![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#261
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sylvain writes:
ok, can you tell me how to make a movie (uploadable to video.google or other similar places) from MS FS? I don't know. I've never tried it. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#262
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Recently, Mxsmanic posted:
Neil Gould writes: You only think that because you have no experience in real airplanes. No, I think that because it's true, despite any idiosyncrasy of human psychology that causes people to deny it. Many skills and experiences are not transferable to highly foreign contexts. Being able to hold a plane in level flight does not equate to being able to taxi. Being able to taxi or fly with two engines does not equate to being able to taxi or fly with one engine failing. Furthermore, even speculating on the unfamiliar scenario is fraught with risk. By the time one is rated to fly -- anything, not just multi's -- one has received training in all aspects of the operation of the plane, including engine out. Taxiing with a single engine would be part of that training. Even if one is already a multi-rated pilot, you can't just go hop into some other multi-engine plane that you haven't been checked out in and go flying. I don't know what the checkout in a Baron is, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if it is 20-25 *hours* or more of instruction. Neil |
#263
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Recently, Sylvain posted:
Neil Gould wrote: there is absolutely no basis for that notion in the real world. BTW - he *has* taxied the Baron with one engine, actually it was a Duchess. I stand corrected! Neil |
#264
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
For an already rated and current MEL pilot, a Baron checkout
should be under 5 hours, perhaps a little. But insurance coverage often will require 25-50 PIC time in that make/model. So, you hire a CFI to ride along. The 25-50 that are required often end up being 95% cruise with not no engine out practice, no systems drills, very little in the way of hand flown instrument, very little valuable training. Five hours of good instruction with some refresher every 6 months makes more sense. -- James H. Macklin ATP,CFI,A&P -- The people think the Constitution protects their rights; But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome. some support http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties. "Neil Gould" wrote in message . com... | Recently, Mxsmanic posted: | | Neil Gould writes: | | You only think that because you have no experience in real airplanes. | | No, I think that because it's true, despite any idiosyncrasy of human | psychology that causes people to deny it. Many skills and experiences | are not transferable to highly foreign contexts. Being able to hold a | plane in level flight does not equate to being able to taxi. Being | able to taxi or fly with two engines does not equate to being able to | taxi or fly with one engine failing. Furthermore, even speculating on | the unfamiliar scenario is fraught with risk. | | By the time one is rated to fly -- anything, not just multi's -- one has | received training in all aspects of the operation of the plane, including | engine out. Taxiing with a single engine would be part of that training. | Even if one is already a multi-rated pilot, you can't just go hop into | some other multi-engine plane that you haven't been checked out in and go | flying. I don't know what the checkout in a Baron is, but I wouldn't be at | all surprised if it is 20-25 *hours* or more of instruction. | | Neil | | | |
#265
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Neil Gould writes:
By the time one is rated to fly -- anything, not just multi's -- one has received training in all aspects of the operation of the plane, including engine out. Taxiing with a single engine would be part of that training. So why doesn't anyone seem to have done it? -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#266
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Jim Macklin" writes:
For an already rated and current MEL pilot, a Baron checkout should be under 5 hours, perhaps a little. But insurance coverage often will require 25-50 PIC time in that make/model. So, you hire a CFI to ride along. Do aircraft have to be insured? What coverage is usually taken? -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#267
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 19:07:51 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote: Neil Gould writes: By the time one is rated to fly -- anything, not just multi's -- one has received training in all aspects of the operation of the plane, including engine out. Taxiing with a single engine would be part of that training. So why doesn't anyone seem to have done it? In fact, they do. I often see multis taxiing in to the ramp with just one engine running. Mostly turboprops. Curious coincidence: I just saw the show on CNBC about American Airlines that they're saving a lot of fuel by taxiing on just one engine. RK Henry |
#268
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It has to do with the thrust vector and the landing gear
geometry. Light twins tend to bind on the asymmetric thrust and the short coupled landing gear. Turbo props and jets are generally longer and the engines thrust further from the nose wheel. On jet aircraft, the engines may be on the tail and they can taxi just fine on one engine. The airlines do anything to save fuel, but they do not take-off with paying passengers aboard to save fuel. They do start and taxi on one engine, but will start all engines when nearing the take-off runway so the temperatures has stabilized and the engine can be verified as running. On airplanes with 4 engines I do understand that some flights may be allowed to depart on three engines, but I have no researched the FAR 25 or 121 to see. Also the particular OPS manual for an airline would have to allow it. -- James H. Macklin ATP,CFI,A&P -- The people think the Constitution protects their rights; But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome. some support http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties. "RK Henry" wrote in message ... | On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 19:07:51 +0200, Mxsmanic | wrote: | | Neil Gould writes: | | By the time one is rated to fly -- anything, not just multi's -- one has | received training in all aspects of the operation of the plane, including | engine out. Taxiing with a single engine would be part of that training. | | So why doesn't anyone seem to have done it? | | In fact, they do. I often see multis taxiing in to the ramp with just | one engine running. Mostly turboprops. | | Curious coincidence: I just saw the show on CNBC about American | Airlines that they're saving a lot of fuel by taxiing on just one | engine. | | RK Henry |
#269
