DC3 nonsense article in Flight International
Thread Starter
DC3 nonsense article in Flight International
Flight International 20-26 July page 65 and heading Oshkosh Review.
The FI aviation correspondent gets to fly a C-47 (military DC3) on a couple of circuits. Extract from his report: Quote:
"Once level at 2500 ft amsl and 104 knots I was able to perform some gentle 20 degrees angle of bank turns. Using ailerons to try and turn the aircraft was a lesson in futility. Increasing the aileron deflection only served to generate adverse yaw.
While I had been prepared to co-ordinate the turn with rudder, I quickly learned that to turn the C-47 one only needed rudder, with the ailerons providing style inputs at the best. The lesson learned was I found the C-47 to be a solid predictable aircraft that required the use of ailerons to co-ordinate turns" Unquote.
Surely the journalist jests? "One only needs rudder to turn a DC3" - and "use the ailerons to co-ordinate turns?"
Pprune readers who have flown DC3's must be horrified to read such rubbish.
I was.
The FI aviation correspondent gets to fly a C-47 (military DC3) on a couple of circuits. Extract from his report: Quote:
"Once level at 2500 ft amsl and 104 knots I was able to perform some gentle 20 degrees angle of bank turns. Using ailerons to try and turn the aircraft was a lesson in futility. Increasing the aileron deflection only served to generate adverse yaw.
While I had been prepared to co-ordinate the turn with rudder, I quickly learned that to turn the C-47 one only needed rudder, with the ailerons providing style inputs at the best. The lesson learned was I found the C-47 to be a solid predictable aircraft that required the use of ailerons to co-ordinate turns" Unquote.
Surely the journalist jests? "One only needs rudder to turn a DC3" - and "use the ailerons to co-ordinate turns?"
Pprune readers who have flown DC3's must be horrified to read such rubbish.
I was.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I quickly learned that to turn the C-47 one only needed rudder,
Using only rudder in the DC-3 can get you into difficulties (rudder lock) that can prove quite unsuccessful, and possibly fatal.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denmark
Age: 79
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turning a DC-3
Flew this type for several years, although many years ago.
But I am 100% sure, that in order to turn you used ailerons with proper rudder input to counteract adverse yaw. Straight forward!
But I am 100% sure, that in order to turn you used ailerons with proper rudder input to counteract adverse yaw. Straight forward!
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Socal
Age: 37
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely the journalist jests? "One only needs rudder to turn a DC3" - and "use the ailerons to co-ordinate turns?"
Aviator Extraordinaire
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 76
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As 411A said, getting into a 'rudder lock' situation can ruin your day. I think there was some kind of modification that eliminated that possibility, but then it has been a really long time since I flew a DC-3.
However, I can say I never tried to make a turn in a DC-3 with just the rudder, never saw any reason to actually.
Now you could steer the DC-3 on the runway with just the alerions, now that was fun. Well, as long as you did not have a strong crosswind.
However, I can say I never tried to make a turn in a DC-3 with just the rudder, never saw any reason to actually.
Now you could steer the DC-3 on the runway with just the alerions, now that was fun. Well, as long as you did not have a strong crosswind.
"The INTRODUCER"
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DC-3
You fellers are tough that's for sure. This poor joker on his first go in these old clunkers was sure to get a few strange "feelings". I guess a lot of a/c will mostly yaw using only ailerons, so I don't know what he was up to there. And a lot will kick up a wing and turn using only rudder, but again, why even try it when all turns should use both.
I think the problem is in semantics, but again his fault.
In MY mind, I used to tend to think I was "leading" with rudder input esp in a glider which needs a wack of rudder, and other a/c that have heavy rudders yet light efective ailerons.
This joker might wonder what he was on about if he got used to the DC-3, but hey, two good landings 1st up? that's got to be worth something.
I think the problem is in semantics, but again his fault.
In MY mind, I used to tend to think I was "leading" with rudder input esp in a glider which needs a wack of rudder, and other a/c that have heavy rudders yet light efective ailerons.
This joker might wonder what he was on about if he got used to the DC-3, but hey, two good landings 1st up? that's got to be worth something.
