Aircraft without a loss of oil pressure procedure
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So I chose to drop like a rock, flight idle, speed brakes, in a FLYABLE plane doing 10000 FPM, and 250kts
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keep trying pal, let us know what the Vmo of a 425 is. You're still way out of the ball park. And let us know what the significance is of 21,800 feet when talking about the 425. My bet is you don't have an answer.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brian the C425 will do 245kts all day long...did you know the Conquest II with -10s will do 305 or better?
Gosh what about 'Vmo' on that aircraft?
Tell you what Brian...you grab your 'Conquest Pilot' you got right there, tell 'her' to grab her manual, and I will ask, a specific question on a specific page...and see if she can look it up? ok?
Gosh what about 'Vmo' on that aircraft?
Tell you what Brian...you grab your 'Conquest Pilot' you got right there, tell 'her' to grab her manual, and I will ask, a specific question on a specific page...and see if she can look it up? ok?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wingham NSW Australia
Age: 83
Posts: 1,343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuel Pump Cavitation.
I have no experience of the engine/prop installations mentioned here and am somewhat reluctant to make a comment, except to say that any aeroplane on which I have operated and which was fitted with a featherable propeller has always been able to be shut-down and, if required, able to be restarted regardless of whether it was a "Precautionary" shutdown or an "Emergency" shutdown without detriment to any component.
Last edited by Old Fella; 11th Dec 2010 at 03:12.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's too early in the morning to laugh like that, but thanks. You're still funny. Very well, let's get on with it.
No dissertations are required: you prove that fact quite conclusively all by yourself.
Do you know what happens when you feather the propeller on a PT6A installation? Do you really believe that the engine keeps rotating, or causes damage? When the engine is shut down, it's shut down. When the engine does windmill, however, when the gas generator still turns, if it's still turning (do you know anything at all about the PT6A?), the propeller isn't connected to the gas generator. If one has feathered the propeller, one hasn't starved the fuel pump of fuel.
If one shuts down the engine in flight, one hasn't starved the fuel pump of fuel. You do understand, of course, that an inflight shutdown, particularly one using the aircraft manufacturer checklist, doesn't involve starving the pump of fuel, right? Do you understand that shutting the engine down using the fuel control has no effect on the fuel pump, because it's downstream of the fuel pump? You really don't know anything about the engine, or the procedures for operating it, do you?
No need to call you an idiot, mate. You do that to yourself over and over with your comments. Your own commentary is self-indictment. This is why I pointed out that you don't appear to know enough to be embarrassed. I'm embarrassed for you, and if that were all, you'd be little more than a fish in a barrel. The problem we face here is that you claim to be a professional, and are therefore not just innocently ignorant and laughably uninformed. You're dangerous.
At least you would be, if one would push one's self to the edge of reason and believe for a moment that you're who you claim.
I don't shut down engines for fun. I shoot for fun. I hike for fun. I skydive for fun. I even fly for fun. But I don't shut down engines for fun.
I shut down engines for training. I shut down engines using aircraft and engine manufacturer procedures. I shut down engines from necessity. I shut down engines to test, to teach, to demonstrate, to show, to prove, to save, and to prevent. But never for fun. I just don't see the fun in it.
I never shut them down on my nickle, however. Someone is always paying me. I fly when someone pays me to fly, and when I shut down an engine, it's because I'm paid to do it. When I do it, I do it using a checklist, a procedure, and a plan. I do it knowing that I am not harming the engine, or endangering the flight, the aircraft, others in the aircraft or those on the ground. I do it because it's safe, it's sometimes necessary, it's appropriate, and it's approved by the engine manufacturer.
Shutting down the PT6A in flight is approved by the engine manufacturer, incidentally. Just as it is by the airframe manufacturer. And the propeller manufacturer (that's why it's a full feathering propeller, you see).
The "antitorque," you say. Okay.
You may be thinking of the Garrett motor, which does incorporate a negative torque sensing system (NTS). NTS moves the propeller blade angle toward high pitch to load the propeller from the engine, when negative torque is sensed; it helps keep the engine driving the propeller, instead of the other way around.
