Typical power settings during cruise and other phases of flight

Is it normal to have throttles set to the maximum during cruise, in
small aircraft? I always set them all the way forward because that
seems to get the best speed, and the engine parameters still stay in
the green areas, but I don't know if this is actually a good idea.
Obviously it would be a bad idea in a car, but perhaps aircraft
engines are specifically designed (?) to operate mainly at full
throttle during cruise.

In other phases of flight I use other settings: always full throttle
for take-off (the manual said so), and low settings or idle to
descend. Also if I'm not in a rush I use lower throttle settings at
cruise, as long as I (or the autopilot) don't have to keep the nose
too high to maintain altitude.

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

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

It seems like sometimes that is the only way to keep that 150/152 in
the air and flying faster than 85kts. I would suggest you consult the
POH for your particular aircraft. Most manufacturers don't recommend
more than 75% power now that is not the same as 75% of your rpm which
would for your normal small trainer would be like 1850 rpm which is not
correct by any means. To answer another of your questions yes the
engines are designed for that higher rpm because they do often turn
2300-2400 rpm in curise for long periods. Another consideration
especially if you are borrowing/renting an airplanes is what the
owner's wishes are for operations. They may request a lower cruise
power setting such as 65% or 55% to help prolong engine life.
Truthfully in my experience though this really doesn't help the motor
all that much and proper leaning techniques are much more important.
Good luck to you.
Matt tiberii
Comm ASEL ASES AMEL
CFI CFII
Mxsmanic wrote:
Is it normal to have throttles set to the maximum during cruise, in
small aircraft? I always set them all the way forward because that
seems to get the best speed, and the engine parameters still stay in
the green areas, but I don't know if this is actually a good idea.
Obviously it would be a bad idea in a car, but perhaps aircraft
engines are specifically designed (?) to operate mainly at full
throttle during cruise.

In other phases of flight I use other settings: always full throttle
for take-off (the manual said so), and low settings or idle to
descend. Also if I'm not in a rush I use lower throttle settings at
cruise, as long as I (or the autopilot) don't have to keep the nose
too high to maintain altitude.

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

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

Huck,

As others have pointed out, our little inquisitive friend is not
referring to real flight.

He's dealing with MSFS issues under the guise of being a pilot.

Don't waste the 1s and 0s ...

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

Jay B wrote:
Huck,

As others have pointed out, our little inquisitive friend is not
referring to real flight.

He's dealing with MSFS issues under the guise of being a pilot.

Don't waste the 1s and 0s ...

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ


Why are you being such a snob? The question he posed is legitimate
whether it is for a simulator or a real airplane. And many simmers
eventually go on to become pilots so it is in our best interest to be
receptive.

In article . com,
Andrew Sarangan wrote:

Jay B wrote:
Huck,

As others have pointed out, our little inquisitive friend is not
referring to real flight.

He's dealing with MSFS issues under the guise of being a pilot.

Don't waste the 1s and 0s ...


Why are you being such a snob? The question he posed is legitimate
whether it is for a simulator or a real airplane. And many simmers
eventually go on to become pilots so it is in our best interest to be
receptive.


Check out some of the other threads started by Mxsmanic and you'll spot
a pattern. He asks what, at face value, appears to be a legitimate
question in the pursuit of knowledge. His questions are answered in a
helpful way. He then proceeds to pontificate, based on his hours
playing a video game, why they are all wrong and their ignorance will
eventually get them killed. He quotes out of context, completely missing
the point. His "discussion" style appears willful because nobody could
possibly be that dense.

It's futile and it does nothing but lower the signal to noise ratio in
the newsgroup. He's not here to learn. He's here to pretend that
playing MSFS is not only equivalent, but superior to flying a real plane.
Many of us have done both so we understand the strengths and weaknesses
of each. Mxsmanic hasn't and doesn't.

