Syncing props on the takeoff roll. Yes or no?

dasleben

That's just, like, your opinion, man
And gooooooo! Hoping this will go to 15 pages. :bandit:

(Tried to get this one going in another thread, but everyone just kept posting pictures).
 
Not in the metro. I have too much going on to really mess with them. Plus, we don't flip the prop sync on til 400ft anyways.
 
I'm too damn busy trying to sync the torque. By the time I get that done, I'm on final approach at the destination.
 
In the 414 I never even played with anything till through 1000 ft because I was pretty sure I was going to die in that plane anyway. Just kidding but It was just to much to play with until on the way. But in my baron I can sync the props with the throttle on takeoff because they are so darn closely set up. Now that being said I have about 900hrs in my baron and it is like putting on a suit that was made for me. So I am a bit biased. So I guess that doesn't really answer the question because I have one for and one against.
 
I'm gonna make a thread titled, "Using full power on takeoff in a Cessna 172?" and try to argue for a flex takeoff setting, seeing if I can get anybody to bite.

And if somebody doesn't get it, I'm not serious, and you should ever, NEVER try to takeoff with anything less than full power in a Cessna 172!!!
 
I'm too damn busy trying to sync the torque. By the time I get that done, I'm on final approach at the destination.

I considered syncing the torque to be a lost cost and just accept the fuel inbalance. I don't have passengers to make sick while balancing the fuel in the decent anyways.
 
I once heard of this guy that only used 3/4 power in a Cirrus to take off from a 11,500' runway because full power would have led to a lift off before the touchdown point of a preceding 777 arrival.
 
Type I Prop Sync off in the King Air for t/o. Type II on...My BB # is something like 12 away from type II. Doh.
 
I once heard of this guy that only used 3/4 power in a Cirrus to take off from a 11,500' runway because full power would have led to a lift off before the touchdown point of a preceding 777 arrival.

He should have just pulled the shoot and let it work itself out.:dunno:
 
I considered syncing the torque to be a lost cost and just accept the fuel inbalance. I don't have passengers to make sick while balancing the fuel in the decent anyways.

LOL I just push them all the way up. Thats what the bypass is for. Kinda like a fadec over whatever that is. then once I get to 6k i will trim out the bypass lights. and balancing the fuel??? UH?? thats what you just put 30gals in the right and 115 in the left for. all this talk takes away from nap time. you know now that i think about it my right fuel qty gauge dont work and I was only flying around on the right engine this week. i might want to look into this.
 
LOL I just push them all the way up. Thats what the bypass is for. Kinda like a fadec over whatever that is. then once I get to 6k i will trim out the bypass lights. and balancing the fuel??? UH?? thats what you just put 30gals in the right and 115 in the left for. all this talk takes away from nap time. you know now that i think about it my right fuel qty gauge dont work and I was only flying around on the right engine this week. i might want to look into this.

Well you taking off with the blue light special (power levers all the way forward and the fuel bypass lights illuminated) might explain why the props were out of sync.:D
 
I used to sync in the Aero Commander... Some of the airplanes I flew had prop levers that were not "synced" already, so when you add full power and get 2550 rpms, it not only gets noisy, it can get painful if not with in +/-15 rpms.

But I guess I'm past that reading from what KLB says :)
 
Real men don't hear that 'wohhh-wohhh-wohhh-wohhh' sound anyway. Only nancies get upset at any glorious by-product sounds of harnessed controlled explosions!
 
Back
Top