Originally Posted by
Chris Scott
Re the relationship between RPM and power/thrust when the throttle and pitch-lever are set at take-off power, I'd be interested if you and others would comment on my previous post. Assuming the flight crew became aware of an engine problem as soon as they were airborne, I think we can assume that the handling pilot would not have called for a power reduction on either engine until they had had a chance to confirm which one was failing.
Hi Chris!
The complex relationships between RPM/MAP/Propellor/engine controls etc and Power, could fill many volumes. I cannot contradict your recollections of a Twin Wasp installation. However, I am surprised that you refer to "pitch levers" and CSU, when the control for a CSU is often a RPM control. That said, a VP CSU controlled propellor might sit on it's Fine pitch stop when selected to high RPM at low power on the ground but, will subsequently coarsen as required to contain the selected RPM as power/airspeed allow the RPM to rise to the RPM lever set datum-as is the function of a CSU. Likewise, most CSU will simply reduce propellor blade pitch to accommodate reductions of throttle setting or airspeed (climbing) or engine abnormalities like misfires etc to maintain RPM, unless the engine controls are linked. I do not have type specific knowledge of the Convair, so my comments are limited to the generic behaviour of basic piston CSU.
Best wishes to all involved in this accident.
OAP