Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Unfeathered propeller performance

Wikiposts
Search
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Unfeathered propeller performance

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 6th Mar 2013, 10:20
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Bulgaria
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Unfeathered propeller performance

I would like to talk a little about the engine failure event where you might not be able to feather. I'm a multiengine student and I would like to know some climb/descent rates figures from your experience, what performance can be achieved in case of an engine failure after takeoff where you can't feather the prop? I guess in light piston twins there is no climb at all, but what fpm descent can you expect?

And what about part 25 large turboprop? Is there such a large drag from an unfeather propeller? I'm thinking about a King Air, Dash8, Saab or an ATR or other big turboprops like these, would you get a high rate of descent like that having no engine at all? I mean, if you have a double engine failure, let's say you get a 1500-2000 fpm glide, but if you have one engine failed and unfeathered, and the other doing full power, what are the figures? Let's assume medium values for weight and outside temperatures.

Thanks!

Last edited by RichPa; 6th Mar 2013 at 10:26.
RichPa is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2013, 13:11
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, one must consider that the DC-3 was originally certified (1936) with a non-feathering constant-speed prop. The Hydromatic full-feathering design wasn't available until a year or two later.
barit1 is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2013, 13:26
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I get about 200-300ft of climb out of my Commander with one unfeathered. If the gear is out, it's down to about zero, maybe the slightest climb in ideal conditions. This is at SL.

So if something happens at rotation, gear still out and you can't feather, then it's a little problematic. Close the other and land straight ahead.

Last edited by AdamFrisch; 6th Mar 2013 at 13:27.
AdamFrisch is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2013, 13:39
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Scandiland
Posts: 480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If your asking for values, you need to be more specific. JAR 25 aircraft have performance requirements that need to be fulfilled for the various climb segments, of which the second segment is usually the more limiting. Those figures would normally be the lower end values that you might see. The Saab 2000 for example I would imagine being well above the climb requirements under any circumstances. I guess it is up to the manufacturer during design and the operator during operation to make sure that these values can be complied with, be it unfeathered or feathered. Usually the performance manual states the conditions under which the values of climb performance are valid.
low n' slow is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2013, 14:19
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Bulgaria
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm asking because as I know part 25 climb segment performance requirements are for feathered propeller, so it doesn't cover the case which you can't feather the prop.

I'm just flying a DA-42 at the moment because I'm in training and there is a 200-300 fpm loss with the prop unfeathered, but I guess the figures are very different for big turboprops due to bigger props and otherss and also different certification.
RichPa is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2013, 14:35
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Blighty (Nth. Downs)
Age: 77
Posts: 2,107
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
AdamFrisch,

Is that a piston-engine Commander? Although the OP seems to be referring to turbine a/c, it sems to me the situation is generally worse in pistons. That may seem obvious, because most turbines have a higher power-to-weight ratio. What I have in mind is that the drag on an unfeathered piston is probably greater than on an unfeathered turbo-prop. But I stand to be corrected.

Last edited by Chris Scott; 6th Mar 2013 at 14:39.
Chris Scott is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2013, 14:41
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
TexasDoll

My uncle Colonel Ed, returning in his B29 from Tokyo to base, had a prop freeze in flat pitch, #3.

It sped crazily to unknown rpms, requiring alot of ad hoc handling, whilst the Magnesium cowl ignited, and caused an ungodly vibration and din. It eventually parted the shaft, like a frisbee, turning wildly like a saucer, forward, up, left, and over the fuselage to narrowly miss taking off the talfeathers.

Yep. Pistons.

Last edited by Jetdriver; 12th Mar 2013 at 00:56.
Lyman is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2013, 14:55
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 45 yards from a tropical beach
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yep. Pistons.
No, Lyman - Propellors
Neptunus Rex is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2013, 14:56
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The added drag could be compared to a 20% increase in weight. So if you're light, it will probably be fine, if you took off at MTOW, you could be struggling to keep level, or maybe just about get 2-300'/min out of it.
RTN11 is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2013, 16:19
  #10 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Bulgaria
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks everyone, very interesting answers. I would appreciate also if anyone here has any values regarding part 25 turboprop.
RichPa is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2013, 22:56
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Dash-8 turboprop.

With autofeather inoperative, therefore assuming an unfeathered propeller following an engine failure at V1, we must reduce our TOW by about 30%. (This is quite approximate you understand; there are several pages of tables to look up for any specific WAT combination.)

In practice it means that the payload is reduced to just about zero!
Oktas8 is offline  
Old 9th Mar 2013, 07:30
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austria
Posts: 706
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
On the DH8-300, it is as Oktas8 has written. On the -400, there is no MEL item allowing a release without working Autofeather function (the autofeather is an integrated function of the PEC).

A windmilling propeller on the -300 about kills all the performance - in straight and level flight, the simulator could be convinced to climb at 100fpm maximum. On the -400 it is not nearly as bad; while the yaw moment is rather nasty, a noticeable rate of climb is achievable. Again, this is experience from the simulator, I have not tried this in real life.
Tu.114 is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2013, 00:11
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 2,792
Received 419 Likes on 231 Posts
SAAB 340 penalty for inop auto-coarsen/feather is almost 3 ton (around 20-30% of MTOW, so very similar to the dash). As with the dash controllability becomes very difficult at low speed requiring substantial increase in Vref if the system is inop. The normal SAAB coarsen system does not actually feather the prop during a failure, a computer cycles the prop at optimum RPM for fast drag reduction.

Most piston twin engine aircraft at mid to high weight will have negative climb rates with a wind-milling failed engine (dependant on atmospheric conditions of course).

What I have in mind is that the drag on an unfeathered piston is probably greater than on an unfeathered turbo-prop. But I stand to be corrected.
That would be very debatable as turbo-props tend to have much larger and more efficient props which in turn cause more drag when being driven by airflow. The reason for the piston lack of performance is more to do with lower power output to start off with. ie, a PA31-350 at max weight struggles to climb on both engines, take one away and add unnecessary drag and the result is predictable. Take same PA31 and strap on 500hp turbo-props (PA31T3) and the aircraft performs much better.

To complicate the situation most turbo-props have a power "push" system that allows operation above 100% power for limited periods during engine failure situations, some over 20% additional power.

Last edited by 43Inches; 12th Mar 2013 at 00:24.
43Inches is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2013, 13:23
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Johannesburg
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The SAAB 2000 has auto feathering on engine failure. It also has auto rudder on engine failure and all the pilot has to do is establish positive climb - very impressive climb to be sure. It is very similar to a modern jet aircraft.
Baron 58P is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2013, 15:08
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: D(Emona)
Posts: 404
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 1 Post
In Saab 340 sim, negative autocoarsen just after V1 is interesting at high weights. Not deadly but you don't climb until you feather the b1tch.

And when your sim partner manually feathers the wrong prop.. then it's reset time
Dufo is offline  
Old 13th Mar 2013, 23:58
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: 500 miles from Chaikhosi, Yogistan
Posts: 4,295
Received 139 Likes on 63 Posts
Investigation: 200000624 - Beech Aircraft Corp 58, VH-NTG


It may not fly well at all....
compressor stall is online now  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.