NavList:

   

Reply

I flew my partner and photographer up to Paradise from CMA in a
Cherokee 180. The accident aircraft turned slightly to the left after
takeoff to avoid trees ahead and clipped a tree past the departure end
of the runway off to the left and fell down into the steep ravine on
that side.

gl

On Aug 3, 1:11�am, Tom Sult  wrote:
> I lived in paradise for a while and flew from there a lot. �One lands �
> to the up hill and takes off to the down hill. �I would not even think �
> of a T&G on the up hill with rapidly rising terrain. �If one were to �
> do a T&G to the down hill (descending at about 1000 ft/min. to clear �
> terrain and make the touch down point, one could get a lot of air �
> speed off the departure end of the runway... it is essentially a cliff!
> Thomas A. Sult, MD
> IntegraCare Clinicwww.icareclinics.com
> ts...@charter.net
>
> On Aug 2, 2009, at 6:03 PM, Gary LaPook wrote:
>
> > Cessna 336 and 337 planes are centerline thrust so do not have the �
> > yawing problem when one engine fails but do have the severe �
> > reduction in climb performance
> > �in common with other twins. It may come as a surprise but twins �
> > weighing up to 6,000 pounds that have a stall speed of not more than �
> > 61 knots are not required to be able to climb on one engine. FAR �
> > 23.67 (a)(2) only requires that " the steady gradient of climb or �
> > descent" must be determined. An example of this is the Piper Apache �
> > which had a pretty good decent rate on one engine. I am not sure �
> > that the 336 would climb on one engine since it had fixed gear. The �
> > 337 would climb on one but with just the minimum rate required by �
> > regulations. Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) 23.67(a)(1) only �
> > requires a 1.5% gradient on one engine. I don't have my 337 manual �
> > with me (I am in Paris) but I think its single engine best rate of �
> > climb speed (Vyse) was about 90 knots or 9114 feet per minute. 1.5% �
> > of this is only a 136 feet per minute rate of climb. I had a case in �
> > which the heirs of a pilot who did a touch and go at a one way �
> > airport in Paradise California claimed that he had suffered an �
> > engine failure caused by my mechanic client's negligence in �
> > installing a defective electric boost pump on the rear engine.(Never �
> > mind that in a 337 the boost pump is not supposed to be turned on �
> > for landing.) Of course, everyone knows you don't do a touch and go �
> > on a one way airport since the terrain rises faster than planes can �
> > climb. (A one way runway is one on the side of a steep mountain, you �
> > land uphill and take off downhill towards lower terrain. You don't �
> > do a touch and go, momentarily landing and then taking off again, in �
> > the direction of rising terrain.) We were able to prove by witness �
> > testimony of the point where he started his takeoff again to the �
> > point where he hit the tree that it was impossible for the plane to �
> > climb at that gradient on only one engine, both engines had to have �
> > been operating to get to the point, near the top of the tree, where �
> > the plane impacted.
>
> > A problem unique to the 336/337 was that sometimes the rear engine �
> > would quit while waiting for takeoff and the pilot wouldn't k know �
> > it and so would attempt to takeoff with only the forward engine �
> > which resulted in takeoff accidents. The proper technique is to �
> > advance the throttle of the rear engine prior to advancing the �
> > throttle of the front engine so that this problem could be identified.
>
> > gl
>
> > 1.1 Critical engine means the engine whose failure would most �
> > adversely affect the performance or handling qualities of an aircraft.
>
> > Title 14: Aeronautics and Space
> > PART 23�AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: NORMAL, UTILITY, ACROBATIC, AND �
> > COMMUTER CATEGORY AIRPLANES
> > Subpart B�Flight
> > Performance
> > Browse Previous | Browse Next
> > � 23.67 � Climb: One engine inoperative.
>
> > (a) For normal, utility, and acrobatic category reciprocating engine-
> > powered airplanes of 6,000 pounds or less maximum weight, the �
> > following apply:
>
> > (1) Except for those airplanes that meet the requirements prescribed �
> > in �23.562(d), each airplane with a VSOof more than 61 knots must be �
> > able to maintain a steady climb gradient of at least 1.5 percent at �
> > a pressure altitude of 5,000 feet with the�
>
> > (i) Critical engine inoperative and its propeller in the minimum �
> > drag position;
>
> > (ii) Remaining engine(s) at not more than maximum continuous power;
>
> > (iii) Landing gear retracted;
>
> > (iv) Wing flaps retracted; and
>
> > (v) Climb speed not less than 1.2 VS1.
>
> > (2) For each airplane that meets the requirements prescribed in �
> > �23.562(d), or that has a VSOof 61 knots or less, the steady �
> > gradient of climb or descent at a pressure altitude of 5,000 feet �
> > must be determined with the�
>
> > (i) Critical engine inoperative and its propeller in the minimum �
> > drag position;
>
> > (ii) Remaining engine(s) at not more than maximum continuous power;
>
> > (iii) Landing gear retracted;
>
> > (iv) Wing flaps retracted; and
>
> > (v) Climb speed not less than 1.2VS1.
>
> > Tom Sult wrote:
>
