A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A beginner's doubt on jet engines



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 23rd 04, 06:26 AM
Ramapriya
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default A beginner's doubt on jet engines

I know that a car's engine needs to be mated to the transmission for
propulsion. This I know isn't the case with an aircraft with a jet
engine; if the engine is turned on without the brakes applied, the jet
of air leaving the engine will hurl the craft forward.

My doubt is, why does this forward motion effect not occur during
push-back, when the engines are normally turned on? Is it because at
low revs the engine would lack the punch to initiate the forward motion
of a heavy aircraft? If not, I'd imagine the push-back becomes a bit of
a tiresome affair by the time it's over...

Sorry if this is infuriatingly elementary, but I need to ask somewhere


Ramapriya


  #2  
Old December 23rd 04, 06:38 AM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

There is not enough thrust at idle to be a problem.

Mike
MU-2

"Ramapriya" wrote in message
oups.com...
I know that a car's engine needs to be mated to the transmission for
propulsion. This I know isn't the case with an aircraft with a jet
engine; if the engine is turned on without the brakes applied, the jet
of air leaving the engine will hurl the craft forward.

My doubt is, why does this forward motion effect not occur during
push-back, when the engines are normally turned on? Is it because at
low revs the engine would lack the punch to initiate the forward motion
of a heavy aircraft? If not, I'd imagine the push-back becomes a bit of
a tiresome affair by the time it's over...

Sorry if this is infuriatingly elementary, but I need to ask somewhere


Ramapriya




  #3  
Old December 23rd 04, 02:48 PM
Ron Parsons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article . net,
"Mike Rapoport" wrote:

There is not enough thrust at idle to be a problem.

Mike
MU-2

"Ramapriya" wrote in message
roups.com...
I know that a car's engine needs to be mated to the transmission for
propulsion. This I know isn't the case with an aircraft with a jet
engine; if the engine is turned on without the brakes applied, the jet
of air leaving the engine will hurl the craft forward.

My doubt is, why does this forward motion effect not occur during
push-back, when the engines are normally turned on? Is it because at
low revs the engine would lack the punch to initiate the forward motion
of a heavy aircraft? If not, I'd imagine the push-back becomes a bit of
a tiresome affair by the time it's over...

Sorry if this is infuriatingly elementary, but I need to ask somewhere


Ramapriya



I've seen numerous times on an icy ramp when it was.

--
Ron Parsons
  #4  
Old December 23rd 04, 06:46 AM
Morgans
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Ramapriya" wrote in message
oups.com...
I know that a car's engine needs to be mated to the transmission for
propulsion. This I know isn't the case with an aircraft with a jet
engine; if the engine is turned on without the brakes applied, the jet
of air leaving the engine will hurl the craft forward.

My doubt is, why does this forward motion effect not occur during
push-back, when the engines are normally turned on? Is it because at
low revs the engine would lack the punch to initiate the forward motion
of a heavy aircraft? If not, I'd imagine the push-back becomes a bit of
a tiresome affair by the time it's over...

Sorry if this is infuriatingly elementary, but I need to ask somewhere


Ramapriya


At idle, turbo fan engines, or turbo jet engines do not make a tremendous
amount of thrust. The push-back tugs are very powerful, with very low
gearing. They simply push harder than the engines are pushing.

Sometimes, the engines are not started until after push-back, or while the
push-back is taking place.

Some of the heavy metal pilots can tell you better than me, but it is my
understanding that it takes well over 50% RPM to get 50% thrust, so it
goes to follow that 10% RPM is way less than 10% thrust.

Where have you been? Kinda' lonely around here, without your constant
questions! g
--
Jim in NC


  #5  
Old December 23rd 04, 02:51 PM
Ron Parsons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Morgans" wrote:

"Ramapriya" wrote in message
roups.com...
I know that a car's engine needs to be mated to the transmission for
propulsion. This I know isn't the case with an aircraft with a jet
engine; if the engine is turned on without the brakes applied, the jet
of air leaving the engine will hurl the craft forward.

My doubt is, why does this forward motion effect not occur during
push-back, when the engines are normally turned on? Is it because at
low revs the engine would lack the punch to initiate the forward motion
of a heavy aircraft? If not, I'd imagine the push-back becomes a bit of
a tiresome affair by the time it's over...

Sorry if this is infuriatingly elementary, but I need to ask somewhere


Ramapriya


At idle, turbo fan engines, or turbo jet engines do not make a tremendous
amount of thrust. The push-back tugs are very powerful, with very low
gearing. They simply push harder than the engines are pushing.

Sometimes, the engines are not started until after push-back, or while the
push-back is taking place.

