Steve,
Here is a thread which dealt in part with this topic you say. It is relevant as it shows that if you have an engine failure at low speed, then you are most likely not going to fly anyway. It in turn links to several ones beforehand which continue the discussion/can of worms.
http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/For...ML/001111.html
But to give more specific replies to your questions:
1. Yes engine failures at low speed are fairly nasty (massive understatement
)
2. The speed that this happens will increase (note I am not specifying Vmca here) with a higher throttle setting as there is a greater slipstream over wing behind the live engine, causing lift, then subsequent roll and yaw which the rudder is trying to counteract.
3. Sort of...if you were very unfortunate to find yourself about to roll inverted as you run out of rudder, reduce the power on the live engine. Reducing power removes the differential which is trying to flip the aircraft on its back. This seems contradictary to maintaining height, but you have 2 options: Flip on your back and go into an inverted spin into the ground, or close the power on the live engine and look for a forced landing site. Your call!
For your info in OZ askop, we define Vmca as "the airspeed at which an aircraft is no longer directionally controllable with:
The live engine developing full power
Flaps in takeoff position
Gear extended
Dead engine windmilling
Max all up weight
Aft CoG
5 deg angle of bank toward live engine
*scratches head* I think thats it.
Any "improvement" (ie drag reduction, lighter etc) will
decrease the speed at which you may maintain directional control.
Whew....and that was at 0450! PS: I am not a physicist, but make no apologies for not understanding your formulae in the time travel thread
{edited to add the 5 degrees AoB which I omitted:eek
------------------
Those who restrain desire do so because theirs is weak enough to be restrained.
William Blake
[This message has been edited by compressor stall (edited 31 January 2001).]