It's dead easy to do a smooth wheeler with no load. C of G is far enough forward to inhibit the worst of its tendency to leap back into the air or ground loop. But fill it to the gunnels with an aft C of G and it's an entirely different beast. Then have a go at 3 pointing it, (which was the way some of us landed it at certain limiting mud or grass strips), and it gets quite interesting if you don't get speed just right and all the drift off.
The author of that article is clearly very experienced and I suspect he did not think too carefully about the way he has written that it mainly turns on rudder with aileron being a mere nicety. Or maybe it just felt that way to him. Ater a long time away from the DC3 I well remember jumping into one and noticing how 'rubbery' and unresponsive the ailerons initially felt. Until I remembered that they need quite large inputs to have any effect.
In the standard DC3 and C47, the rudder lockout thing was never an issue unless asymmetric with it hard against the stops, and even then it was not life-threatening. The so-called 'Super' DC3 may have been different. But it was UGLY, too....
The author of that article is clearly very experienced and I suspect he did not think too carefully about the way he has written that it mainly turns on rudder with aileron being a mere nicety. Or maybe it just felt that way to him. Ater a long time away from the DC3 I well remember jumping into one and noticing how 'rubbery' and unresponsive the ailerons initially felt. Until I remembered that they need quite large inputs to have any effect.
In the standard DC3 and C47, the rudder lockout thing was never an issue unless asymmetric with it hard against the stops, and even then it was not life-threatening. The so-called 'Super' DC3 may have been different. But it was UGLY, too....
Psychophysiological entity
Tell me about this rudder-lock issue, can't say I've ever heard of it. May be just fading memory.
The worst swing I ever had from ailerons was on the HP7. Depending on the idividual aircraft, it could yaw in the opposite direction to the aileron input. It was a little like that on the Dak, but not as bad. The flying was really quite basic, even if in slow motion.
However, this thread makes me a bit concerned about the number of times I've had the rudder on full lock, while side-slipping into tight little strips. It behaved very well under those conditions, and came out of the slip with a graceful yet controlled swing.
While on full rudder, the airspeed could be puller right back to a figure that would give astonishingly low ground-speed while in brisk surface winds. It would give the impression of being in an elevator.
Ailerons were indeed very hard work, or seemed so, having come back onto the DC3 from a frisky early phase 1-11.
First time round I was P2 to guys that had flown it 'Over the hump' and in other rather demanding conditions. I recall being somewhat surprised that it could be made to do the things they did with it. Not too many rules about then...well, not ones they cared to abide by.
The worst swing I ever had from ailerons was on the HP7. Depending on the idividual aircraft, it could yaw in the opposite direction to the aileron input. It was a little like that on the Dak, but not as bad. The flying was really quite basic, even if in slow motion.
However, this thread makes me a bit concerned about the number of times I've had the rudder on full lock, while side-slipping into tight little strips. It behaved very well under those conditions, and came out of the slip with a graceful yet controlled swing.
While on full rudder, the airspeed could be puller right back to a figure that would give astonishingly low ground-speed while in brisk surface winds. It would give the impression of being in an elevator.
Ailerons were indeed very hard work, or seemed so, having come back onto the DC3 from a frisky early phase 1-11.
First time round I was P2 to guys that had flown it 'Over the hump' and in other rather demanding conditions. I recall being somewhat surprised that it could be made to do the things they did with it. Not too many rules about then...well, not ones they cared to abide by.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The journalist's words, as would be expected of most journalists, are pure and utter cr@p!
The DC3 was in every respect a 'normal' aircraft to fly, certainly different control feel to other aircraft, but that's normal for comparison between varying types.
Maybe the journo was flying it by auto-pilot, now that's a different matter. Turning a DC3 with it's crude Auto-Pilot was achieved by yawing the aircraft by way of manipulating the Heading control, and it felt terrible. For anything more than a few degrees of turn, it was far better to disconnect the Auto-Pilot, make the turn manually (WITH AILERONS) co-ordinated with appropriate rudder input, and then re-engage the Auto-Pilot.
Typical journo crud!!!!
Regards,
Old Smokey
The DC3 was in every respect a 'normal' aircraft to fly, certainly different control feel to other aircraft, but that's normal for comparison between varying types.
