Descent techniques
Posted: Sun Feb 20, 2005 4:07 am
Related to the long-range discussion, but I've broken it out for future searches.
Descending from cruise altitude - for years, in smooth air I maintain cruise power and let the airspeed increase while coming down at 3-500 FPM. But recently I've seen some discussion on the Cessna Pilot Association board that claims this will burn more fuel overall; i.e. the decrease in flight time will not reduce the total fuel burn as effeciently as reducing power and making a constant airspeed descent. Now, with a jet airplane, this prodedure would be correct but I'm not so sure in a fixed gear single like the 170 you could measure the difference.
So I'm throwing this one out there as well. What do you guys think? Russ Farris
Descending from cruise altitude - for years, in smooth air I maintain cruise power and let the airspeed increase while coming down at 3-500 FPM. But recently I've seen some discussion on the Cessna Pilot Association board that claims this will burn more fuel overall; i.e. the decrease in flight time will not reduce the total fuel burn as effeciently as reducing power and making a constant airspeed descent. Now, with a jet airplane, this prodedure would be correct but I'm not so sure in a fixed gear single like the 170 you could measure the difference.
So I'm throwing this one out there as well. What do you guys think? Russ Farris