Flaps up, Gear Up

[wjmiller3]

You are misinterpreting what I mean. I am saying that if you were flying along at 90 knots with a prop windmilling in a Seminole and likely many other small twins (as prop diameter would determine drag so = diameter will give about equal drag) and you are climbing at say 150 FPM if you feather the prop you will now climb at 300 FPM.

Conversely if your flying any small aircraft inside flap range speed at level flight if you leave the power settings alone, lower the flaps, and keep the speed up by pitching the nose down you will see the noted FPM descents from my previous post. On another note, the gear is approximately 500 FPM, a perfect descent for those ILS approaches, cross the FAF, drop the gear and you can fly a pretty sweet approach.

Tgray - I see what you mean, cause the tire would be almost like a sail in the RW pushing the nose around toward the dead engine. Thanks

I'm pretty sure I didn't misinterpret your specific quote, and no, I do not need a lesson in drag demo, but thanks anyway. You specifically stated you had "tested and confirmed" windmilling prop drag factor in an Arrow to be 150fpm. So it is either a typo, or you have some explaining to do how you came about this number. Cause when you pull the engine on an Arrow, it drops like a brick, not because you have a windmilling prop(which is irrelevant), but because you just lost your only engine. So, the part I was disputing was the Arrow part, not the Seminole, twins, or the "various other Cessna's". Unless those Cessna's you were talking about were singles also.

 

[tgrayson]

Cause when you pull the engine on an Arrow, it drops like a brick, not because you have a windmilling prop(which is irrelevant), but because you just lost your only engine.

The windmilling prop isn't irrelevant, because it certainly contributes to the drag in the engine-out scenario. Bringing the prop back to low RPM will reduce the resulting descent rate by some amount, but I haven't quantified it.

 

[wjmiller3]

The windmilling prop isn't irrelevant, because it certainly contributes to the drag in the engine-out scenario. Bringing the prop back to low RPM will reduce the resulting descent rate by some amount, but I haven't quantified it.

Agreed, wrong choice of words. What I meant I guess is the windmilling prop is the effect of losing the engine, you have no way to get around that, nor can you fix it. If you could feather an Arrow, its irrelevant to the outcome, cause you still dont have an engine and you are still going down. Unless you needed that few extra feet it would give you before you ran out of altitude.

 

[shdw]

I'm pretty sure I didn't misinterpret your specific quote, and no, I do not need a lesson in drag demo, but thanks anyway. You specifically stated you had "tested and confirmed" windmilling prop drag factor in an Arrow to be 150fpm. So it is either a typo, or you have some explaining to do how you came about this number. Cause when you pull the engine on an Arrow, it drops like a brick, not because you have a windmilling prop(which is irrelevant), but because you just lost your only engine. So, the part I was disputing was the Arrow part, not the Seminole, twins, or the "various other Cessna's". Unless those Cessna's you were talking about were singles also.

hahaha I should wait to have my cup of coffee in the morning before making a reply. My fault I meant the flap portion in the arrow and other single engines, prop in the seminole only.

 

[wjmiller3]

hahaha I should wait to have my cup of coffee in the morning before making a reply. My fault I meant the flap portion in the arrow and other single engines, prop in the seminole only.

Cool, on the same page now....

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

How are flaps creating a rolling moment? Unless your referring to the prop wash over one flap vs. the other, which would be stabilizing. Think about having a right engine INOP with the left engine going trying to yaw you to the right. Lower the flaps gives the left wing with the thrust a little more lift than the right causing a right rolling moment which (introduce adverse yaw) would give a left yawing moment, exactly what you are trying for in the first place and a stabilizing effect.

But we are talking about Vmc, which is with the critical engine failed. Granted, lots of light twins don't have one, but in practice, we use the left as the example for airplanes without counter rotating props.

 

[shdw]

But we are talking about Vmc, which is with the critical engine failed. Granted, lots of light twins don't have one, but in practice, we use the left as the example for airplanes without counter rotating props.

I don't see your point sorry. Regardless of which engine I used in my example the situations would all still hold true. All you do by changing the engine is add yaw from P-factor to everything I stated, I think. Is that what your getting at?