This isn't necessary on the PT6A; it's a free turbine, after all, and the propeller can't drive the gas generator. The propeller is controlled instead by the governor, which works the blade angle as required to maintain a constant RPM when in the governing range.
On the Conquest, as with all turboprops, the concept of torque is a good thing; we want torque.
Now, you ask if I'm stupid enough to believe that the propeller feathers when the engine shuts down. No, I'm not stupid, and yes, the propeller feathers when the engine shuts down; that's part of the shutdown and feathering procedure for all PT6A installations, including on the Conquest. You ensure it feathers by feathering the propeller, you see. You didn't do that, in the scenario you describe. In fact, you didn't try.
For all your rambling about the propeller governor "making metal" and being unable to be feathered, you never tried to feather the propeller or shut it down (perhaps because of your gross misunderstanding of the construction, operating principles, and function of the equipment you *claim* to have flown).
I find it incredibly ironic that you'd hold out your hand on this site (not once, but twice, of late), begging for a job, yet turn around and openly profess such unprofessionalism, poor judgment, and lack of understanding and training.
You may be thinking of autofeather features, and you may be thinking of the actions of the propeller governor when the propeller attempts to overspeed; the actions are similar; propellerblade angle is increased to load the propeller, reduce RPM. The rationale is slightly different as is the process, but the result is a higher blade angle (moving toward feather).
Lose oil pressure, of course, as in shutting down the engine, and the propeller will feather.
Autofeathering systems are not new, and no, the airplane will not fall out of the sky at 3,000 fpm because the propeller didn't feather, nor will it "flip" on you if you keep flying the airplane. Especially from 24,000'.
This is really irrelevant, however, as you never had a propeller that failed to feather. You had a pilot (allegedly YOU) that failed to feather the propeller. There was no 3,000 fpm descent. Instead there was a 10,000 fpm descent that you initiated, according to your own text. You failed to follow procedure, failed to secure the engine, failed to feather the propeller, and still managed to make a mountain out of a molehill with triple the rate of descent you assumed might take place if the problem you assumed existed (which it did not). Go figure.
In most cases where autofeather systems are provided, one shouldn't count on them, and even where one should let the autofeather system act first, procedures are established to follow up by manually feathering the propeller. All of which is far afield from the subject of loss of oil pressure or quantity. Never the less, you failed to use procedures that were available to you, guessed at the problem, imagined causes that weren't there (as well as the effects), and then acted entirely inappropriately for all of the above (even if the problem had existed as you dreamed it up to be).
Another problem here is that reading your previous posts, you're a missionary of single-pilot operations. You don't belong in a crew cockpit, let alone a single pilot cockpit. You don't appear to be able to correctly decide your way out of a wet paper bag, let alone be trusted with flying an airplane (be it a "million dollar" airplane or a paper one).
Autofeathering systems aren't P&W items, incidentally, but customer served accessories, generally installed as an issue of certification.
The pilot must always be capable of feathering the propeller.
There are some installations of autofeather systems in which the pilot shouldn't "verify" with the power lever before feathering, because such action defeats the autofeather function. The pilot should still manually feather the propeller, however; something which you failed to do.
Actually, most here were quite straight to begin with. It's you that's a little crooked.
Guppy..when you cut off the fuel from a windmilling turbine engine...what will the mechanical fuel pump do when it doesn't have fuel to lubricate it?
No long answers...no dissertations on how stupid I am...what does a mechanical fuel pump do when you starve it off fuel.
No long answers...no dissertations on how stupid I am...what does a mechanical fuel pump do when you starve it off fuel.
Do you know what happens when you feather the propeller on a PT6A installation? Do you really believe that the engine keeps rotating, or causes damage? When the engine is shut down, it's shut down. When the engine does windmill, however, when the gas generator still turns, if it's still turning (do you know anything at all about the PT6A?), the propeller isn't connected to the gas generator. If one has feathered the propeller, one hasn't starved the fuel pump of fuel.
