Reduced Power takeoffs

Yes, normal takeoffs are with full power...

Followed by "reduce power to X inches and Y RPM as soon as practical." Not takeoff with X inches and Y RPM when practical. Your interpretation is incorrect. The red underlined passage is poorly written, but context makes it clear what was intended.
 
Exactly right, if they were actually approving reduced power takeoffs they would have to provide complete takeoff performance charts for each level of reduction they approved. Failure to do so would have the attorneys eating their lunch in court on the first reduced power takeoff accident regardless of reason.
 
What about: "Whenever possible, reduce take-off power to normal climb power."

I read that as the final word...
Normal climb power is listed in some POH.
It is frequently different than say, maximum climb for obstacle clearance.

I read that, again, as "nailing" down the first portion underlined in red.

Not my plane, not my engine. Aircraft probably no longer produced. And, since the engine has probably been overhauled, I woul follow the remanufacturer's recommendations.

Do what you wish.
 
In order to reduce something, it has to be higher first. Do you think they want you to reduce power in the middle of the takeoff roll?
 
Last edited:
Good luck with inventing your own procedures. They clearly mean after you are airborne reduce to climb power, that’s why they say climb power. I have never seen a takeoff performance chart based on climb power. Your procedure is going to reduce your detonation margins. That is the quickest way to destroy a engine. I have a bunch of time with high compression pistons in Lycomings. The most important caution was never use reduced power takeoffs. Maximum fuel flow was critical to detonation margins.
 
Last edited:
I'm not really disagreeing with what you're saying here... And I'm fully aware that many older POHs were not written well. That seems to be the case here.

It's ambiguous. Is there a comma where it doesn't belong... Or was the first draft different than what's here?

I'm curious as to which aircraft it is. Flintlock or.... Percussion cap?
 
I do derated takeoffs all the time. Higher MP inherently means higher internal pressure, so I have no problem at taking off at 25” (which is my climb power), especially when it’s just me and it’s cold outside....I’m pulling the power back to that setting in a minute anyway if I go WOT. My CHTs on takeoff have never been above 350F whether I am WOT or climb power, so I am not sure how using a climb setting is going to be bad for my engine for the 60 seconds between turning onto the runway and reaching 500’ AGL.
 
Full power takeoffs. Period. End of discussion for this CFI and 414 owner. Do I like 36 GPH per engine fuel flows at TO (full) power. No I don’t. But it’s only for a minute or so. CHTs, internal cylinder pressures and safety factors all dictate this procedure.
 
What about reducing power for local noise abatement compliance.?? Prop tips on some planes can make a whole lot of noise.

I have been to places that want pilots to receive IFR clearance before starting engines. I have been to a couple of public airports that ban engine runups, usually between certain hours like 8pm to 8am.

I have been to places that request power reduction to cruise climb by certain altitudes.

Gotta be nice to those people that bought their dream home right next to the airport that was built 50 years before the house was built.
 
I interpret reduced power to refer to throttle, not prop. Dialing the prop down doesn’t mean I shouldn’t push throttle all the way to the stop.
 
Degrees of what?
Really, Lindberg, you're too smart to not know "of what", so this is for anybody who isn't: peak EGT.

That said, it's been eons since I went to A&P school. Lots have changed. I learned there was an enrichment circuit in carburetors and not to reduce power on takeoff lest you melt valves and such. SOMEBODY here must be able to explain why/when that doesn't apply anymore. Do fuel injected engines do the same? I don't remember. I wouldn't do it unless I had it on good authority (the manufacturer is "good") it is safe. Then, if so, I'd use an "assumed temperature" power setting and the performance numbers for that temp/weight and altitude. Say, the density altitude (DA) is 3000', but you assume 5000' instead and set manifold pressure (if allowed) for that DA. (Assuming normally aspirated and no EGT gage.)
 
Last edited:
In my own history with my carbureted 520 the key to acceptable engine temps is fuel flow, particularly takeoff fuel flow. No question about it.
 
Really, Lindberg, you're too smart to not know "of what", so this is for anybody who isn't: peak EGT.
I have at least three instruments that give me temps. I did not know which this was referring to. Maybe I was the only one. I still mostly do the "lean until rough and then enrichen a bit," method.
 
