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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 16:37:15 -0500, in rec.aviation.military Cub Driver
wrote: Early piston aircraft had a lot of torque generated by the engine. In a wave-off situation, the sharp increase in power would roll the aircraft slightly to port. Combined with pulling back on the stick to gain altitude, this would result in a climbing left turn. Having an island in the way when doing this could ruin your If so, then British carriers would have the island to port. Do they? Why would they? Their aircraft engines rotated in the same direction as the American's, thus generating the same port-biased torque. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Don't know much about boats but doesn't the ship crossing from the
starboard - the right - have the right of way, so it's a navigation thing? But the torque reaction is a good reason, too; I've seen Hellcats wrapped up in a tight left bank from too enthusiastic power application when the drones (and chase) were flying out of Naha in the late 50's. Walt BJ |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
William Hughes wrote:
Early piston aircraft had a lot of torque generated by the engine. In a wave-off situation, the sharp increase in power would roll the aircraft slightly to port. Combined with pulling back on the stick to gain altitude, this would result in a climbing left turn. Having an island in the way when doing this could ruin your whole day. Hence, the island was placed on the other side of the filght deck. So what does one do in an a/c which has an engine turning the opposite way?... -- -Gord. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 03:22:34 GMT, in rec.aviation.military "Gord Beaman"
) wrote: William Hughes wrote: Early piston aircraft had a lot of torque generated by the engine. In a wave-off situation, the sharp increase in power would roll the aircraft slightly to port. Combined with pulling back on the stick to gain altitude, this would result in a climbing left turn. Having an island in the way when doing this could ruin your whole day. Hence, the island was placed on the other side of the filght deck. So what does one do in an a/c which has an engine turning the opposite way?... And which aircraft would that be? AFAIK, all aircraft engines rotated the same way - clockwise from the pilot's point-of-view. At least on single-engine birds; some twins may have had counter-rotating props, but I don't think they operated from carrier decks all that much. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"William Hughes" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 03:22:34 GMT, in rec.aviation.military "Gord Beaman" ) wrote: William Hughes wrote: Early piston aircraft had a lot of torque generated by the engine. In a wave-off situation, the sharp increase in power would roll the aircraft slightly to port. Combined with pulling back on the stick to gain altitude, this would result in a climbing left turn. Having an island in the way when doing this could ruin your whole day. Hence, the island was placed on the other side of the filght deck. So what does one do in an a/c which has an engine turning the opposite way?... And which aircraft would that be? AFAIK, all aircraft engines rotated the same way - clockwise from the pilot's point-of-view. At least on single-engine birds; some twins may have had counter-rotating props, but I don't think they operated from carrier decks all that much. What, like a P-3? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
William Hughes wrote:
So what does one do in an a/c which has an engine turning the opposite way?... And which aircraft would that be? AFAIK, all aircraft engines rotated the same way - clockwise from the pilot's point-of-view. You think so?...amazing indeed...you sound most assured...I'd have felt damned uneasy if it had been me making that big bald statement to the whole world. WooHoo. -- -Gord. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"Tarver Engineering" wrote...
At least on single-engine birds; some twins may have had counter-rotating props, but I don't think they operated from carrier decks all that much. What, like a P-3? Not single-engine, not a twin, no counter-rotating props, and never operated from a carrier... So, "like" what? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Tarver Engineering" wrote in
news "William Hughes" wrote in message ... On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 03:22:34 GMT, in rec.aviation.military "Gord Beaman" ) wrote: William Hughes wrote: Early piston aircraft had a lot of torque generated by the engine. In a wave-off situation, the sharp increase in power would roll the aircraft slightly to port. Combined with pulling back on the stick to gain altitude, this would result in a climbing left turn. Having an island in the way when doing this could ruin your whole day. Hence, the island was placed on the other side of the filght deck. So what does one do in an a/c which has an engine turning the opposite way?... And which aircraft would that be? AFAIK, all aircraft engines rotated the same way - clockwise from the pilot's point-of-view. At least on single-engine birds; some twins may have had counter-rotating props, but I don't think they operated from carrier decks all that much. What, like a P-3? The P-3 doesn't have counter-rotating props, and AFAIK operates from land bases. So your point about the P-3 was? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 05:30:18 GMT, in rec.aviation.military "Gord Beaman"
) wrote: William Hughes wrote: So what does one do in an a/c which has an engine turning the opposite way?... And which aircraft would that be? AFAIK, all aircraft engines rotated the same way - clockwise from the pilot's point-of-view. You think so?...amazing indeed...you sound most assured...I'd have felt damned uneasy if it had been me making that big bald statement to the whole world. WooHoo. You are aware of the meaning of "AFAIK", are you not? If I am incorrect, you are invited to enlighten me. Post snide comments, with no correcting information, does not advance the discussion. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
In article B7Ztb.171248$9E1.880881@attbi_s52,
John R Weiss wrote: "Tarver Engineering" wrote... At least on single-engine birds; some twins may have had counter-rotating props, but I don't think they operated from carrier decks all that much. What, like a P-3? Not single-engine, not a twin, no counter-rotating props, and never operated from a carrier... So, "like" what? The De Havilland Sea Hornet was a twin with the props revolving in opposite directions and that operated from carriers (as, of course, was the Gannet , but that wasn't until *long* after the location of the island was a done deal. -- Andy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/ "Time has stopped, says the Black Lion clock and eternity has begun" (Dylan Thomas) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
B-29s & P-51s Strike Japan plus "Carrier Franklin" at Zeno's Drive-In | zeno | Home Built | 1 | October 4th 04 11:19 PM |
B-29s & P-51s Strike Japan plus "Carrier Franklin" at Zeno's Drive-In | zeno | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | October 4th 04 05:32 PM |
Can the F-14 carry six AIM-54s and land on carrier? | Matthew G. Saroff | Military Aviation | 1 | October 29th 03 08:14 PM |
C-130 Hercules on a carrier - possible ?? | Jan Gelbrich | Military Aviation | 10 | September 21st 03 04:47 PM |
launching V-1s from an aircraft carrier | Gordon | Military Aviation | 34 | July 29th 03 11:14 PM |