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Jim Macklin" wrote in message news:OOEZg.12886$XX2.1052@dukeread04... It has to do with the thrust vector and the landing gear geometry. Light twins tend to bind on the asymmetric thrust and the short coupled landing gear. Turbo props and jets are generally longer and the engines thrust further from the nose wheel. On jet aircraft, the engines may be on the tail and they can taxi just fine on one engine. Thank you Jim, I was going to bring this up but didn't think it was worth the effort for this thread : ( I used to taxi a Lear 35 all the time on one engine, starting the second after the batteries had a chance to re-charge. I have also taxiied a Baron on one engine but it was always on a hardsurface without any uphill incline. The distance between the thrust source and the steering source is the key. The airlines do anything to save fuel, but they do not take-off with paying passengers aboard to save fuel. They do start and taxi on one engine, but will start all engines when nearing the take-off runway so the temperatures has stabilized and the engine can be verified as running. On airplanes with 4 engines I do understand that some flights may be allowed to depart on three engines, but I have no researched the FAR 25 or 121 to see. Also the particular OPS manual for an airline would have to allow it. Boeing 727 also has procedure for two-engine take-off but usually only minimum crew to ferry it to a place it can be worked on. -- James H. Macklin ATP,CFI,A&P -- The people think the Constitution protects their rights; But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome. some support http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties. "RK Henry" wrote in message ... | On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 19:07:51 +0200, Mxsmanic | wrote: | | Neil Gould writes: | | By the time one is rated to fly -- anything, not just multi's -- one has | received training in all aspects of the operation of the plane, including | engine out. Taxiing with a single engine would be part of that training. | | So why doesn't anyone seem to have done it? | | In fact, they do. I often see multis taxiing in to the ramp with just | one engine running. Mostly turboprops. | | Curious coincidence: I just saw the show on CNBC about American | Airlines that they're saving a lot of fuel by taxiing on just one | engine. | | RK Henry |
#270
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I think that things as simple as tire pressures and surface
would make a difference. Slope or runway gradients, current wind would have a big effect. a crosswind might cancel the turning moment of a single-engine or magnify it. I've had a number of engine failures, except for one at my home airport. After landing I would coast off the runway and just call for a tow. When I had both fuel pumps on the left engine of a BE 58P fail down in Texas, I just did the same thing, landed, coasted clear and arranged for a tow to the ramp. If I had tried to taxi and had a problem, I could have been blocking a taxiway and caused a real problem to the ground controller. For those who will ask, I was returning to Wichita from Brownsville after dropping the aircraft owners off for the week. At FL240 near Corpus Christi the left engine died when I turned the boost pump off [I had been using the pumps because of hot fuel and vapor suppression on the ground] Then the engine would not start again because of zero fuel pressure. Did not attempt cross-feed from the right because of concern about possible broken fuel lines. The most difficult decision was selecting a place to land, it does take a while to come down from FL240 and I wanted a place where I could get repairs and an airline flight out. It was Mothers' Day week-end so I knew there would be no work done for a while and my wife probably wanted me home. Declared an emergency just because I wanted the priority handling and no traffic I had to follow. The shop in San Antoine repaired the pumps and I picked it up the next week. Later, back at home we ended up replacing all the pumps with new pumps. There was still too much fuel pressure variation. The airplane was an early 58P and it had many hours in service formerly in air taxi service in Europe. "Allen" wrote in message om... | | "Jim Macklin" wrote in message | news:OOEZg.12886$XX2.1052@dukeread04... | It has to do with the thrust vector and the landing gear | geometry. Light twins tend to bind on the asymmetric thrust | and the short coupled landing gear. Turbo props and jets | are generally longer and the engines thrust further from the | nose wheel. On jet aircraft, the engines may be on the tail | and they can taxi just fine on one engine. | | Thank you Jim, I was going to bring this up but didn't think it was worth | the effort for this thread : ( I used to taxi a Lear 35 all the time on | one engine, starting the second after the batteries had a chance to | re-charge. I have also taxiied a Baron on one engine but it was always on a | hardsurface without any uphill incline. The distance between the thrust | source and the steering source is the key. | | | | The airlines do anything to save fuel, but they do not | take-off with paying passengers aboard to save fuel. They | do start and taxi on one engine, but will start all engines | when nearing the take-off runway so the temperatures has | stabilized and the engine can be verified as running. On | airplanes with 4 engines I do understand that some flights | may be allowed to depart on three engines, but I have no | researched the FAR 25 or 121 to see. Also the particular | OPS manual for an airline would have to allow it. | | Boeing 727 also has procedure for two-engine take-off but usually only | minimum crew to ferry it to a place it can be worked on. | | | | | -- | James H. Macklin | ATP,CFI,A&P | | -- | The people think the Constitution protects their rights; | But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome. | some support | http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm | See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties. | | | "RK Henry" wrote in message | ... | | On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 19:07:51 +0200, Mxsmanic | | | wrote: | | | | Neil Gould writes: | | | | By the time one is rated to fly -- anything, not just | multi's -- one has | | received training in all aspects of the operation of | the plane, including | | engine out. Taxiing with a single engine would be part | of that training. | | | | So why doesn't anyone seem to have done it? | | | | In fact, they do. I often see multis taxiing in to the | ramp with just | | one engine running. Mostly turboprops. | | | | Curious coincidence: I just saw the show on CNBC about | American | | Airlines that they're saving a lot of fuel by taxiing on | just one | | engine. | | | | RK Henry | | | | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
Home Built Aircraft - Alternative Engines - Geo/Suzuki | OtisWinslow | Home Built | 1 | October 12th 05 02:55 PM |
Book Review: Converting Auto Engines for Experimental Aircraft , Finch | Paul | Home Built | 0 | October 18th 04 10:14 PM |
P-3C Ditches with Four Engines Out, All Survive! | Scet | Military Aviation | 6 | September 27th 04 01:09 AM |
U.S. Air Force Moves Ahead With Studies On Air-Breathing Engines | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | October 29th 03 03:31 AM |