Bu web site tanımlama bilgileri kullanmaktadır. Bu web siteyi kullanarak ve bu sitede gezinerek, bunu kabul etmiş olursunuz.
Kapat
FlightAware uçuş takibinin reklamlarla desteklendiğini biliyor muydunuz?
FlightAware.com'dan gelen reklamlara izin vererek FlightAware'in ücretsiz kalmasını sağlamamıza yardım edebilirsiniz. harika bir deneyim sunmak adına reklamlarımızı anlamlı ve öne çıkmayacak şekilde tutmak için yoğun şekilde çalışıyoruz. FlightAware'deki whitelist adsreklamları güvenilir olarak görmek hızlı ve kolaydır, veya lütfen premium hesaplarımıza geçmeyi düşünün.
Kapat
Back to Squawk list
  • 56

Spinning the P-3 Orion - Incident from 2008

eklendi
 
The P-3 did FIVE rotations in a flat spin, dropping 5500 feet, finally recovering between 50 and 200 feet AGL (above ground level), pulling a whopping 7 positive G's on the airframe after sustaining 2.4 negative G's in the spin. The rolling pullout burst 45 rivets on one wing, physically RIPPED the main spar, and bent the entire airframe... the crew could see INSIDE the fuel tanks of the wing. (www.flightglobal.com) Daha Fazlası...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


a6n6d6y
andy talty 0
they lived to change their underwear
kb9uwu
Matt Comerford 0
no joke andy, that would scare the crap out of anyone.
genethemarine
Gene spanos 0
Glad they made it.
chalet
chalet 0
I have logged all of 95 (100 minus 5) hours on a C-152 but still I have the temerity to volunteer why the experienced Navy crew did not seem to have added full power to No. 1 engine when No. 2 surged, after all the momentum of those big propellers is so great that when a C-130 takes off the only engines pushed to max power are No. 2 and 3 until the aircraft reaches I guess 100 KIA or so then Nos. 1 and 2 are pusshed to the wall. This procedure was adopted after a number of accidents when one of the outboard engines lost power the aircraft veered violently towards the dead engine. I would assume that the same procedure applies to the P-3 an otherwise wonderful workhorse of almost 50 years of faithful operation thanks to the excellent crews that fly and maintain them in spite of inadequate funding for spares.
vettdvr
James Corkern 0
In Vietnam we locked brakes for C130 short field take off max power all 4 engines, bleed air off to get more power. If I remember correct we pulled it off the ground around 95 knots and held 95 in the climb until the VVI began to fall off. Minimum control speed for 1 engine out was right at 125 knots so we knew what any failure on take off would mean. Normally surging in a herk engine was NTS system when throttle setting was low and prop driving the turbine when the fuel control would add fuel. Just pushing the throttles up a bit would stop the surging. All this is based on proper and correct maintence.
Kjoden44
Ken Oden 0
James,
My hat is off to you Herc drivers - quite an airplane and quite a mission. The P-3 had the same engine / prop issues as the Electra, that is with the NTS system. It was reliable and if any problems, just add or subtract the thrust lever to make it calm down - usually worked but not all the time. Glad to hear these Navy guys made it back. I'm indirectly involved with the P-8 program to replace the Orion, they'll like that airframe a bit better I'm sure.
Chungwi
Tom Kurtz 0
I have flown the Herc many times but never used the number 2&3 engines only short field take off. I now fly the C-17 Globemaster III. On short field T/O I use full flaps and hit the TOGA button and hold the brakes for about 30 or 40 seconds then let her go. I am airborne and climb out at 135KIAS. I have not had engine failures yet. Guess I am lucky.
Kjoden44
Ken Oden 0
Tom,
I've never heard of any C-130 crew rolling with only 2 & 3 pushed up, then pushing up the outboards in case of asymmetrical thrust. Too many variables there: when do you get full power from four engines, what is your actual runway remaining, balanced field length, etc. Nope, I think most crews push 'em up and roll with all four.
Only time I've ever done anything that was with stretch B-727. The middle engine was prone to compressor stalls if you had any kind of strong cross wind on take off. The 1 & 3 engines would be pushed to the firewall and bring #2 up to about 1.4 EPR. Then by around 60 knots you could push #2 up for full power. But of course, this was all based on a long runway.... just in case.
Chungwi
Tom Kurtz 0
Ken,

The shortest runway required for the C-17 is 3500 feet. Usually we are airborne at about 2/3 of the runway. Even with a load. Haven't had to do very many short T/O thank heaven. OIAX in Afghanistan has a short runway I have been in there twice and now scheduled to air drop a load there soon.
Chungwi
Tom Kurtz 0
Ken,
Actually the runway at OAIX is over 10,000 feet. However, that was after it was rebuilt.
Kjoden44
Ken Oden 0
Tom,
Shortest runway I ever operated from was 1,040 feet long. But we had the advantage of being able to turn that into the wind, stoke up the boilers to "all head full" and generate almost 50 knots of wind over the deck. <G> You sound like you like the C-17. Are you USAF or Guard?
Chungwi
Tom Kurtz 0
donsprl
Don Sproule 0
You damned kids with your jets and turbo-props. Why, back in the old days-------
vettdvr
James Corkern 0
Herk precision team known as the 4 horsemen flying C130A models did roll the herk but then that is another story. The herk with high power high angle of attack/slow airspeed is subject to rudder reversal due to vertical fin stall. This might cause a herk to roll if at high altitude but the recovery is power off nose down. ie if you have altitude and not in the traffic pattern.

Giriş

Hesabınız yok mu? Kişiselleştirilmiş özellikler, uçuş uyarıları ve daha fazlası için şimdi (ücretsiz) üye olun!