Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By MichaelP
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912196
Simple answer is to refer to the Cessna 152 POH.
This gives the range curves for the aeroplane with standard tanks, (the lower the better), and the long range tanks where the range graph curves forward (longer range) at an altitude well above ground before it slopes back again.

Fuel consumed in the climb is less of a percentage with filled long range tanks.
Problem is carrying a passenger...

Almost nobody achieves the range stated in the performance charts as they don’t lean below 3,000 or 5,000 feet.
To achieve anything like the range performance in the charts you need to lean, even in the climb!

In a DA40 with the G1000 ‘lean assist’ you see a saving of around 2 USG an hour leaned below 2,000 feet.

Then, how many of us take the wind into account?

I set my students performance calculations based on zero wind, then with a thirty knot headwind A to B, and a thirty knot tailwind B to A.
You’ll find that the best range is at a higher power setting - TAS into the wind.

You never gain with a tailwind what you lost in a headwind, and a crosswind is always a loss unless it has a significant tailwind component.
Dodo, terryws, T6Harvard liked this