Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Please play nicely.  No one wants to listen/read a keyboard warriors rants....

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Aircraft turboprop engines  (Read 6537 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Kevin Wood

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Alton, Hampshire
  • Posts: 36286
    • Jaguar XE 25t, Westfield
    • View Profile
Re: Aircraft turboprop engines
« Reply #60 on: 06 August 2017, 16:21:57 »

When an aircraft has total engine failure on the final approach the automatic reaction is to pull up the nose....

Not for a pilot who's had more than a couple of lessons, and certainly not for anyone with a licence, I'd hope. :o
Logged
Tech2 services currently available. See TheBoy's price list: http://theboy.omegaowners.com/

Shackeng

  • Omega Lord
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Ramsbury
  • Posts: 7762
    • 3.2 Elite 2.0 TitX Mondeo
    • View Profile
Re: Aircraft turboprop engines
« Reply #61 on: 06 August 2017, 17:01:50 »

As I understand it the latest jet fighters cannot actually stay in the air without their computer systems operating.  They are impossible to fly without this electronic input that adjusts the aircraft's trim.
Hence my point about gliding ;) most fighters have a glide ratio of 1:1 following stores dumping... The F35 doesn't have an official glide ratio due to its non existent unpowered flight performance. To give you an idea of what a 1:1 descent and subsequent landing feels like, the Osprey has been designed to fragment in order to absorb the impact... basically the props splinter and the wings snap off at the roots whilst the undercarriage/seats/and fuselage all deform to absorb the worst of the impact... the safety cell is tested to deform to 85% of its original volume  :o with one engine its glide ratio improves to 4:1, so the passengers and crew might walk out of it :-\

By comparison, commercial aircraft seem to fare better, the obvious case being: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Transat_Flight_236 

Although it is not an unique situation: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airline_flights_that_required_gliding

Most of the fatal flights in the list are either ones that encounter engine failure either just after take off or during final approach. The notable absence from the list is: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_38

Wing/aircraft design, altitude and training are the three equal factors that determine how successfully a powered aircraft might land with no thrust.

When an aircraft has total engine failure on the final approach the automatic reaction is to pull up the nose, which increases the angle-of-attack and drag, which decreases speed until you stall. Commercial pilots practice dead stick landings as part of their annual flight simulation testing along with other failure stress testing. The pilots of the 747 at Heathrow that lost all engine power due to frozen fuel did very well where their training kicked in and they got it over the parameter fence. :y :y :y

Not when I was an instructor with BA! :y

By the way it was a triple 7, and what they did in reducing flaps from 30 to 25 was not any part of training. This link shows how badly the Captain was treated. http://www.pilotweb.aero/gear/heathrow-b777-crash-the-aftermath-1-4170197
« Last Edit: 06 August 2017, 17:07:09 by Shackeng »
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]  All   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.013 seconds with 18 queries.