[index] [month] [prev] [next] [thead-prev] [thread-next]

Takeoffs from high altitude airports in the summer is the main reason I have
a turbo. I don't like flying with O2 and avoid >12000. 10.5 and 11.5 work
great VFR and 11 and 12 are great IFR without O2. I could go faster at
FL250, but, nahh.

"Jon Carlson" <no@spam.com> wrote in message
news:MK288.29966$ym3.99023@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
> You have a T182T. What are you doing at 9-10000? Get some O2, get up
> there to about 16-17000, and you'll get more speed and burn less gas.
> Why else did you bother with the turbo?
>
> -Jon C.
>
>
> "gwengler" <gwengler@parkprop.com> wrote in message
> news:ee08e715.0202050848.5fd85503@posting.google.com...
> > Here is an interesting problem. I am trying to find out if it
> really
> > make sense to fly at lower power settings with my Turbo Skylane
> T182T.
> > The trip is about 900 nm with three stops in between. This will
> take
> > roughly between 6 and 7 hours to make it a bit more simple, all legs
> > are flown at 9000 or 10000 ft, no wind. I could fly at 60% power
> (95
> > gal, 7.1 hours) or 85% (111 gal, 6.2 hours) and anything in between.
> > At 60%, I save 1 hour's money for fuel but have to spend an extra
> hour
> > operating costs which according to a rule of thumb equals about 1
> hour
> > of fuel. Therefore, I am almost even cost wise. So, what to do?
> >
> > Gerd
>
>

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: Re: Mi to Ca, McGregor
Next message: Re: GPS approach question, Email address hidden
Next message in thread: Re: Fuel Savings?, JerryK
Previous message in thread: Re: Fuel Savings?, Jon Carlson