TO piston engine always use max permissible power. Turbojet totally different set of circumstances, reduced power ok. Turbine engines retain their performance with greater predictability than piston engines over time and maintenance. Also the software to predict the aircraft's performance is much better. Many piston engine aircraft, especially smaller GA, do not have performance prediction software available.

This used to come up a lot in CAP normally after a retired airline pilot joined the squadron.

Hope everyone is having a great weekend!
 
I have taken off with a piston plane at less than ‘full power’. The circumstances were cold temp, near sea level, lightly loaded, solo. I got in the air much quicker than a takeoff at 4500 elevation, 85 degrees, loaded up a bit.

In general, I’d be hesitant to recommend less than full power takeoffs. One has to give some thought to what’s going on. It’s kinda like the discussion on running tanks dry, no biggie for some, the next says it’s a safety hazard.
 
In order to reduce something, it has to be higher first. Do you think they want you to reduce power in the middle of the takeoff roll?

That's honestly exactly how I read this. It specifically states "to test full throttle early in the takeoff run" before going on to advise to reducing power to that required for safety.

I wonder if this advisory is speaking more towards "cold weather operations" or low density altitude operations. After all, even the FAA publishes recommendations on taking off with less than full throttle when its cold. Full throttle in cold weather can cause the engine to perform at higher than rated outputs which does cause excess wear and increases the risk of failure during takeoff under those conditions.

If normal takeoff is at "full throttle" and "2600 RPM" what do you do when the prop is full and after setting full throttle find the engine is producing redline (or higher) RPMs and Temps due to variations in temperature/pressure/altitude? That to me would be where this statement is warranted.
 
Wrong. Reducing throttle in cold air assures a lean condition that you wouldn’t see in warmer temps. When it’s cold out? Full throttle is more important than ever. Turning the prop down a little? Look at a prop tip speed calculator and do your own math.
 
Wrong. Reducing throttle in cold air assures a lean condition that you wouldn’t see in warmer temps. When it’s cold out? Full throttle is more important than ever. Turning the prop down a little? Look at a prop tip speed calculator and do your own math.

You're not wrong that in cold weather you are seeing a lean condition that you wouldn't see in warmer temps but I do believe you are wrong about how you would go about fixing it. Consider that the mixture is already set to full rich on such days, you are physically incapable of increasing the amount of fuel you add to the engine. The only thing still within your control at that point is the amount of air entering the engine by adjusting the throttle. Reducing the throttle in this condition brings the engine back under control and closer to the ideal fuel-air mixture of 15 to 1.

Throttle controls the amount of air entering the engine not the amount of fuel. If you want to change the amount of fuel entering the engine you change the mixture not the throttle.

While we normally think about engine limitations from a fuel perspective, the normal limiting factor in engine combustion, especially the rate, is normally the presence of air, not fuel. When we adjust the mixture, particularly in fuel injected engines but this also applies to carbuerated engines, we are setting a quantity of fuel to be added to the air mixture; that quantity remains the same for every revolution of the engine regardless of throttle setting. When we adjust the throttle, we are adjusting the amount of air the engine is allowed to intake.

Going up in altitude we set the throttle to full because the air is less dense so we need to intake more of it and we then use the mixture to smooth out the engine as continuing to climb results in increasingly less dense air that the throttle can no longer compensate for thereby causing the engine to get too rich and close to flooding. Going down in altitude is fairly similar, its not quite an exact mirror as you have more options on how to obtain a given power output but its close enough.

On the ground, if we set the mixture too low, we end up with too little fuel for the amount of air and we starve the engine of fuel until it stalls
If we set the mixture very high on a low air density/high altitude density day, we end up with too much fuel for the amount of air and we starve the engine of air until it stalls. Since we normally look at combustion as a factor of fuel not air, we call this "flooding" the engine. Pretty much every "flooded engine" start procedure I've seen is the same...

Set mixture to idle cutoff, throttle to full. You are literally setting the throttle to allow full air flow into the engine while setting the mixture control to allow no fuel into the engine. Sometimes all you end up doing is burning off the fuel and having to start anew with a "non-flooded" engine but often times you'll successfully get the engine to turn over and run for a moment, until the fact that you aren't adding fuel to a full open throttle eventually starves the engine for fuel and it quits again.

So what does that mean on a cold weather day?