Some of the heavy metal pilots can tell you better than me, but it is my
understanding that it takes well over 50% RPM to get 50% thrust, so it
goes to follow that 10% RPM is way less than 10% thrust.

Where have you been? Kinda' lonely around here, without your constant
questions! g


Thrust and RPM do not have a linear relationship. Idle can be as high as
60%.

--
Ron Parsons
  #6  
Old December 23rd 04, 03:15 PM
Ramapriya
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi there Jim, been in the wilderness of northeastern Sudan, laying a
gas pipeline, hence the bit of silence
Returned a couple of hours ago (sneaked a visit to the A320 cockpit
until TOD), and will be returning back there in about 3 days for
another month or so, but my laptop works in the deserts too, so the Qs
might just keep comin
Cheers,
Ramapriya

PS: Don't know if they trolled me, but both the pilots today didn't
seem to know much of the CFM56's internals. Possibly they didn't want
to bother answering, but I'll have to look elsewhere to figure the
compressor's and ignition chamber's construction...

  #7  
Old December 23rd 04, 11:44 PM
BTIZ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

PS: Don't know if they trolled me, but both the pilots today didn't
seem to know much of the CFM56's internals. Possibly they didn't want
to bother answering, but I'll have to look elsewhere to figure the
compressor's and ignition chamber's construction...


too many questions.. to the wrong person or persons.. may label you a
suspected terrorist..
and why would they give information like that.. to someone they don't know..
and information that is readily available in a public library?
some one may come knocking on your door to check you out...

BT


  #8  
Old December 24th 04, 02:56 AM
G.R. Patterson III
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Ramapriya wrote:

PS: Don't know if they trolled me, but both the pilots today didn't
seem to know much of the CFM56's internals.


Perhaps they don't know that much about the internals. Ernest Gann said he never
understood why American Airlines felt it necessary that he be able to answer
detailed questions about the workings of the radial engines he flew behind. He
couldn't imagine climbing out on the wing to affect repairs in flight, though he
said "there would be times when I fervently wished it were possible."

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.
  #9  
Old December 24th 04, 01:57 AM
Michelle P
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

10% is usually about half way to light off for a turbine engine. Starter
usually cuts out around 50% and stabilize at 60-70% core speed.
Michelle

Morgans wrote:

"Ramapriya" wrote in message
roups.com...


I know that a car's engine needs to be mated to the transmission for
propulsion. This I know isn't the case with an aircraft with a jet
engine; if the engine is turned on without the brakes applied, the jet
of air leaving the engine will hurl the craft forward.

My doubt is, why does this forward motion effect not occur during
push-back, when the engines are normally turned on? Is it because at
low revs the engine would lack the punch to initiate the forward motion
of a heavy aircraft? If not, I'd imagine the push-back becomes a bit of
a tiresome affair by the time it's over...

Sorry if this is infuriatingly elementary, but I need to ask somewhere


Ramapriya




At idle, turbo fan engines, or turbo jet engines do not make a tremendous
amount of thrust. The push-back tugs are very powerful, with very low
gearing. They simply push harder than the engines are pushing.

Sometimes, the engines are not started until after push-back, or while the
push-back is taking place.

Some of the heavy metal pilots can tell you better than me, but it is my
understanding that it takes well over 50% RPM to get 50% thrust, so it
goes to follow that 10% RPM is way less than 10% thrust.

Where have you been? Kinda' lonely around here, without your constant
questions! g



  #10  
Old December 23rd 04, 07:09 AM
Jay Beckman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Ramapriya" wrote in message
oups.com...
I know that a car's engine needs to be mated to the transmission for
propulsion. This I know isn't the case with an aircraft with a jet
engine; if the engine is turned on without the brakes applied, the jet
of air leaving the engine will hurl the craft forward.

My doubt is, why does this forward motion effect not occur during
push-back, when the engines are normally turned on? Is it because at
low revs the engine would lack the punch to initiate the forward motion
of a heavy aircraft? If not, I'd imagine the push-back becomes a bit of
a tiresome affair by the time it's over...

Sorry if this is infuriatingly elementary, but I need to ask somewhere


Ramapriya



Sometimes they don't even need a tug to get away from the gate...

I've been on American Airlines MD80s that have pushed back under their own
power via their reversers.

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
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
Engines and Reliability Dylan Smith Piloting 13 June 30th 04 03:27 PM
What if the germans... Charles Gray Military Aviation 119 January 26th 04 11:20 PM
Accident Statistics: Certified vs. Non-Certified Engines Ron Wanttaja Home Built 23 January 18th 04 05:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.