If one shuts down the engine in flight, one hasn't starved the fuel pump of fuel. You do understand, of course, that an inflight shutdown, particularly one using the aircraft manufacturer checklist, doesn't involve starving the pump of fuel, right? Do you understand that shutting the engine down using the fuel control has no effect on the fuel pump, because it's downstream of the fuel pump? You really don't know anything about the engine, or the procedures for operating it, do you?
No need to call you an idiot, mate. You do that to yourself over and over with your comments. Your own commentary is self-indictment. This is why I pointed out that you don't appear to know enough to be embarrassed. I'm embarrassed for you, and if that were all, you'd be little more than a fish in a barrel. The problem we face here is that you claim to be a professional, and are therefore not just innocently ignorant and laughably uninformed. You're dangerous.
At least you would be, if one would push one's self to the edge of reason and believe for a moment that you're who you claim.
Care to answer that? Now if, you have ever been IN CHARGE of an aircraft meaning you are RESPONSIBLE for it....you might think twice about taking it up...on the boss's nickel and shutting down engines for fun...just a thought...
I shut down engines for training. I shut down engines using aircraft and engine manufacturer procedures. I shut down engines from necessity. I shut down engines to test, to teach, to demonstrate, to show, to prove, to save, and to prevent. But never for fun. I just don't see the fun in it.
I never shut them down on my nickle, however. Someone is always paying me. I fly when someone pays me to fly, and when I shut down an engine, it's because I'm paid to do it. When I do it, I do it using a checklist, a procedure, and a plan. I do it knowing that I am not harming the engine, or endangering the flight, the aircraft, others in the aircraft or those on the ground. I do it because it's safe, it's sometimes necessary, it's appropriate, and it's approved by the engine manufacturer.
Shutting down the PT6A in flight is approved by the engine manufacturer, incidentally. Just as it is by the airframe manufacturer. And the propeller manufacturer (that's why it's a full feathering propeller, you see).
As far as why a tprop feathers...are you so stupid as to think that the anti torque system on the Conquest is there, because you happen to think that when the engine shuts off of a freewheeling turbine....that the prop goes right into feather..?
You may be thinking of the Garrett motor, which does incorporate a negative torque sensing system (NTS). NTS moves the propeller blade angle toward high pitch to load the propeller from the engine, when negative torque is sensed; it helps keep the engine driving the propeller, instead of the other way around.
This isn't necessary on the PT6A; it's a free turbine, after all, and the propeller can't drive the gas generator. The propeller is controlled instead by the governor, which works the blade angle as required to maintain a constant RPM when in the governing range.
On the Conquest, as with all turboprops, the concept of torque is a good thing; we want torque.
Now, you ask if I'm stupid enough to believe that the propeller feathers when the engine shuts down. No, I'm not stupid, and yes, the propeller feathers when the engine shuts down; that's part of the shutdown and feathering procedure for all PT6A installations, including on the Conquest. You ensure it feathers by feathering the propeller, you see. You didn't do that, in the scenario you describe. In fact, you didn't try.
For all your rambling about the propeller governor "making metal" and being unable to be feathered, you never tried to feather the propeller or shut it down (perhaps because of your gross misunderstanding of the construction, operating principles, and function of the equipment you *claim* to have flown).
I find it incredibly ironic that you'd hold out your hand on this site (not once, but twice, of late), begging for a job, yet turn around and openly profess such unprofessionalism, poor judgment, and lack of understanding and training.
You may be thinking of autofeather features, and you may be thinking of the actions of the propeller governor when the propeller attempts to overspeed; the actions are similar; propellerblade angle is increased to load the propeller, reduce RPM. The rationale is slightly different as is the process, but the result is a higher blade angle (moving toward feather).
Lose oil pressure, of course, as in shutting down the engine, and the propeller will feather.
And did you think that the reason for the anti torque system being there had a little more to do with just the pilot reaching over and feathering the prop, but maybe, you know...just maybe...Pratt and Whitney....you know the engine guys...had little faith in the ability of the pilot to feather a failed engine in time before that big ol three bladed McCauley or 4 blade Hartzell created so much drag that Vmc would be reached in in no time, and just to keep the plane flying, you needed to go down, to the tune of 3000 FPM...holding enough power on the good side, but enough speed forward to counteract so much asymetrical yaw and roll that the plane was almost un--flyable..