Maybe the journo was flying it by auto-pilot, now that's a different matter. Turning a DC3 with it's crude Auto-Pilot was achieved by yawing the aircraft by way of manipulating the Heading control, and it felt terrible. For anything more than a few degrees of turn, it was far better to disconnect the Auto-Pilot, make the turn manually (WITH AILERONS) co-ordinated with appropriate rudder input, and then re-engage the Auto-Pilot.
Typical journo crud!!!!
Regards,
Old Smokey
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The rudder lock issue on the DC-3 happens under very unusual circumstances, usually very aggressive forward slips wherein the rudder is hard over, then cannot be moved central again without using differental engine power.
The primary reason is the very deep rudder hinge line.
This is necessary to use aerodynamic assistance for the rudder to counter high pedal forces that would otherwise be necessary.
A demonstration of this was (at one time) required for the type rating, normally done at a reasonable altitude...at least 5000 feet.
The primary reason is the very deep rudder hinge line.
This is necessary to use aerodynamic assistance for the rudder to counter high pedal forces that would otherwise be necessary.
A demonstration of this was (at one time) required for the type rating, normally done at a reasonable altitude...at least 5000 feet.
I remember times slipping a Three when all of a sudden you didn't have to push on the rudder anymore, it would stay down but as soon as you took all the aileron out the plane straightened out.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney NSW
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ah yes, I remember Mike....
I had no more said to KO Sally aka my wife... " I wonder if that's Mike". She didn't take the bet. By the way OS he isn't a journalist no more than he is a test pilot but he'll always get his dollar a day from somewhere and can sure swing the lamp and spin a good yarn. That's what he's paid to do and he's just done it, trousered the dollars and swaggered away laughing at us all. The REAL Percy Prune after whom this inspired site draws its name could go one better. Example: "I came in so low over the North Sea that I had to stand up to see over the waves". Now that's shooting a line.....
Mike? He's just a c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-clot. [apologies to "I'm All Right Jack".]
Mike? He's just a c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-clot. [apologies to "I'm All Right Jack".]
Bring back the Dak!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rudder locked hard over and increasing airspeed will quickly lead to the situation where no amount of pedal-pressure can centralise it again, and if carried to the extreme, will probably end up with the rudder detaching, as the airflow impinges on the aerodynamic horn forward of the hinge-line. Those hinges are relatively flimsy.
Answer is, don't lose control of the airspeed with the rudder hard over! Reduce the speed, and pedal-power alone will enable you to centralise the rudder. My training (UK) in the early seventies did not include this demonstration due to the above, and it remained a discussion item, and as we did not operate into limiting strips, side-slipping was forbidden.
As for turning it on rudder alone, poppycock! Put the man back in a Tiger Moth and invite him to fly, keeping the ball centred at all times, and THEN have another go in the DC-3. It will all become crystal clear! It's called properly coordinated flying.
Answer is, don't lose control of the airspeed with the rudder hard over! Reduce the speed, and pedal-power alone will enable you to centralise the rudder. My training (UK) in the early seventies did not include this demonstration due to the above, and it remained a discussion item, and as we did not operate into limiting strips, side-slipping was forbidden.
As for turning it on rudder alone, poppycock! Put the man back in a Tiger Moth and invite him to fly, keeping the ball centred at all times, and THEN have another go in the DC-3. It will all become crystal clear! It's called properly coordinated flying.
Decent, high quality gouge.
Pages 16, 56 and 57 seem to about cover it (although a roll rate given in radians per second is less than brilliantly helpful); it seems to match my recollection of being observer for a DC3 flight test assessment in the 1990s at ETPS - conventionally heavy controls, but well co-ordinated.
G
Pages 16, 56 and 57 seem to about cover it (although a roll rate given in radians per second is less than brilliantly helpful); it seems to match my recollection of being observer for a DC3 flight test assessment in the 1990s at ETPS - conventionally heavy controls, but well co-ordinated.
G
Psychophysiological entity
Thanks 411A . . . and Marker, that brings back some memory of the general feel.
The last thing I'd have done with such radical control deflections is to let the airspeed build up, so it sounds as though that's the reasons I only felt the slightest hint of Marker's description.
Crossed up, the aircraft felt as though it was to a large extent resting on its fuselage. Very stable, yet still quite maneuverable - without un-crossing the controls.
"Standing up to see over the waves" made me laugh. Not quite that bad, but trying to make sure that we didn't get salt water spray on the bird was a reality.