Well you have a static, unincreasable (full rich) amount of fuel that you are putting into the engine. The engine is producing more power than desired though because this full-rich mixture is actually fairly lean as a result of the high-density air. In order to correct for this high-density air and increased power output, you need to decrease the power output by decreasing the amount of air the engine intakes by decreasing the throttle setting, stabilizing the fuel-to-air mixture/ratio and limiting power output.

Now in most cases with a normally aspirated engine, you probably wont run into an issue... For each 5 degrees below standard, you get about 1% increase in engine output so it'd take about -40C day at sealevel to reach power outputs above 110%. So in most cases (and for most of us) you're probably ok to take off in your normally aspirated engine aircraft with full power so long as the engine is properly warmed (dont demand 110% of your engine until your engine is fully ready to give it to you) and you dont remain at that power setting for long after takeoff.

For supercharged and turbine engines however, the FAA advises that you use caution not to overboost and that you refer to your aircraft/engine POH to determine the appropriate power settings to use for the given pressure altitude and ambient temperature.


Lastly, I'd like to note that I did not advise using the governor/manifold to adjust prop speed but rather power; sorry if that was unclear. In fact, in a lot of ways using manifold to adjust prop speed would be much much worse since it is possible you'd be overpowering your engine without even knowing it since your manifold pressure and RPM's would not be above redline even though your engine is producing significantly more power. At full forward prop though, the prop RPM is controlled through the throttle just like it would be in a fixed pitch airplane. If you are at or above redline or desired/target RPM at full power with full forward prop (which would be standard for takeoff), you would reduce power to reach targets or prevent over-revving and damaging the engine. Should you take off in such a condition is a different matter.
 
Last edited:
A carb’s job is to meter fuel to the air flowing through it. Reduce the air and fuel is proportionately reduced. Except we know in airplanes the full throttle setting provides added fuel to protect against detonation and to provide cooling. I’m not giving that up.

In the frozen north it’s imperative to set our carbs up to deliver adequate fuel for cold temp flying. If I can’t demonstrate 100* of leaning authority in the coldest temps I choose to fly in my carb isn’t providing enough fuel. Once adjusted for cold ops we have to use the mixture knob more aggressively in warmer weather. The colder it is the more fuel it takes to keep the engine happy. It isn’t just about takeoff. If I tried to compensate for cold by limiting throttle and accepting the reduced fuel it provided? I’d be doing more harm than good. My temps would soar up immediately. I fought it for years until I got my carb jetted properly. Maybe you’re old school and remember when a cold weather kit included a restrictor for the air intake? The point of that was to reduce airflow to allow the carb to provide a richer mixture. That applied to all throttle settings. But less air picks up less fuel. Modern times have us increase the fuel flow. Nobody I know restricts the airbox. Nobody I know uses reduced throttle, either. Many don’t twist the prop back, either, because while it does make a lot of noise, winter performance is awesome. More power, more thrust, more lift. Every pilot’s dream.

In the 1900s we used to carry jet kits in our snowmachines. We had to adjust jets for altitude and temperature and while we got good at it nobody liked doing carb work on the trail in the cold. Wake up to find the temps dropped overnight? Re-jet or risk a lean burn down. I don’t miss those days.
 
Last edited:
Big bore continentals IO550/520, have a feature that makes it run extra rich at takeoff power for increases detonation margin and more optimal peak cylinder pressure after TDC. If you pull the throttle back off the stop, the enrichment feature is disabled. I’m not aware of wether Lyc has a similar setup.
 
From the Precision carburetor manual-

d. POWER ENRICHMENT, (ECONOMIZER), SYSTEM, (Ref. appropriate figure for a particular model).-Aircraft engines are designed to produce a maximum amount of power consistent with their weight. But since they are not designed to dissipate all of the heat the fuel is capable of releasing, provisions must be made to remove some of this heat. This is done by enriching the fuel - air mixture at full throttle. The additional fuel absorbs this heat as it changes into a vapor. Power enrichment systems are often called economizer systems because they allow the engine to operate with a relatively lean and economical mixture for all conditions other than full power.
e. MECHANICAL AIRBLEED ENRICHMENT SYSTEM, (Large MA-4-5, HA-6 Carburetors, Ref. appropriate figure for a particular model).–When we increase the air velocity through the main venturi, we get an increased pressure drop that enriches the mixture, and to prevent this enrichment, an air bleed of a very precise size is used between the float bowl and the discharge nozzle. If we increase the size of this air bleed, we lean the mixture, and if we decrease it, more fuel is pulled from the discharge nozzle and the mixture becomes richer. The air for the air bleed comes from the float chamber and passes through the air bleed metering valve. The needle for this valve is held off of its seat by a spring and is closed by an operating lever attached to the throttle shaft. When the throttle is wide open, the lever closes the air bleed valve and enriches the fuel – air mixture.
 