This is really irrelevant, however, as you never had a propeller that failed to feather. You had a pilot (allegedly YOU) that failed to feather the propeller. There was no 3,000 fpm descent. Instead there was a 10,000 fpm descent that you initiated, according to your own text. You failed to follow procedure, failed to secure the engine, failed to feather the propeller, and still managed to make a mountain out of a molehill with triple the rate of descent you assumed might take place if the problem you assumed existed (which it did not). Go figure.
In most cases where autofeather systems are provided, one shouldn't count on them, and even where one should let the autofeather system act first, procedures are established to follow up by manually feathering the propeller. All of which is far afield from the subject of loss of oil pressure or quantity. Never the less, you failed to use procedures that were available to you, guessed at the problem, imagined causes that weren't there (as well as the effects), and then acted entirely inappropriately for all of the above (even if the problem had existed as you dreamed it up to be).
Another problem here is that reading your previous posts, you're a missionary of single-pilot operations. You don't belong in a crew cockpit, let alone a single pilot cockpit. You don't appear to be able to correctly decide your way out of a wet paper bag, let alone be trusted with flying an airplane (be it a "million dollar" airplane or a paper one).
Autofeathering systems aren't P&W items, incidentally, but customer served accessories, generally installed as an issue of certification.
The pilot must always be capable of feathering the propeller.
There are some installations of autofeather systems in which the pilot shouldn't "verify" with the power lever before feathering, because such action defeats the autofeather function. The pilot should still manually feather the propeller, however; something which you failed to do.
Thanks Guppy...for setting all of us straight....
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brian the C425 will do 245kts all day long
Brain..your a liar
Last edited by Brian Abraham; 11th Dec 2010 at 02:55.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gosh what about 'Vmo' on that aircraft?
What do you think the FAA Type Certificate Data Sheet says that it is? That's the certification standard for the airplane, you see: the legal pedigree and the document which allows it to exist. Are you familiar with a TCDS?
From the FAA, http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/73eb196d79951940862576e4006bca71/$FILE/A7ce.pdf
VMO (Max Operating) 230 knots 265 m.p.h. (IAS) Sea level to 21,800 ft.
MMO Above 21,800 ft. .52 mach
MMO Above 21,800 ft. .52 mach
You were doing 250 knots in the descent (a 10,000 fpm descent, as I recall, with one engine that you believed was "making metal" in the propeller governor. You remember the engine? The one you didn't shut down for fear of damaging the fuel pump, when you believed it was making metal--which would have destroyed the entire engine, incidentally). That engine. So there you were, in an airplane with a published Vmo of 230 knots, while you were doing 250.
Then again, you just told us the airplane does 245 knots "all day long." 15 knots faster than Vmo. Interesting.
Read the TCDS. The link above is provided for you. Get back to us when you've figured out a way to backpeddle a little more.
Last edited by SNS3Guppy; 11th Dec 2010 at 03:16.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guppy your a master at writing a whole bunch, but saying little.
What is are un feathered numbers for a Conquest 1?
Does a windmilling turbine engine turn the mechanical Pump?
Is it a good thing to starve a mechanical fuel pump ran off of a windmilling turbine?
Do you have any idea what the anti-torque system is on the C425?
In any event...Guppy...in the real world you can't hit 'stop' at Fl240...put on an O2 mask, open the clamshell, climb onto the wing and find out where the oil was coming from...and as it turned out..the leak being near the governor...you know that thing the controls the angle of the prop...could have been a problem in the governor..
And you know...governors get overhauled...did you know that...it's a regular maintenance item...because if you don't ...they break...and the prop doesn't do what it's supposed to do...you know...like feather...
So maybe the next time you see oil coming from the front of a turbine nacelle...you can wonder...'should I mess with a governor that might be broken or not? hmmm..
Let me think about that.....
- Brain...oh gosh, yeah...the lost manuals...been such a long time...yeah sure....
What is are un feathered numbers for a Conquest 1?
Does a windmilling turbine engine turn the mechanical Pump?
Is it a good thing to starve a mechanical fuel pump ran off of a windmilling turbine?