Time and time again, carriers were returning from Sumburgh having gone around due to low cloud (the aids were primitive on the old field) I realized that so often the viz below was crystal clear the whole way. Trouble was the cloud base was very low, but if I could see Fair isle Fair Isle Home Page on the horizon, i.e., at a safe distance, it was more often than not, possible to see clearly for the entire flight to the lead-in lights that curved round the hotel. It was imperative not to allow the aircraft to climb into the stratus, hence the need for the ability to bully it a little should it become necessary. That only came by practice, practice, practice.
I should hasten to add, we flew a lot of empty sectors in those days. After about 400 hours in the left (and 500 in the right) I gradually got more daring with the things I'd try, but one thing left me beaten. Just try getting a DC3 down from say, 9,000' in a hurry. Nothing I could do would make those vast old wings come out of the sky quickly. I imagined being on fire and trying to be on the ground in c 3 mins. Huh! Double that if you were lucky.
The last thing I'd have done with such radical control deflections is to let the airspeed build up, so it sounds as though that's the reasons I only felt the slightest hint of Marker's description.
Crossed up, the aircraft felt as though it was to a large extent resting on its fuselage. Very stable, yet still quite maneuverable - without un-crossing the controls.
"Standing up to see over the waves" made me laugh. Not quite that bad, but trying to make sure that we didn't get salt water spray on the bird was a reality.
Time and time again, carriers were returning from Sumburgh having gone around due to low cloud (the aids were primitive on the old field) I realized that so often the viz below was crystal clear the whole way. Trouble was the cloud base was very low, but if I could see Fair isle Fair Isle Home Page on the horizon, i.e., at a safe distance, it was more often than not, possible to see clearly for the entire flight to the lead-in lights that curved round the hotel. It was imperative not to allow the aircraft to climb into the stratus, hence the need for the ability to bully it a little should it become necessary. That only came by practice, practice, practice.
I should hasten to add, we flew a lot of empty sectors in those days. After about 400 hours in the left (and 500 in the right) I gradually got more daring with the things I'd try, but one thing left me beaten. Just try getting a DC3 down from say, 9,000' in a hurry. Nothing I could do would make those vast old wings come out of the sky quickly. I imagined being on fire and trying to be on the ground in c 3 mins. Huh! Double that if you were lucky.
Thanks for the link, Ghenghis the Engineer, and the narrative of page 16 completely rubbishes the Flight International correspondent's assertion (as quoted in post #1 by Centaurus) that "increasing the aileron deflection only (serves) to generate adverse yaw."
Am surprised to learn, however, 42 years after a short stint (500 hrs P2), of the issue of rudder lock. I'm sure it was not covered on my course or on the line at Morton's, and for that time we had some of the most experienced C-47/DC3 skippers in Europe, e.g., Jo Rechka and Bill Caldwell.
The same page of the NACA report also confirms that the heaviness of the aileron controls is slightly above normal limits at airspeeds over 140kts (presume that must be in a dive!). Even at approach speeds, it could be quite an effort to pick up a wing-drop on a gusty day. That, and the initial rudder loads in asymmetry (a frequent event...) may be why our petite lady pilot, Yvonne Pope, never sought to get a command on the Gooney Bird.
Chris
Am surprised to learn, however, 42 years after a short stint (500 hrs P2), of the issue of rudder lock. I'm sure it was not covered on my course or on the line at Morton's, and for that time we had some of the most experienced C-47/DC3 skippers in Europe, e.g., Jo Rechka and Bill Caldwell.
The same page of the NACA report also confirms that the heaviness of the aileron controls is slightly above normal limits at airspeeds over 140kts (presume that must be in a dive!). Even at approach speeds, it could be quite an effort to pick up a wing-drop on a gusty day. That, and the initial rudder loads in asymmetry (a frequent event...) may be why our petite lady pilot, Yvonne Pope, never sought to get a command on the Gooney Bird.
Chris
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is "rudder lock" another term for "rudder tramping?" We used to experience rudder tramping on Lincolns with two engines out on one side and full rudder needed to keep straight. At the time the cause of rudder tramping was never explained to me and I still don't know. But it was a bit worrying at the time because you didn't know what would come next.