The Swearingen-TEB incident: control issues with twins

"Corky Scott" wrote in message
...
Speaking of difficult to handle twins.

In 1939, the Martin Co. responded to a request for a high speed medium
twin engined bomber with a submission that was named the "Marauder"
and designated the 26th such commissioned design, or B-26.

Martin assigned a young aerodynamics engineer to the task of designing
the airplane.

The same guy (Ted Smith ?) who designed the Rockwell/AeroCommander series,
now called the Twin Commander.

"Corky Scott" wrote in message
...
The reason for this was due less to the robust construction of the
bomber or it's flight characteristics than to the Luftwaffe's orders
to concentrate on the heavy bombers at the expense of all other
operations. When the heavies were up, it was usually because the
weather favored visual bombing. That being the case, all other
bombers were usually also flying missions. The Luftwaffe did not have
the numbers to respond to each and every type of enemy incursion, so
they concentrated on the heavies.

So the Marauders kind of drew a bye when they flew on bombing
missions. They even got lucky with the AA artillery because most of
it was removed from the fronts to surround the cities in defense
against the heavy bomber attacks. But the missions were not a piece
of cake as any B-26 combat veteran can tell you, there was plenty
enough AAA still around to make missions harrowing.


And IIRC, the B-26 drew mostly low level attack missions which drew all
sorts of fire, most of it more accurate than the high level bombing!?!?

Corky Scott wrote:

Many of the training flights involved takeoff at max gross. At that
weight during takeoff, the loss of an engine or having the prop slip
to flat pitch was disasterous. The bomber rolled into the dead engine
virtually instantaneously and pitched into Tampa Bay, or impacted the
ground upside down. "One a day in Tampa Bay" became the bitter
refrain.

Martin provided instructions for recovery from an engine failure. The Army had
it's own standard procedure, however, and refused to make a type-specific
exception. Eventually the accident rate forced them to change to the procedure
recommended by Martin, and the accident rate went down to one typical for twins.
The Army never did like type-specific training, however, and retired all the 26s
as soon as it could.

My father worked on the Martin assembly line in Baltimore. My mother worked
there in the accounting department. She says that you wouldn't think it possible
that they could lose something the size of one of "those big flying boats" (as
she calls them), but, according to her, they did.

George Patterson
Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
Because she smells like a new truck.

"George Patterson" wrote

My father worked on the Martin assembly line in Baltimore. My mother
worked
there in the accounting department. She says that you wouldn't think it
possible
that they could lose something the size of one of "those big flying boats"
(as
she calls them), but, according to her, they did.

Nah, they didn't lose it! Someone stole it, one piece at a time, and took
it out of the plant in their lunch bucket. ;-o
--
Jim in NC

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...


On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 18:22:00 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
wrote in
t::

Any twin can be banked into the dead engine and controlled, it is only a
matter of airspeed.

At low altitude, that becomes problematic.

Airspeed and altitude are really the same thing in this arena...energy.
Low, slow and in a high drag configuration is what you don't want.


If memory serves, the Aerostar has only one hydraulic
pump and won't climb with the gear down.

Have you any idea which engine powers the hydraulic pump?


I don't remember but I think that it is mentioned in the Aerostar section of
the Used Aircraft Guide which, unfortunately, is not at hand.

Basically, as Michael points out there are conditions where any twin can
climb on one engine and conditions where they can't (this isn't really true
for Part 25 certified twins) and different airplanes have different
"weaknesses". Some have minimial power, some can't climb with the gear
down, some with gear and flaps. The reason for all this is that
manufacturers keep increasing the gross weight until performance is
marginal. MU-2 weak points are slow gear retraction, big flaps and a wide
gap between Vr and Vyse (about 50kts).

Mike
MU-2.

George Patterson writes:

wrote:
It sounds
like once the aircraft gets near that point, there isn't much you could do.

Chop power to the operating engine.

Yeah, I see why that works. I also see why people might not always
remember to do it at the right moment. Yes, loss of some more power
is *clearly* better than loss of control, when I'm calmly thinking
about it at my desk. But in the cockpit, when I've already lost half
my power and am having trouble dealing with it, I can see why people
get it wrong now and then.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 15:03:52 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
wrote:


wrote in message
roups.com...
An engine loss in a Garrett powered aircraft such as the Swearingen or
MU-2 would be quite noticeable at any power setting.

The Negative Torque Sensor (NTS) on the Garrett TPE331's will dump oil
pressure from the prop dome when the engine flames out. The spring load
on the prop will drive the prop to a high pitch, lower drag
configuration, but does not feather the prop. The pilot must manually
perform this task.

I have been told that in a MU-2 with a four bladed prop, should an
engine quit and the NTS fail, a minimun turn of 90 degress will occur
before the pilot gets the prop feathered. The NTS should be checked
every engine start and is a no go item should it not test properly.

The Searingen Metro, like th MU-2, is a handful of airplane with 2
pilots and 2 engines. One pilot and one engine? ew.......


G. Lee


It is not quite as bad as all that. NTS failures on takeoff are saveable at
least in the simulator but immediate feathering is required. The airplane
will not yaw or roll 90 deg.

I have experienced (in the simulator) NTS failures on takeoff in the
Turbo Commander (TPE-331 powered) and agree that it was saveable in
this airplane. I have also experienced uncommanded thrust reverser
deployments in Citation Bravo Simulator and found this to be at least
as much a handful as the NTS failure. Both simulators were at Flight
Safety International and were full motion machines.

Klein

Morgans wrote:

Nah, they didn't lose it! Someone stole it, one piece at a time, and took
it out of the plant in their lunch bucket. ;-o

So, somewhere out there there's an entire Martin Mars hidden away? I guess it'll
show up at Fantasy of Flight sooner or later. :-)


George Patterson
Why do men's hearts beat faster, knees get weak, throats become dry,
and they think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?
Because she smells like a new truck.

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:I4une.4992$Sl5.2242@trndny08...

snippage

"My father worked on the Martin assembly line in Baltimore."

Hence the B26's other nickname: "The Baltimore Wh*re"

;O)

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

"George Patterson" wrote

So, somewhere out there there's an entire Martin Mars hidden away? I guess
it'll
show up at Fantasy of Flight sooner or later. :-)

Right. Problem is, it will take a while longer than they originally
thought. Seems the culprit didn't think it through, quite enough.

The thieves are now having to put the parts back together. Problem is, that
it is hard to reassemble a prop from all of the 6"" x 8" x 10" chunks that
fit in the lunch boxes. That's just the prop. How about the engine case,
and tires? g

Thanks George. You're a great straight man!
--
Jim in NC