Connie engine-out performance

[chuckk1]

I recently watched a film made in the 1950's that was hosted by Arthur Godfrey about a flight aboard a Lockheed Constellation which he himself piloted. During the film, a demonstration was shown of the Connie's engine-out performance. Having been a private pilot with 600+ hours and an instrument ticket, I know a little bit about multi-engine aircraft and engine-out procedures/performance. I watched in total disbelief as TWO engines on the SAME wing were stopped and feathered! The aircraft continued to maintain flight (though I do question the actual rate-of-climb or ability to maintain constant altitude in this config). Then to my utter astonishment, a third engine was shutdown and feathered - an inboard engine, leaving only one remaining OUTBOARD engine running!! Was this film a hoax? How could any 4 engine airplane maintain flight with that much asymetric thrust on the airframe? I know the Connie's triple vertical stabilizers were loved by all who flew her for the lateral stability they provided...

[BOAC]

Was this film a hoax? How could any 4 engine airplane maintain flight with that much asymetric thrust on the airframe? - Weight? Height? Temperature? Actual rate of descent? Bank angle?

I do not think it would actually crash - for a few minutes anyway:)

[barit1]

A colleague of mine once told me of a TWA captain on a west coast to MDW leg lost one over Nebraska. He elected to continue.

Then over the Mississippi river he lost a second 3350. Rather than divert to Rockford he pressed on to MDW. He didn't have any trouble getting expedited ATC. But wx was favorable so no worries mate.

[Shackman]

Flying with two engines out on one side (of any four engined ac) is no big deal so long as your flying controls - specifically the rudder - have sufficient authority. In actual fact if you think of the thrust of two piston engines on one side versus that of today's twin jet pax ac (as made by Boeing and Airbus) I suspect the jets are considerably more powerful. However it is more the power of your foot that is needed to control the assymetric forces.

On the Shackleton - four piston engines, twin rudders - we had to establish our own safe two engine out limit; both engines on one side at full power, the other two feathered and then climb and reduce speed until Vmca (min control speed) was reached, which was when your leg muscles gave out. But at least you had a good idea of what to expect. I suspect the Connie (and a lot of other civvie ac) also had powered controls, which made things an awful lot simpler and less demanding, but am quite happy to be proved wrong.

As for three out, all you have really done is halve the thrust on the 'powered' side of the ac, and hence reduced the assymetric problem. However what you also have lost is the potential to stay airborne for a long time - as BOAC said, think weight, temperature, altitude and perhaps rate of descent.