> >> I agree with what you have said but the crash data for 336/337 is no
> >> better than other twins.
> >> Thomas A. Sult, MD
> >> IntegraCare Clinic
> >>www.icareclinics.com
> >> ts...@charter.net
>
> >> On Aug 2, 2009, at 3:58 PM, Greg R. wrote:
>
> >>> Not to speak for Gary, but the pusher/puller configuration has
> >>> what's called
> >>> "centerline thrust" - i.e. if you lose an engine, the thrust vector
> >>> stays on
> >>> the centerline - theoretically making the engine-out procedure
> >>> easier to
> >>> handle (ditto for a single-engine, though the engine-out procedure
> >>> is a lot
> >>> more cut-and-dried... �;-)).
>
> >>> Wing-mounted twins have a more-complicated engine-out procedure -
> >>> not only
> >>> identifying the dead engine, securing/feathering it (also true of
> >>> centerline-mounted engine configs), but also maintaining a slight
> >>> bank angle
> >>> to compensate for the thrust imbalance caused by the dead engine.
>
> >>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_engine
>
> >>> Not sure if the Vmc (minimum-controllable velocity) restrictions
> >>> would apply
> >>> to A/C with centerline-mounted engines, that's probably a question
> >>> for Gary.
>
> >>> --
> >>> GregR
>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "Greg Rudzinski" 
> >>> To: "NavList" 
> >>> Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 12:16 PM
> >>> Subject: [NavList 9297] Re: Bygrave and Chichester
>
> >>> Gary,
>
> >>> How would the Cessna 336/337 perform if one engine fails? Is there �
> >>> an
> >>> advantage to a pusher puller configuration over a single or wing
> >>> mounted twins?
>
> >>> Greg
>
> >>> On Aug 2, 11:18 am, Gary LaPook  wrote:
>
> >>>> Well, I would agree with you Douglas, as judged from our
> >>>> perspective in
> >>>> 2009, that Chichester may have been "reckless." But as judged from
> >>>> the
> >>>> standards of aviation pioneers almost 80 years ago, I prefer the �
> >>>> word
> >>>> "bold." If you look at early pioneering efforts, Lindberg, Perry, �
> >>>> Sir
> >>>> John Franklin, Columbus etc., they all appear reckless as viewed
> >>>> through
> >>>> our prism of time. But that is what pioneering is all about, taking
>
> >>> chances.
>
> >>>> Regarding you preference for twin engine flying, the accident
> >>>> statistics
> >>>> show that they are more dangerous than singles, pretty
> >>>> counter-intuitive. Flying a twin when both engines are operating is
> >>>> just
> >>>> like flying a single, it only gets interesting when one quits. Then
> >>>> the
> >>>> pilot must deal with a greatly reduced performance envelope and
> >>>> asymmetric thrust causing control difficulties. If the pilot
> >>>> doesn't do
> >>>> everything exactly right he ends up crashing and the crash happens
> >>>> at a
> >>>> higher speed than would have occurred in a single. By US
> >>>> certification
> >>>> standards (I expect they are similar in Britain) a single must �
> >>>> have a
> >>>> stall speed below 60 knots while a twin can have a much higher �
> >>>> speed.
> >>>> This means that a pilot trying to crash land a twin must fly above
> >>>> the
> >>>> stall speed resulting in a higher impact speed and much more �
> >>>> kinetic
> >>>> energy to dissipate (varies with velocity squared), can we say �
> >>>> "torn
> >>>> aluminum" and "mangled bodies?" I've litigated airplane crashes for
> >>>> the
> >>>> last twenty years and I have seen my share of bent aluminum and
> >>>> autopsy
> >>>> photos. (BTW, a Cessna 310 Twin fits in a box on a standard pallet,
> >>>> about five feet square and three feet deep after it impacts the �
> >>>> dirt.
> >>>> Airplanes are mostly air surrounded by an aluminum skin, just �
> >>>> like an
> >>>> empty beer can and they squish just like a beer can..)
>
> >>>> After the loss of one engine the airplane has little or no climb
> >>>> capability. It will only climb or maintain altitude if the pilot �
> >>>> does
> >>>> everything right. If he doesn't get rid or the drag form the flaps,
> >>>> the
> >>>> landing gear and the windmilling propeller immediately then he is
> >>>> going
> >>>> down.
>
> >>>> I'll give you some examples. About seven years ago a Cessna 310 was
> >>>> taking off from Laverne airport just northeast of Los Angeles on �
> >>>> July
> >>>> 4, 2002, Independence Day. One engine quit right after takeoff and
> >>>> the
> >>>> pilot did not do everything right and the plane crashed on top of a
> >>>> bunch of picnickers celebrating Independence Day in the park near �
> >>>> the
> >>>> airport resulting in the deaths of the two occupants of the plane,
> >>>> two
> >>>> deaths of the picnickers and severe injuries for nine other �
> >>>> people on
> >>>> the ground. See the accident report at:
>
> >>>http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=LAX01FA152&rpt=fa
>
> >>>> The left propeller control was found "one inch aft." In order to
> >>>> feather
> >>>> the propeller it is necessary to pull the prop control all the way
> >>>> aft,
> >>>> about eight inches. Since the pilot did not move the prop control �
> >>>> all
> >>>> the way aft
>
> ...
>
> read more �
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
NavList message boards: www.fer3.com/arc
Or post by email to: NavList@fer3.com
To , email NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply