I assume TRQ % means the amount of torque the propeller is being subjected to, it regularly peaks over 100% when climbing. But do I need to worry about it if it only peaks occasionally?
I think that’s torque on the output shaft of the engine. That number and the rotational speed determine
peak horsepower. With that, one could assume that would be overstressing the engine and (if modeled) would be damaging the engine.
That is correct. So if engine damage is modelled properly then it will be a bad thing to do for any length of time. With the TBM in X-Plane I’d back it off a little straight away, by reflex I do it here too. That said, with the performance of the TBM there is rarely a need to give it 100% on take off anyway.
In real life, torque is a limitation you would invest a lot of focus on during flight. There are individual limits for every model of aircraft, which you learn to meticulously obey during your type rating.
If MSFS is a simulator (personally I am not so sure yet), there should be serious consequences if you exceed the torque limits (for a sufficient amount of time to trigger the exceedance)…
Yes, torque limit is something a pilot should pay attention to, and it is not abnormal for full throttle to exceed torque limit on take-off/climb. You have to back off the throttle to keep torque within limit.
I have yet to see any consequences occur, and am wondering if this is modeled. If not, then that is one more thing that indicates this is a game more than a sim.
Think I might try to blow up an engine today and see if it happens.
I see. I always have my assistance level set to true-to-life but haven’t yet seen any consequences of maxing out the TRQ %, so maybe it isn’t modelled. Which is a shame.
I’m pretty sure there are no consequences in the game. I have flown across the US in the TBM with the throttle at 100% the whole way and nothing happened.
It simply means the particular aircraft is not fully modeled and that surely is not a surprise for a default aircraft. To completely dismiss the whole thing is a game is waaaayy overboard. And completely wrong going by most real pilots here.
1 Like
Why are we still making excuses for basic features missing from default aircraft? I can go play almost any racing game and damage my engine by staying in one gear for too long. Why is it too hard for an airplane to be programmed the same way (and it doesn’t even have gears to shift)?.
Stop making excuses for the default aircraft being awful.
OH and here’s a fun one I just remembered. Anyone else remember the P-51 from FSX? That was a default aircraft and took some care to not blow the engine. I guess Asobo aren’t as competent as their predecessors were.
1 Like
hahaha. That is the most amazing troll I’ve read for a while. Do you actually believe it? Anyway, doesn’t matter. Feel free to go back to the most amazing FSX! But make sure you go back to FSX 1.0 because after all, it was sooo perfect!
Since you seem to have a hard time accepting that other people have opinions different from yours, it’s easy to see who is the troll here. You posted your opinion in the 3rd post of this thread. Apparently you felt entitled to harass every following post differing from your point of view. That’s quite rude.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.