You're not wrong that in cold weather you are seeing a lean condition that you wouldn't see in warmer temps but I do believe you are wrong about how you would go about fixing it. Consider that the mixture is already set to full rich on such days, you are physically incapable of increasing the amount of fuel you add to the engine. The only thing still within your control at that point is the amount of air entering the engine by adjusting the throttle. Reducing the throttle in this condition brings the engine back under control and closer to the ideal fuel-air mixture of 15 to 1.

Throttle controls the amount of air entering the engine not the amount of fuel. If you want to change the amount of fuel entering the engine you change the mixture not the throttle.

While we normally think about engine limitations from a fuel perspective, the normal limiting factor in engine combustion, especially the rate, is normally the presence of air, not fuel. When we adjust the mixture, particularly in fuel injected engines but this also applies to carbuerated engines, we are setting a quantity of fuel to be added to the air mixture; that quantity remains the same for every revolution of the engine regardless of throttle setting. When we adjust the throttle, we are adjusting the amount of air the engine is allowed to intake.

Going up in altitude we set the throttle to full because the air is less dense so we need to intake more of it and we then use the mixture to smooth out the engine as continuing to climb results in increasingly less dense air that the throttle can no longer compensate for thereby causing the engine to get too rich and close to flooding. Going down in altitude is fairly similar, its not quite an exact mirror as you have more options on how to obtain a given power output but its close enough.

On the ground, if we set the mixture too low, we end up with too little fuel for the amount of air and we starve the engine of fuel until it stalls
If we set the mixture very high on a low air density/high altitude density day, we end up with too much fuel for the amount of air and we starve the engine of air until it stalls. Since we normally look at combustion as a factor of fuel not air, we call this "flooding" the engine. Pretty much every "flooded engine" start procedure I've seen is the same...

Set mixture to idle cutoff, throttle to full. You are literally setting the throttle to allow full air flow into the engine while setting the mixture control to allow no fuel into the engine. Sometimes all you end up doing is burning off the fuel and having to start anew with a "non-flooded" engine but often times you'll successfully get the engine to turn over and run for a moment, until the fact that you aren't adding fuel to a full open throttle eventually starves the engine for fuel and it quits again.

So what does that mean on a cold weather day?

Well you have a static, unincreasable (full rich) amount of fuel that you are putting into the engine. The engine is producing more power than desired though because this full-rich mixture is actually fairly lean as a result of the high-density air. In order to correct for this high-density air and increased power output, you need to decrease the power output by decreasing the amount of air the engine intakes by decreasing the throttle setting, stabilizing the fuel-to-air mixture/ratio and limiting power output.

Now in most cases with a normally aspirated engine, you probably wont run into an issue... For each 5 degrees below standard, you get about 1% increase in engine output so it'd take about -40C day at sealevel to reach power outputs above 110%. So in most cases (and for most of us) you're probably ok to take off in your normally aspirated engine aircraft with full power so long as the engine is properly warmed (dont demand 110% of your engine until your engine is fully ready to give it to you) and you dont remain at that power setting for long after takeoff.

For supercharged and turbine engines however, the FAA advises that you use caution not to overboost and that you refer to your aircraft/engine POH to determine the appropriate power settings to use for the given pressure altitude and ambient temperature.


Lastly, I'd like to note that I did not advise using the governor/manifold to adjust prop speed but rather power; sorry if that was unclear. In fact, in a lot of ways using manifold to adjust prop speed would be much much worse since it is possible you'd be overpowering your engine without even knowing it since your manifold pressure and RPM's would not be above redline even though your engine is producing significantly more power. At full forward prop though, the prop RPM is controlled through the throttle just like it would be in a fixed pitch airplane. If you are at or above redline or desired/target RPM at full power with full forward prop (which would be standard for takeoff), you would reduce power to reach targets or prevent over-revving and damaging the engine. Should you take off in such a condition is a different matter.
A very logical but flawed reasoning. The correct info is already posted please re-evaluate your knowledge. Your engine will be appreciative.
 
Back
Top