Typical power settings during cruise and other phases of flight

Euan Kilgour writes:

Well I disagree. I found that MSFS gave me terrible habits that my
instructors had to beat out of me (j/k). Fixation on instruments was
the main one.

What were the others?

Can you tell me from flying MSFS what it is like to control an aircraft
that is at MAUW and is loaded aft of the C of G?

Difficult.

While the aircrafts behaviour might be able to be simulated well,
you have no idea of the strength required to hold it straight and level ...

The strength required depends on the aircraft.

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

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...
[...]
Incidentally, we've had many real pilots (Mary included) who absolutely
cannot land the sim planes. It is quite a bit harder to do than
landing the real plane, although the casual lack of concern about
bending metal makes it a bit easier on the digestion.

No doubt. Playing a game is a somewhat different skill than flying an
airplane. Some aspects of hand-eye coordination and procedures translate,
so it's not entirely orthogonal. But at the same time, there's no reason to
believe that someone good at flying an airplane would be good at flying a
PC-based flight-sim, just as there's no reason to believe that someone good
at flying a PC-based flight-sim would be good at flying an airplane.

[...]
IMHO, making fun of a "pilot wannabee" because all he can afford is
MSFS is NOT the best way for us to grow GA. And, trust me -- we NEED
to grow GA. Now.

First, as Mark says he's not being made fun of, nor is the scorn he gets
here related to his use of MSFS, except inasmuch as he falsely believes his
MSFS experience to grant him knowledge of all sorts of things he actually
knows nothing about.

It's pretty much just coincidence that he's using a flight sim. The main
problem is his willingless to form opinions in a vacuum and fail to revise
those opinions when presented with facts contrary to those opinions.

Second, the guy has absolutely no hope, nor intention, of ever being in the
pilot's seat. As you well know, economics is not truly an effective barrier
to entry into aviation. Those who truly desire it find a way. This guy
talks about economics as if it's insurmountable, when in fact the real issue
is that he is completely and absolutely scared ****less of airplanes.

I seriously doubt that justified, accurate criticisms of the guy is going to
have ANY negative effect on aviation. It may well improve the situation
(if, for example, those criticisms help someone else understand the reality
of the situation better, rather than relying on the guy's inaccurate
proclamations).

Pete

Grumman-581,

To make it worse, he's a French troll...


Actually, he is an American living in Paris, from what someone posted.
And what's worse about it? At least it's a country that's got its
war-going priorities right.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On 09/25/06 22:30, Peter Duniho wrote:
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...
[...]
Incidentally, we've had many real pilots (Mary included) who absolutely
cannot land the sim planes. It is quite a bit harder to do than
landing the real plane, although the casual lack of concern about
bending metal makes it a bit easier on the digestion.

No doubt. Playing a game is a somewhat different skill than flying an
airplane. Some aspects of hand-eye coordination and procedures translate,
so it's not entirely orthogonal. But at the same time, there's no reason to
believe that someone good at flying an airplane would be good at flying a
PC-based flight-sim, just as there's no reason to believe that someone good
at flying a PC-based flight-sim would be good at flying an airplane.

[...]
IMHO, making fun of a "pilot wannabee" because all he can afford is
MSFS is NOT the best way for us to grow GA. And, trust me -- we NEED
to grow GA. Now.

First, as Mark says he's not being made fun of, nor is the scorn he gets
here related to his use of MSFS, except inasmuch as he falsely believes his
MSFS experience to grant him knowledge of all sorts of things he actually
knows nothing about.

It's pretty much just coincidence that he's using a flight sim. The main
problem is his willingless to form opinions in a vacuum and fail to revise
those opinions when presented with facts contrary to those opinions.

Second, the guy has absolutely no hope, nor intention, of ever being in the
pilot's seat. As you well know, economics is not truly an effective barrier
to entry into aviation. Those who truly desire it find a way. This guy
talks about economics as if it's insurmountable, when in fact the real issue
is that he is completely and absolutely scared ****less of airplanes.

I seriously doubt that justified, accurate criticisms of the guy is going to
have ANY negative effect on aviation. It may well improve the situation
(if, for example, those criticisms help someone else understand the reality
of the situation better, rather than relying on the guy's inaccurate
proclamations).

Pete


In fact, I see more potential for negative impact as a result of his postings
to these aviation news groups, as he speaks as though he knows what he's
talking about, which could easily confuse or scare potential student pilots.

The best thing the aviation community could do for GA (in this regard) would
be to stop responding to his posts (IMHO). He's like a virus that's just never
going to go away otherwise.


--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

Second, the guy has absolutely no hope, nor intention, of ever being in the
pilot's seat. As you well know, economics is not truly an effective barrier
to entry into aviation. Those who truly desire it find a way. This guy
talks about economics as if it's insurmountable, when in fact the real issue
is that he is completely and absolutely scared ****less of airplanes.

I agree 100% on your former comment, and I haven't read enough of his
posts to comment on the latter. If, indeed, he's got no intention of
ever becoming a pilot, well, that's really just a shame.

Of course, I still have hopes for Skylune becoming a pilot -- so I *am*
an eternal optimist!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...

Of course, I still have hopes for Skylune becoming a pilot -- so I *am*
an eternal optimist!

:-)

..........and don't forget; the day he gets his license, we all chip in and
get him a membership in AOPA!!!
:-))
Dudley

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
link.net...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...

Of course, I still have hopes for Skylune becoming a pilot -- so I *am*
an eternal optimist!

:-)

.........and don't forget; the day he gets his license, we all chip in and
get him a membership in AOPA!!!


Does he need his license first?

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
news:l5bSg.6632$8j4.1651@trndny05...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
link.net...

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...

Of course, I still have hopes for Skylune becoming a pilot -- so I *am*
an eternal optimist!

:-)

.........and don't forget; the day he gets his license, we all chip in
and
get him a membership in AOPA!!!


Does he need his license first?

Not really, but wouldn't the proper thing to do on such a momentous occasion
as getting his license be to present him with a membership in the very
organization that has occupied his every thought both awake and asleep for
such a long............looooooooooong time :-))
Dudley Henriques

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...
Matt Barrow wrote:
OOPS! WOT is harder on the engine.


OWT.

Actually, on many engines WOT is better than slightly reduced throttle
settings.

Quite...use the mixture to set power. WOTSOPLOP.
WOT on the carbs provide a bit of enrichment for cooling.

Actually, it creates turbulence in the induction that help the mixing for
better fuel distribution.

BTW, for those who are so adamant about not going LOP, our TNIO-550 just
passed the normal TBO of 1700 hours and a compression check ran
76/77/77/76/78/76. Zero evidence of lead fouling. My guess is we'll easily
get 2000 hours from this plant.

It's regularly run at 75-80%, 60-100LOP, and WOT.

I've been mulling the idea of trading up to a turbine twin as we either have
two aboard (in which case it's over kill to have a six passenger) or six or
seven (and I hate to cram in passengers, especially those who are 6-4 and
250 lbs...we have two of them).

So, what...a four place and a twin?


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO (MTJ)

"Ross Richardson" wrote in message
...
Ron Natalie wrote:
Matt Barrow wrote:

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.

Try the throttle slightly closed and adjust power with a leaner mixture. You
might find you fuel flow decreased and the engine smoother.