Do you have any idea what the anti-torque system is on the C425?
In any event...Guppy...in the real world you can't hit 'stop' at Fl240...put on an O2 mask, open the clamshell, climb onto the wing and find out where the oil was coming from...and as it turned out..the leak being near the governor...you know that thing the controls the angle of the prop...could have been a problem in the governor..
And you know...governors get overhauled...did you know that...it's a regular maintenance item...because if you don't ...they break...and the prop doesn't do what it's supposed to do...you know...like feather...
So maybe the next time you see oil coming from the front of a turbine nacelle...you can wonder...'should I mess with a governor that might be broken or not? hmmm..
Let me think about that.....
- Brain...oh gosh, yeah...the lost manuals...been such a long time...yeah sure....
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guppy your a master at writing a whole bunch, but saying little.
the lost manuals
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Conquest I did 245kts in Straight and Level at FL240.
I only did 250kt...because I was either a/s limited or I was below 10k.
I only did 250kt...because I was either a/s limited or I was below 10k.
You have two problems right now. Three, really. One is that hand you've got out, begging for a job. Might as well put it away. The second is that you just admitted to exceeding the limitations for the airplane, which is a violation by itself, but also invalidates the airworthiness certificate (turn it over sometime, and read). Also an FAA violation. The third is that you just admitted to it publically, on the record, The fourth, already a given, is that you've outed yourself fully and completely as being entirely without any knowledge of the airplane you claim to have been flying. Good gravy, man: you could have at least looked it up online before you perpetuated this lie!
In any event...Guppy...in the real world you can't hit 'stop' at Fl240...put on an O2 mask, open the clamshell, climb onto the wing and find out where the oil was coming from...and as it turned out..the leak being near the governor...you know that thing the controls the angle of the prop...could have been a problem in the governor.
It's time to do what you usually do. Dry up, go away, and come back under another name to try again. You're never hard to spot, and won't be any more difficult next time. This time, your cover is blown.
And you know...governors get overhauled...did you know that...it's a regular maintenance item...because if you don't ...they break...and the prop doesn't do what it's supposed to do...you know...like feather...
So maybe the next time you see oil coming from the front of a turbine nacelle...you can wonder...'should I mess with a governor that might be broken or not? hmmm..
I'll allow this: I've shut down engines many times due to enormous quantities of oil over the engine nose case, nacelle, and wing. Most all of them in radial engines, and the majority of them due to failures of the stephead base plate cracking. In each case, I feathered the propeller manually, shut down the engine, completed the inflight engine failure shutdown checklist, and proceded normally. On a few occasions, the propeller wouldn't feather (hamilton standard hydromatic propellers need oil under pressure to feather, using a feather pump). What I didn't do is fall out of the sky at 3,000 fpm. Then again, like everyone here (except you), I'm actually a pilot, and I perform within the limitations and capabilities of the airplane.
Let me think about that.....
- Brain...oh gosh, yeah...the lost manuals...been such a long time...yeah sure....
This message is hidden because johns7022 is on your ignore list.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whoa....ok...I see...you guys are saying a Conquest I is limited to below 245kts...?????
Well let's see it folks......show me the C425 limiting speeds...I am all ears....I have the book right here.
Guppy...I read your rants...and honestly wonder...why you would think oil coming from the front of a nacel could be anything BUT from the governor area....
Freewheeling turbine right? All the hot stuff is in back...in a PT6..so what's up front...the governor...
Or did YOUR PT6 have an oil supply to the nose of the prop for something else?
Please explain.
Well let's see it folks......show me the C425 limiting speeds...I am all ears....I have the book right here.
Guppy...I read your rants...and honestly wonder...why you would think oil coming from the front of a nacel could be anything BUT from the governor area....
Freewheeling turbine right? All the hot stuff is in back...in a PT6..so what's up front...the governor...
Or did YOUR PT6 have an oil supply to the nose of the prop for something else?
Please explain.
The TCDS pretty well answered the question about limit speeds on the Conquest. Move on, answer questions presented to you, do your homework
GF
GF
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Galaxy...put up or shut up...if you can't put the numbers up...your on the ignore list..tired of dealing with you...I got the book right hre.....let's see if you got the stones to back up what your saying...Brain sure doesn't.
