Why didn't the Cessna 337 make it?

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
[...]
The people who are liable to VMC roll a conventional twin are probably
the same people who will stall a 337 while taking their time over trying
to figure out which engine has quit.

I don't see how this is an issue. With centerline thrust, the pilot
shouldn't NEED to know which engine has quit. The primary reason for
knowing which engine has quit in a convential twin is so you can use the
correct control inputs. With centerline thrust, you just keep flying the
airplane. Why would any pilot spend any time trying to figure out which
engine has quit on a 337? What are they going to do with that
information, at least in the immediate sense?

Pete

With a conventional twin you "just keep flying the airplane" as well. It's
HOW you keep flying the airplane that matters.
Any "dufus" as you have said, who thinks that just because those engines are
in line on the 337 means you don't have a prop drag issue with engine
failure needs to go out on a hot Sunday afternoon on a short runway with
trees at the end and lose one at rotation!
Dudley Henriques

Sorry Duniho, the "dufus" guy was somebody else. My mistake.
Dudley Henriques

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Grumman-581" wrote in message
...
Perhaps there is a need to feather the prop on the dead engine to cut
drag?

Ahh...good point, thanks.

Naw, if you're a regular multi, a centerline thrust is no big deal. It
requires
no additional ratings. I teach in both. It flies like a heavy 210.

I think the reason it didn't make it, was performance and room. It was
not
a spectacular performer on both. On one it needed to be flown correctly. It
also
doesn't have any baggage room. I always felt alot of vibration, and used the
"sychrophaser" to move the center of the vibration as far as possible from
the
left front seat

Al


"Jose" wrote in message
. com...
Just what did the FAA issue then?
A 'centerline only' thrust limitation to the ME rating.

Not only that, but if you have a regular multiengine rating, you still
can't fly the thing unless you get a type rating (or somesuch) for it.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Dallas" wrote in message k.net...
Looking at the design of the C377, it seems like it should have been more of
a winner. Why did it flop?


Dallas



Dunno, but here is a short video

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...ssna+skymaster

A jet needs to be faster to be efficient, the airframe is
not designed for Mach 0.60, let alone real jet speeds.


wrote in message
ups.com...
| Hi Jim,
|
| That is true, but if the jet engines were small enough
they wouldn't
| necessarily overpower the airframe. There are some really
small
| turbines out these days...
|
| Dean
|

Robert M. Gary wrote:
It made a poor multi trainer for FBOs because the FAA would not issue
"full" multiengine ratings to students who took their checkrides in it.

-Robert

That and despite the advantages of not having any asymmetric thrust
issues, it doesn't fly any better single engine than most twins.
The rear engine is prone to overheating as well.

All Cessna's ending in 7 are odd birds.

Jim Macklin wrote:
Not correct, at least in the USA. There are some jets that
don't have a Vmca as such because the engines are so close
to the centerline and although they have two engines, they
don't meet the FAA requirement for issuing an unrestricted
multiengine certificate.

I don't think Vmc is the issue, just the failure to be able
to demonstrate handling asymetric thrust. There are some
regular twins where the Vmc is pretty much aligned with the
stall speed.

Good point. Probably the CFI community that killed it more than
anything. NOT a trainer. In fact laughed at.

On 2006-03-02, Ron Natalie wrote:
All Cessna's ending in 7 are odd birds.

I wouldn't say the Cardinal is odd.

--
Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net

Well, 140 is definitely even.

"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
On 2006-03-02, Ron Natalie wrote:
All Cessna's ending in 7 are odd birds.

I wouldn't say the Cardinal is odd.

--
Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net