Typical power settings during cruise and other phases of flight

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

I think MSFS is much harder to fly than the real thing.

If so, then it would be good practice. If you can fly the simulator,
you can fly the aircraft.

Walking to Chicago is harder than eating my lunch. Does that make walking to
Chicago good practice for eating my lunch. If I can walk to Chicago, I can
eat my lunch?

The two have no correlation.

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
...
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

So what is the deal? Is it okay to run for several hours at full
throttle?

Depends on the plane.

The planes I've flown are less efficient at WOT, but get there faster.

WOT is gentler on the engine, but if it's only a sim, fuel burn and engine
wear don't matter.

OOPS! WOT is harder on the engine.

Steve Foley writes:

Walking to Chicago is harder than eating my lunch. Does that make walking to
Chicago good practice for eating my lunch. If I can walk to Chicago, I can
eat my lunch?

Not a good analogy. If walking to Chicago is harder than walking
across town, then walking to Chicago is good practice for walking
across town. It has nothing to do with eating lunch.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Steve Foley writes:

OOPS! WOT is harder on the engine.

See? Aren't you glad I'm only flying a sim? Otherwise you might have
my crash on your conscience.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
news:KmPRg.6595$Iq5.1919@trndny02...
The planes I've flown are less efficient at WOT, but get there faster.

WOT is gentler on the engine, but if it's only a sim, fuel burn and
engine
wear don't matter.

OOPS! WOT is harder on the engine.


OWT.

Matt Barrow wrote:
"Steve Foley" wrote in message
news:KmPRg.6595$Iq5.1919@trndny02...
The planes I've flown are less efficient at WOT, but get there faster.

WOT is gentler on the engine, but if it's only a sim, fuel burn and
engine
wear don't matter.
OOPS! WOT is harder on the engine.


OWT.




Actually, on many engines WOT is better than slightly reduced throttle
settings. WOT on the carbs provide a bit of enrichment for cooling.

Ron Natalie wrote:
Matt Barrow wrote:

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
news:KmPRg.6595$Iq5.1919@trndny02...

The planes I've flown are less efficient at WOT, but get there faster.

WOT is gentler on the engine, but if it's only a sim, fuel burn and
engine
wear don't matter.

OOPS! WOT is harder on the engine.


OWT.




Actually, on many engines WOT is better than slightly reduced throttle
settings. WOT on the carbs provide a bit of enrichment for cooling.

Hmmm, when at cruise, especially above 5K feet, I always bring the
throttle back to where the MP just moves down a bit. I am not wasting
fuel that is not needed and I have heard that the butterfly valve
slightly tilted helps in mixing. Don't know about the latter, but
certainly I have found better fuel burn numbers. In cruise, not sure you
have to worry about using fuel for cooling.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

Steve Foley wrote:

OOPS! WOT is harder on the engine.

Not according to Tornado Alley Turbo, the manufacturers of my
turbo-normalization system, it's not. In fact, running less than WOT
during cruise is discouraged by TATurbo:

http://www.taturbo.com/operation3.html

In the article, scroll down to the "Lean of Peak Cruise Operation of the
Turbonormalized (TN) IO-520/550" paragraph and read tips 3 and 4.


--
Peter

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Steve Foley writes:

Walking to Chicago is harder than eating my lunch. Does that make walking
to
Chicago good practice for eating my lunch. If I can walk to Chicago, I
can
eat my lunch?

Not a good analogy. If walking to Chicago is harder than walking
across town, then walking to Chicago is good practice for walking
across town. It has nothing to do with eating lunch.


You have been told by many pilots here that playing with a simulator is not
the same thing as, or even close to, flyine. Yet you continue to claim one
relates to the other.

You remind me of a Jethro Tull album with only one song on it. Who are you,
little Milty?

Steve Foley writes:

You have been told by many pilots here that playing with a simulator is not
the same thing as, or even close to, flyine.

I've been told the opposite by pilots in real life. Clearly, there
are differences of opinion, and neither camp is "right." It depends
on what you mean by "close to" or "same thing."

If you don't want to talk about it, you don't have to reply to me.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.