When to pull power back on takeoff.

[Rally]

Why is it that everyone I talk to get its a nitch to pull back power at 500 agl. Whats wrong with doing it at 1000 agl as long as there is'nt a time limitation (like a C-210, 2-3 minutes)? I don't see the big deal, for me it buys altitude reduces the risk of doing stuff that could induce engine problems allow you to concentrate on other stuff. Where am I wrong? To my knowledge there is no AC, Manual, Supplement that specifies that you need to pull the power back at a certain point.

 

[minitour]

If it doesn't specify to pull power back, why are you pulling the power back?


For example: I was taught in the Duchess that at 500', power goes to 25"/2500RPM...if you look in the manual, it says "climb power" is Full Throttle and 2600RPM.

Why do it if ya don't need to?

 

[340drvr]

If this is a poll, I use 1000 except for time-limited engines or maybe special-case noise abatement.

 

[nosehair]

Training. That's why. Training on control manipulation. In the normal routine of flying traffic patterns, you would be leveling off at pattern altitude with the first power back, so you would skip the initial climb power setting.

Like bringing the gear up and putting it back down. For normal operations, it would be better to leave the gear down, or climb at full power to 1000', but for power change training, we do it that way.

Of course, the problem is that nobody explains that to students, so they leave the school world thinking that this is normal, and they do stuff "because they were taught that way".

 

[avbug]

When and if you pull power really depends on what it is that you're doing. If you're just using breakawy thrust for the takeoff, just to get you off the ground, then you can pull it back whenever. Typically, below 400-500' isn't the time to be pulling anything.

Sometimes I use maximum continuous power up until I reduce it when leveling off. Other times I retard power just as soon as the wheels are off the ground. In other cases, I leave the power be and back the propeller off the stops, in a propeller driven airplanes...sometimes to keep it off the stops, sometimes for noise.

Sometimes in a turbojet with the performance, I pull power rather than pitching steeply, to keep speed in check. Others because I won't be climbing far. In other cases, I hold the maximum takeoff power setting for the maximum time before reducing to max continuous...or to a precalcualted power setting.

Reduce power when and if it's appropraite, according to your needs.

On a checkride once in a sabreliner, I reduced power during a single engine missed approach, as I was turning out on to the missed course. The examiner had a fit. He wanted to know why I'd reduce power on the good engine. Quite simple, really We had too much performance, and we didn't need the extra thrust.

Reducing power may be necessary as the ram rise increases performance toward a limitation during the takeoff. The propeller that was just below redline might creep to redline, and need to be retarded. The manifold pressure that was at it's limit might need to be pulled back as the aircraft gains airspeed. The EPR that was might be creeping up with ram effect, it may need to be pulled back. The concientious operator who knows that a 10% reduction in operating temperature extends component life by 10% and more may elect to make an early reduction to save hundreds of thousands of dollars.

You decide what you need when you need it, and don't worry about it after that.

 

[svcta]

Think about things in terms of the end: You want as much distance between you and mother earth as soon as you can get it, especially in a single-engine pistion thingy, so why would you reduce the power before, say, 1000'? I also agree and used to teach to just leave the power alone until you're ready to level off in the pattern. Now, in certain airplanes, like the Aero Commanders I used to fly with geared powerplants I might pull it off a little earlier for noise and easing off the 3450 RPM just to be kind, but those things had performance like crazy, I can't say I'd do the same in something like a Duchess because, well, they do not.

Think of it this way, jets got climb performance in spades and I don't know of anyone who touches the power levers below 1000' any more(barring a short climb or something), so why would you want to reduce your climb capability in a piston single(or some light twins)when you don't have that much to begin with?

 

[Metro752]

I am gonna guess the question was in the context of lighter planes, and the only reason I believe, especially with light twins, that they want you to pull the power back, they being the company instructors and business people, is to reduce wear on the engines.

I too have been chewed out, for pulling the power back on climb out, by a DE, since it wasn't in the POH, but just a silly flight school policy. It's true we do pay good money, usually, to rent these planes, why pull the power back if you really don't have to and are still pretty damn low.

 

[Huggyu2]

WRT piston aircraft, John Deakin has written a bunch of very good articles on this issue. He also goes into the "Old Wives Tales " (OWT) that permeate our flying culture when it comes to engine management. avweb.com has these articles in their archive (you have to register).
Here's link to one of them:
http://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/182045-1.html

He generally doesn't pull the throttle off at all in the climb, but instead he leans the engine (and reduces RPM if noise abatement is a factor).
I think some folks consider him a heretic, but he backs up all of his techniques with solid data.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

I've always reduced to 25/25 at 1,000'. Why mess with power adjustments so close to the ground especially when there's already a lot going on during a departure. From what I understand, most power failures occur during power changes especially ones from full power during a takeoff where you're asking the engine to do a lot from holding short to climbing an aircraft several thousand feet. Besides, it doesn't take much longer to go that additional 500'.

 

[svcta]

The myth about engine problems being related to changes in power settings in untrue. I thought I had read this somewhere, but then I read from Lycoming that it is not the case.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't some of the newer aircraft even tell you that full power is "okay" all the time. I seem to remember a new mooney that had that in the books. Not that I agree with the principle.

Regarding powerplant management and leaning: Lycoming says that it is not possible to over lean one of their engines at anything less than takeoff power. I've flown a bunch of big continentals, too, and we leaned them failrly hard(with only 3 failures in 20,000 hours). Got to keep these engines hot--until you're ready to shut them down. I could go on for hours, but make one power change at a time(after initial climb power change), and none within 60 seconds of each other(M.P., R.P.M, Mixture) especially in a descent. Maybe we should start a new thread for this.