Engine failure loss up to 80%

The important thing to understand is what determines climb performance in the first place. Your rate of climb is always relative to your excess power. Excess power is the power available minus the power required.

If you can imagine a drag curve, that's the same basic shape as the power required curve.

Prop-driven aircraft have power-available curves shaped almost the mirror image of a drag curve, due to prop efficiency.

See the first attached graph.

If you cut the power available in half (remember, you're cutting it in half relative to zero, not relative to the power required) you can see the excess power (the part that determines your performance) is reduced by dramatically more than 50%, in most aircraft the reduction is more like 75-80%.

See the second graph.

Keep in mind, the most common answer to this question is that drag is increased because of control deflection to maintain aircraft controllability (eg. rudder deflection). This is a cop-out answer if you ask me, as rudder deflection at Vyse should be minimal for most aircraft. It will increase drag, but only slightly. The reason for the major decrease in performance is because of the reduction in excess power.


p.s. Sorry for the image size, I'm a noob when it comes to embedding photos. Any mod who can make this look better please feel free.
 

Attachments

  • Performance Chart.jpg
    Performance Chart.jpg
    25.4 KB · Views: 120
  • Performance Chart 2.jpg
    Performance Chart 2.jpg
    29 KB · Views: 209
If you can imagine a drag curve, that's the same basic shape as the power required curve.

Yes, it is, which is why your power required curve isn't quite correct. You show power required as a constant as the airspeed gets lower, when it really starts to increase very dramatically.
 
You're absolutely correct. The diagrams I drew up are not very realistic, but I feel they show the relationship between power reqd. and power available which was the point. You're correct.
 
Back
Top