My closest experience to this.. was in a Comanche, at an airport in the KY foothills. We were heavily loaded.. the density altitude was in the 4,000 range (2100' field elevation), and it was an uphill , 4000' runway . I aborted, because it just felt wrong. Then, suffering from an admitted case of get-there-itis.. I decided to try it again, with a notch of flaps.. fully prepared to abort... All went well.

My closest experience to this.. was in a Comanche, at an airport in the KY foothills. We were heavily loaded.. the density altitude was in the 4,000 range (2100' field elevation), and it was an uphill , 4000' runway . I aborted, because it just felt wrong. Then, suffering from an admitted case of get-there-itis.. I decided to try it again, with a notch of flaps.. fully prepared to abort... All went well.

Like most accidents in aviation-it probably was a combo of lots of things. If one can believe the youtube comments-perhaps a known downdraft area at the end of the runway, an aircraft at gross or slightly over, a short runway, and perhaps high density altitude, and a pilot pulling back on the yoke in an effort to climb. In any case, awfully hard to watch.I had a similar takeoff to yours in Heavens Landing, Georgia (ge99) in my Baron. I got off ok, but it sure felt marginal, and the uphill did not help. Luckily at the end of the runway is a thousand foot drop. :( I posted some shots a few months ago in the screenshot forum compared to fsx and xplane. You might get a kick out of it.http://forums1.avsim.net/index.php?showtop...13&hl=geofa

Now that's interesting :( I've got some similar shots from a takeoff/landing at Hot Springs, VA (HSP).. It's the highest airport open to the public, east of the Mississippi (~4,000msl), with a scary, shear drop-off. I'll dig'em up and post them.I've never done a real-photo / screenshot comparison.. now I'm inspired to.Now (as if this thread isn't high-jacked to death), I'm intrigued about X-Plane. I'm so wrapped up in FSX (you might have flown some of my models.. C177RG, C310..), that I've never had time to experiment with X-Plane. MSFS's uncertain future, and those screen-shots have pushed me to buy it.

Now that's interesting :( I've got some similar shots from a takeoff/landing at Hot Springs, VA (HSP).. It's the highest airport open to the public, east of the Mississippi (~4,000msl), with a scary, shear drop-off. I'll dig'em up and post them.I've never done a real-photo / screenshot comparison.. now I'm inspired to.Now (as if this thread isn't high-jacked to death), I'm intrigued about X-Plane. I'm so wrapped up in FSX (you might have flown some of my models.. C177RG, C310..), that I've never had time to experiment with X-Plane. MSFS's uncertain future, and those screen-shots have pushed me to buy it.

Well if you do get it give it some time. It is really different, and a lot of the good things take time to appear.Look forward to your future screen shots.

Getting back to the original topic, somewhere is the deinitive answer in some manual or book. If so, what is that book? Furthermore it seems like some sort of diagramatic representation of all the variables involved and how they interact would be a good thing. An animated diagram would be great. Verbal descriptions are good but there nothing like seeing an animation for topics like this. Anyone know of any sources?

Oh yeah.. the original question..Turboprop engine/prop control configurations come in many forms.. For the FSX KingAir, the prop-control IS like a piston, constant-speed prop-control. The condition-lever, is a combination idle-speed and fuel cut-off.The reason for idle-speed control, is because a low-idle makes ground handling easier.. in flight, a high idle lessens the spool-up time when power is applied. Like.. if you're on final with the power all the way back, but then need to add power.