Spam Magnet wrote:

It's futile and it does nothing but lower the signal to noise ratio in
the newsgroup. He's not here to learn. He's here to pretend that
playing MSFS is not only equivalent, but superior to flying a real plane.
Many of us have done both so we understand the strengths and weaknesses
of each. Mxsmanic hasn't and doesn't.


All true but you have to understand that the reason he's a "superior pilot" is
that he flies the big iron that few of us have ever even sat in the cockpit
of... like the B-737. The fact that the C-172 I flew Thursday was real can't
possibly compare against his many hours managing the mighty Boeing with just a
keyboard.

You know, I fly MSFS too. But when I do it, I fly the same aircraft that I fly
in real life. I just use it to keep my instrument scan active because I don't
fly instruments enough any more to feel comfortable without some help from the
sim.

He flies the airliners so he can lord it over you. What he doesn't realize is
that flying the crappiest piece of **** on the field is still better than the
"flight experience" you get with a computer sim.

He's playing all of you guys like fish on a hook. Wise up.

I tried to tell folks last week and some people came to his defense. I suspect
now they wish they'd just followed my suggestion: Ignore the troll.

I don't think it's censorship to point out he's pretty much taken over two
newsgroups with his crossposted questions. Not that it matters that the
questions get answered. When they disagree with his preconceived ideas he just
ignores them. We should return the favor.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

Andrew,

Why are you being such a snob?


Read a few early threads started by the guy. He is first class troll,
not the least bit interested in learning. In fact, there's another
active thread where he is lecturing on instrument flight. Every reason
to be snobbish.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

i have a thought or two about people who come here with questions after
playing with computer flying toys:

welcome!!

even if they pretend they're flying real planes i don't care. should we
really think the future of g.a. is riding his bicycle up to the fence
at the airfield whispering "golly" and "gee whiz" to skippy the frog in
his pocket????

also, when one of these guys asks a really dumb question some of us are
waiting for the answer with him 'cause we didn't want to look stupid
asking the same thing.

dan


Jay B wrote:
Huck,

As others have pointed out, our little inquisitive friend is not
referring to real flight.

He's dealing with MSFS issues under the guise of being a pilot.

Don't waste the 1s and 0s ...

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

I agree. There was a long time between my sailplane and the airplane I have
now. The only way I could scratch my itch was with MSFS.

I used MSFS to plan and pre-fly my check ride (as much as I could). I have
used it to pre-fly flights to unfamiliar airports, setting the time, season
and various weather scenarios. I find it an excellent tool for a pilot, and
I could see where it would be a satisfactory hobby unto itself. When my son
starts college, the fate of the airplane is unclear. I might find myself
spending all my flight time with the downloaded model of my Sundowner.

I think MSFS is much harder to fly than the real thing. I also find myself
doing the same wrong things on MSFS that I do in real flight.

The only seat I'll ever occupy in a 7x7 has a number and letter, but that
hasn't stopped me from flying them on MSFS. I track the tips here on flying
the big iron nonetheless.

"houstondan" wrote in message
oups.com...
i have a thought or two about people who come here with questions after
playing with computer flying toys:

welcome!!

LWG writes:

When my son starts college, the fate of the airplane is unclear.
I might find myself spending all my flight time with the
downloaded model of my Sundowner.

Wouldn't that give you more time for real flight? Or have I
misunderstood?

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. Although it doesn't look like I'll be
anywhere near a real aircraft in the foreseeable future.

I also find myself doing the same wrong things on MSFS that
I do in real flight.

Are they things that would be dangerous in real life?

The only seat I'll ever occupy in a 7x7 has a number and letter, but that
hasn't stopped me from flying them on MSFS. I track the tips here on flying
the big iron nonetheless.

Large aircraft are interesting for procedures and instrument flight.
I've been trying all weekend to complete a flight with the FMS alone
but I haven't been able to escape flying by hand at some point, as I
seem to screw something up in the programming each time.

Of course private pilots aren't likely to ever use a flight management
system on their aircraft, so it's either the sim or nothing.

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