Your level of ignorance is staggering.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess I have to spell the diff between IAS and TAS...for the experts here..
If I say a Citation does 450 kts...you think that's indicated...oh..yeah..that's because you all fly recips...ok I get it..
Sorry I need to get my head down there about 40,000 ft.. My bad.
If I say a Citation does 450 kts...you think that's indicated...oh..yeah..that's because you all fly recips...ok I get it..
Sorry I need to get my head down there about 40,000 ft.. My bad.
Thread Starter
I had the prop also get out of control on the Metro once, and again I was able to take a video of it before it suffered an event horizon malfunction.
YouTube - Freaky Metroliner prop
YouTube - Freaky Metroliner prop
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And I have no idea what your talking about Brian, if we ever were to have this discussion in person, I am sure it would last about as long as it took to pull out the manual, show you the error of your ways...and send you back to the C152 that you were flying....
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany
Age: 47
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can give you a long list of airplanes I've flown in which I've shut down engines in flight, ranging from J-3 cubs to Boeing 747's. I've shut down PT6's, TPE-331's, T-56's, TFE-731's, JT9D's, JT-12's R-2600's, R-3350's, R-985's, TSIO-360's, 0-320's, A-65's
can you tell us how to feather the prop on the space shuttle ?
this here goes absolutely teletubbies gentlemen.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Aerobat77.....I smelled it too..
I've been doing this long enough, especially as an MEII to tell you that LAST thing you do is take up Jets and Tprops, and do shutdowns......flight idle simulates a feathered prop or a dead engine just fine.
To prove this point Guppy has only to provide the name of ONE training provider, that takes up real Jets and Turboprops to perform shutdowns, taking the chance with million dollar gear to fly around on one engine, cavitating the mechanical fuel pump for training purposes.
And even if we can find a provider that has no regard for the owner's plane...I wanna meet the CFII that's got the balls to do it...these aren't Apaches, nor is it a Sim.
I mean if everyone is on me for doing V1 cuts in real jets, on real runways....who's up there flying around jets and turboprops and shutting down engines?
I've been doing this long enough, especially as an MEII to tell you that LAST thing you do is take up Jets and Tprops, and do shutdowns......flight idle simulates a feathered prop or a dead engine just fine.
To prove this point Guppy has only to provide the name of ONE training provider, that takes up real Jets and Turboprops to perform shutdowns, taking the chance with million dollar gear to fly around on one engine, cavitating the mechanical fuel pump for training purposes.
And even if we can find a provider that has no regard for the owner's plane...I wanna meet the CFII that's got the balls to do it...these aren't Apaches, nor is it a Sim.
I mean if everyone is on me for doing V1 cuts in real jets, on real runways....who's up there flying around jets and turboprops and shutting down engines?
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany
Age: 47
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
at least over european sky it is forbidden by JAR-FCL to inentionally shut an engine for training purposes.
beyond this, john- i would respectfully disregard with some of your comments too.
e.g pump cavitation is not that dramatic issue on the pt6- when you shut it keep on boosting by the electrical pump until core speed drops below 10% and all is fine.
the whole "speed battle" about the C425- well, one was talking about the barberpole in indicated values, you were talking about cruise performance in TAS, this was sorted out i think.
ok... its saturday evening now in germany, i have off today, my girlfriend is calling to come down to her... i feel the fuel pressure rising- to prevent any cavitating, i think i need to drain the pipe now...
keep cool gents , see you later !
beyond this, john- i would respectfully disregard with some of your comments too.
e.g pump cavitation is not that dramatic issue on the pt6- when you shut it keep on boosting by the electrical pump until core speed drops below 10% and all is fine.
the whole "speed battle" about the C425- well, one was talking about the barberpole in indicated values, you were talking about cruise performance in TAS, this was sorted out i think.
ok... its saturday evening now in germany, i have off today, my girlfriend is calling to come down to her... i feel the fuel pressure rising- to prevent any cavitating, i think i need to drain the pipe now...
keep cool gents , see you later !