >300 hp n = 141 Turboprop n = 96 · low n Jet n = 47 · low n

Fig. 5. Medians rise with installed power and the spread narrows. The two smallest groups are hatched rather than dropped — the honest way to show a thin sample.

Approach steepness

Distribution
Approach steepness Descriptive — a shallower approach is not a worse one, it is a longer time low 3.0° reference shallower — more distance spent low 1.5° 2.3° 3.0° 3.7° 4.5° Approach gradient 2,540 scored arrivals

Fig. 6. Descriptive, not prescriptive: a shallower approach is not a worse one, it is a longer time spent low. The caption says so, so the chart cannot be read as a verdict.

Touchdown consistency, by runway end

Distribution · small multiples
Touchdown consistency, by runway end Same bins, same scale · a consistency proxy, honestly capped by track precision Runway 27 n = 1,240 landings Runway 9 n = 640 landings Runway 33 n = 210 landings dashed line = the runway's reference point Detected touchdown distance from the reference point →

Fig. 7. Same bins, same scale, three ends. A consistency proxy, and one honestly capped by track precision — which the figure states rather than implies.

Steep versus fast

Scatter · polar
Steep versus fast Rays are constant gradient — the same terrain clearance at any speed 300 500 700 900 rays: ft/NM 0 40 80 120 400 800 1,200 Vertical rate (fpm) Groundspeed (kt) below 380 ft/NM

Fig. 8. The climb polar: vertical rate against groundspeed, read against constant-gradient rays. Every point on a ray clears terrain identically, however fast it flies.

Time and rhythm

When the field flies, and how that changes

The first question a neighbor asks is when. The first question a school asks is how long. These are the forms that answer them without reducing a day to a single average.

The flying day, as a clock

Clock chart
The flying day, as a clock Take-offs and landings by hour of the local day 00 03 06 09 12 15 18 21 local Take-offs Landings Busiest hour 15:00 127 movements Quiet before 06:00 and after 20:00 Wedge length is movements in that hour · shaded arc is night

Fig. 9. Take-offs and landings on a 24-hour face. The quiet arc is as much of the finding as the busy one, and it is the figure most often quoted back at a community meeting.

The training day, in strips

Timeline strips
06 08 10 12 14 16 18 N-•••4G 6 9 N-•••7T 11 N-•••1M 8 N-•••9K 12 N-•••2R 6 N-•••5C 9 One lane per aircraft · bar length is session duration · number in bar is laps Local hour · shaded bands are civil twilight

Fig. 10. One lane per aircraft-day, each pattern session drawn across the hours it spanned with its lap count in the bar, and civil twilight shaded from computed sun times.

The two-minute chart

Band + line
The two-minute chart Height above ground per 15-second bin · fleet median with the middle half 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 500 ft AGL at 20s 1,000 ft AGL at 49s 0 30 60 90 120 150 Seconds after start of climb Height above ground (ft)

Fig. 11. The one figure with a time axis: height above ground per 15-second bin, with the 500 and 1,000 ft crossings direct-labelled where they happen.

The station's own climate

Heat matrix
Median density altitude · month × local hour Field elevation 5,000 ft · the station's climate J F M A M J J A S O N D 06 09 12 15 18 cool, dense air hot and high 2,000 ft above the field

Fig. 12. Median density altitude for every month and local hour. Which hours of which months are simply hard — settled in one plate, before anyone argues about technique.

Comparison, kept honest

Ranking is easy; ranking fairly is the work

The record will happily order things — but never in a way that lets two lucky flights outrank a season of them, and never as a ranking of identifiable pilots.

Score against the weight of evidence

Scatter
Score against the weight of evidence Two lucky flights never outrank a season of them strong, and proven too few to call 1 10 100 400 50 70 90 Scored flights behind the subject (log) Median score

Fig. 13. The chart that makes the leaderboard defensible: median score against how many flights sit behind it, with a too-few-to-call boundary drawn in.

Types with a consistently strong record

Ranked bars
Types with a consistently strong record Evidence-weighted combined score · one flight never outranks a season field median 73 Cessna 182T Skylane 84 n = 212 Diamond DA40 NG 82 n = 168 Cirrus SR22 G6 81 n = 141 Piper PA-28-181 78 n = 260 Cessna 172S 76 n = 418 Beechcraft A36 75 n = 96 A distribution of types — never a ranking of identifiable pilots

Fig. 14. A label–bar–value list rather than a rotated axis, each row carrying its own sample size and the field median drawn through all of them.

Strongest and weakest, side by side

Candlestick
90 75 60 45 30 Strongest sustained record Most room to improve Weekly climb-score range · same scale, side by side

Fig. 15. Weekly score ranges for the two ends of the same ordering, on one shared scale — so the comparison is a glance rather than an act of memory.

Where the field connects

Map
Where the field connects Arc thickness is movements · a distribution, not a route map CJT 210 GBH 168 WLD 96 STN 74 ARO 52 MPL 41 Fairview Local-only flights excluded · origins and onward fields are estimates

Fig. 16. Arrivals by estimated origin and departures by estimated onward field. A distribution of connections, explicitly not a route map.

Explaining a number

A score you cannot open is a score you should not trust

Wherever a 0–100 number reaches a reader, the record can decompose it — into the points that built it, or into each component set against what the rest of the field did.

How the score is built

Waterfall
How the score is built Every point accounted for — the number is legible, not a black box 0 25 50 75 100 50 Base +14 Initial -6 Mid +11 Final +5 Consistency 74 Score Points, from the base to the published score · one illustrative climb

Fig. 17. The waterfall: base, each phase's contribution, consistency, and the published number. Every point accounted for.

The score, taken apart

Dot comparison
The score, taken apart One arrival against the field's own arrivals High shelf — altitude benefit 34 of 40 High-shelf stability 12 of 15 Descent-capture timing 14 of 20 Stable descent after capture 18 of 20 Touchdown / data confidence 3 of 5 this arrival fleet median middle half

Fig. 18. Each component as this flight's navy dot against the fleet's median tick and middle-half band — the score's worked arithmetic, not its assertion.

And the primer, for readers who need one

Seven hand-built diagrams, no live data

Two of the seven. The rest cover what a climb profile is, why climb rate is measured, what a strong profile looks like, altitudes and enroute operations, and density altitude.

Best angle, or best rate

Diagram
Vx or Vy — best angle, or best rate The same take-off, two techniques, two different shapes over the ground Vx · best angle Vy · best rate more room over the ridge the ridge is the reason to choose same take-off Distance over the ground Height above the field

Fig. 19. Why two departures from the same runway can look nothing alike and both be correct.

The traffic pattern

Diagram
The traffic pattern A left-hand circuit, roughly to scale · the turn radii are real, not stylised 27 9 upwind crosswind downwind base final 1,000 ft above the field pattern altitude Pattern altitude, direction and dimensions come from each deployment's own configuration — nothing in VyCurve is hard-coded to one airport's geometry.

Fig. 20. Drawn roughly to scale, with real turn radii, from each field's own configuration.

Request a demo See the maps and tracks →

Every figure on this page is synthetic and illustrative, drawn for Fairview Airfield (FAA), a fictional demonstration field. They show the forms the product renders, not what any real airport recorded.