Jump to content

The Airplane Fanatic Thread


Hornsareus

Recommended Posts

Lost an engine going too slow, at too high of a weight and or with a center of gravity too far aft to control the aircraft directionally with the rudder on the remaining engine. It’s called a Vmc roll because Vmc is the minimum controllable airspeed in the angle engine scenario. 
On a situation that presents a Vmc roll in a twin....would it not be smart to stay in ground effect as long as possible and gain speed if you are on a long runway like addison?

Completely ignorant on twins, no clue. Just wondering if there is better protocol to not have an engine failure and roll.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, markstanco said:

On a situation that presents a Vmc roll in a twin....would it not be smart to stay in ground effect as long as possible and gain speed if you are on a long runway like addison?

Completely ignorant on twins, no clue. Just wondering if there is better protocol to not have an engine failure and roll.

Maybe, but now you’re invalidating all the climb gradient guarantees achieved by flying the plane at V2 on climb out as well as going against all Vmc cut training. 

Basically, you have performance guarantee of climbing above obstacles single engine in high performance twins as long as you fly V2, the engine out departure procedure, and have bothered to not overload the plane or fly it out of CG. I’d imagine a horse like a 350 can happily climb at 6-700 rpm at MTOW single engine. And Vr is right at V2. They shouldn’t have been slow enough to Vmc roll it if that’s what happened. 

Light twins are another story. Even something like a Chieftain with 350hp per side is basically taking you to the scene of the accident. In that case with nothing off the end of the runway staying in ground effect to gather speed might be a solution. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, now that I think about it, the plane is Vmc rolling because you’re out of rudder. You probably wouldn’t accelerate enough in ground effect to have enough air over the rudder before the thing rolled on you anyway. 

Sorry, it’s been a while since I’ve had to think like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that some of the cachet of the King Air's being certified as commuters was their autofeather system that is in place for engine losses at takeoffs and landings.  Did this feature malfunction or is this feature just not enough to overcome a plane that was just too slow, too heavy or out of balance at the time of engine loss?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It could have failed. Usually the feathering system is tied to engine oil pressure countering a spring. Loss of engine oil pressure leads to the spring feathering the propeller. It’s why every PT6 driven prop feathers on shutdown because there are no start locks to maintain pitch. It’s a pretty simple and robust system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, my heart goes out to the families of those aboard.

I only have a few hours in a kingair (it was a 200 not a 350) but I remember us having to "Arm" the auto-feather system.  Maybe it wasn't armed, or didn't get tested pref-light?

PS, be fore you ask how I only have a few king air hours, I'm not qualified to fly one, but was right seat with a guy who typically flies single pilot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, DalTxHornFan said:

I thought that some of the cachet of the King Air's being certified as commuters was their autofeather system that is in place for engine losses at takeoffs and landings.  Did this feature malfunction or is this feature just not enough to overcome a plane that was just too slow, too heavy or out of balance at the time of engine loss?  

Not a pilot, but from what I understand feathering/not feathering the dead engine wouldn't be as much of a problem as the single engine torque wanting to roll the aircraft and not enough speed/alt to counter with controls. Do we know what their TOW was?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RPM said:

Not a pilot, but from what I understand feathering/not feathering the dead engine wouldn't be as much of a problem as the single engine torque wanting to roll the aircraft and not enough speed/alt to counter with controls. Do we know what their TOW was?

Useful load of that model is around 5,100 lbs.  I'm sure that they will be looking at that issue given the 8 adults and 2 older teens on board and the flight destination. 

Also, as I understand it, the autofeather feature also has a rudder boost that kicks in to counter the single engine torque mentioned in your post.  But, the plane's gotta have some speed for the rudder to have much effect.  Tragic situation no matter what ended up going wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RPM said:

Not a pilot, but from what I understand feathering/not feathering the dead engine wouldn't be as much of a problem as the single engine torque wanting to roll the aircraft and not enough speed/alt to counter with controls. Do we know what their TOW was?

Feathering is still a big deal. An unfeathered propeller on a dead engine has the aerodynamic drag effect of a solid disk the diameter of the prop acting as an airbrake. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

Useful load of that model is around 5,100 lbs.  I'm sure that they will be looking at that issue given the 8 adults and 2 older teens on board and the flight destination. 

Also, as I understand it, the autofeather feature also has a rudder boost that kicks in to counter the single engine torque mentioned in your post.  But, the plane's gotta have some speed for the rudder to have much effect.  Tragic situation no matter what ended up going wrong.

Average plane weighs around 10k lbs. It probably needed 2200lbs of fuel as a guess. And probably had 1800lbs of  people and bags. Maybe more.  It may not have been at MTOW, but it was in the ballpark. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RPM said:

I get that Bobby. But wouldn't the torque be a bigger issue than the drag? Combined it's a cluster.

A little bit of both. Too slow, too heavy and or too aft loaded and there’s not enough rudder to counteract the asymmetric thrust and torque. But a 9 ft diameter speed brake providing asymmetric drag that adds to the asymmetric thrust and torque while inhibiting acceleration is obviously doing no one any favors. 

I have 600 hours of King Air time, and remember having an auto feather system, but can’t remember a thing about it. It could be as simple as not arming the system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Bobby_Batronic said:

A little bit of both. Too slow, too heavy and or too aft loaded and there’s not enough rudder to counteract the asymmetric thrust and torque. But a 9 ft diameter speed brake providing asymmetric drag that adds to the asymmetric thrust and torque while inhibiting acceleration is obviously doing no one any favors. 

I have 600 hours of King Air time, and remember having an auto feather system, but can’t remember a thing about it. It could be as simple as not arming the system. 

Thanks, Bobby.  I've only been a pax on some King Air charters, but one pilot in particular explained to me why they were doing a big engine run-up to test the system.  Said that it was a daily requirement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DaysOff said:

I flew the Beech 1900 for 3 years. My only comment is RIP and the plane was a piece of shit designed to fly 30 hours a month not 300 for the airlines.

Obviously more use means more maintenance but like most machines isn't it better to use them regularly than sparingly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DalTxHornFan said:

Thanks, Bobby.  I've only been a pax on some King Air charters, but one pilot in particular explained to me why they were doing a big engine run-up to test the system.  Said that it was a daily requirement.

I even remember doing the run ups daily, and we did a big electrical check weekly. But I can’t for the life of me remember the system other than basic constant speed prop theory. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DCA_HORN said:

Obviously more use means more maintenance but like most machines isn't it better to use them regularly than sparingly?

It’s was the same when I flew private jets. They were designed to fly 3-400 hours a year and we were running 1200+. They broke a lot. And yes, letting them sit and do nothing often just as bad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/22/2019 at 5:48 PM, Hagbard Celine said:

Dad's first jet training was in the T-37 at Vance.  Then moved up and first soloed in the T-38.  I was born on Vance.

Then moved to Sheppard when i was 6 months old and he taught NATO guys how to drive for the next 3 years before joining Delta.

Lucky you. Your dad got to teach NATO guys. My dad got stuck teaching Iranian pilots how to fly the F-4 in the 70s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/13/2019 at 6:34 AM, Texas St. Armadillos said:

After having difficulty getting on the schedule w my CFI, I laid out my goals and expectations a little more clearly to him.  Long story short, I'll be back in the air Sunday,  Monday,  Wednesday,  and Thursday.

How many hours do you have currently?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frequency of flights is the best thing you can do to learn faster and save money.  I was a broke college student when I was working on my ratings and sometimes was lucky to fly once a week.  Twice was a good week.  You spend so much time relearning what you did the time before when you don't fly often enough.  3-4 times a week seems like the perfect frequency to retain at a high rate and still avoid burnout.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. Anything more than 4 a week and it's harder to lay down learning. You'll get more out of using off days to fly the chair. How much learning is going on when that CFI is talking in the headset and you're trying to fly. I'll answer that. Almost none.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had only gotten in 5 lessons before the break.  About 6 hours.  Feels great to get back in.  Just the past 2 days we've  done power on and off stalls, turning stalls, steep turns, forward slips, pattern work and touch and gos.   So happy to have reestablished my expectations and seeing the new scheduling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/1/2019 at 5:12 PM, Bobby_Batronic said:

A little bit of both. Too slow, too heavy and or too aft loaded and there’s not enough rudder to counteract the asymmetric thrust and torque. But a 9 ft diameter speed brake providing asymmetric drag that adds to the asymmetric thrust and torque while inhibiting acceleration is obviously doing no one any favors. 

I have 600 hours of King Air time, and remember having an auto feather system, but can’t remember a thing about it. It could be as simple as not arming the system. 

I just flew right in a King Air 350 a couple weeks ago. Simply arm the auto feather in the run up checklist. You can also test the system on run up.

I think I have been in a 350 that did not have auto feather feature installed. 

This accident is scary. Every time I take off in the Baron there is that few second window where I think to myself: this would be a shitty time for an engine to go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but what if the autofeather system doesn’t work properly?  It never failed it’s check during my King Air time, but you never know when those Swiss cheese holes line up just right. 

Seems like it would activate with 4-600 lbs of tq difference between the motors and not allow the remaining engine to feather.

At least you know the 350 will climb if you pop a motor and everything else works. I have about 8-1000 hours in a PA31, and it would only take you to the scene of the crash in a single engine scenario with any kind of load. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

Any of you jockeys headed to OSH this year?

I have to miss it but, as always, there’s going to be cool stuff.

I’m particularly disappointed not to get to see the XP-82 fly after its recent resto.

How does the ATC handle all the traffic during that?  Do they treat it like Bravo?  I read where it is an honor to be invited as an ATC to work it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, markstanco said:

How does the ATC handle all the traffic during that?  Do they treat it like Bravo?  I read where it is an honor to be invited as an ATC to work it. 

Just google that shit.  There are all sorts of write ups and videos that do way better justice than I could.  It's an amazing dance to see though.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, markstanco said:

How does the ATC handle all the traffic during that?  Do they treat it like Bravo?  I read where it is an honor to be invited as an ATC to work it. 

https://www.eaa.org/airventure/eaa-airventure-news-and-multimedia/eaa-airventure-news/eaa-airventure-oshkosh/07-25-2018-behind-the-scenes-with-oshkosh-air-traffic-control

 

2019-NOTAM.ashx

https://www.eaa.org/airventure/eaa-fly-in-flying-to-oshkosh

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any of you jockeys headed to OSH this year?

I have to miss it but, as always, there’s going to be cool stuff.

I’m particularly disappointed not to get to see the XP-82 fly after its recent resto.


I thought about it, but not this year. I really should’ve though since I have plenty of PTO left for the year and basically nothing planned.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...