Kenlsa Posted February 15, 2021 Posted February 15, 2021 Same as the Skyraider. Read that an aborted approach to a carrier deck and if full go around power was applied without care, the resultant torque could get it inverted with zero space to correct. Ken 1
facthunter Posted February 15, 2021 Posted February 15, 2021 Too much power goes to your head I believe. Nev 1 2
facthunter Posted February 15, 2021 Posted February 15, 2021 Propeller "P" factor rather than engine torque is more likely to cause angst at a high AoA high power go around. Plenty of info on what it is on the web. Look it up because you will hear the term occasionally. Although it applied to all the non contra prop equipped planes it was not fully understood by many flyers of high powered planes till say about the 60's. It's assymetric effect is like having an engine out in a twin where if you are too slow you won't have enough rudder to counteract the YAW which then causes a roll. Most single engined planes don't have big rudders. Also in a wave off you probably don't have a lot of pre set rudder trim as you do in a normal take off on these planes . Nev 2
SSCBD Posted February 16, 2021 Posted February 16, 2021 Give me 50% more power on just about any aircraft specifically RAA for take off on any day - but specifically for heavy hot, high, short strips that's all I would use it for. 1
skippydiesel Posted February 16, 2021 Posted February 16, 2021 (edited) 35 minutes ago, SSCBD said: Give me 50% more power on just about any aircraft specifically RAA for take off on any day - but specifically for heavy hot, high, short strips that's all I would use it for. Assuming sufficient power (subjective) my preference has always been for a more efficient airframe and a nice wide performance envelope (being carful here) Edited February 16, 2021 by skippydiesel
kgwilson Posted February 16, 2021 Posted February 16, 2021 A bit of extra grunt is very useful when things are a bit tight or it is hot and the pressure is low or you are at high altitude and your normal climb out is not so good and there are trees ahead. I could have installed an 80 hp engine but went with 120 hp for these and other reasons. 1 up I climb out at 1500 fpm on most days but have on hot low pressure days not even made 1/2 of that although still better than a C172 on a good day. 1
facthunter Posted February 16, 2021 Posted February 16, 2021 The extra power USUALLY means extra weight that you have to carry for all the time you don't need the power. Water Meth injection did a great job on the Fokker F 27s and the RR Dart engine. It works on Pistons also. Keeps them cool and clean. Someone converted an Auster J1? at Bankstown in the 60's and it would easily exceed VNE in level flight and leapt off the ground in fine style. The FLAT engine was lighter than the Heavy Gypsy as well. Nev
planesmaker Posted February 16, 2021 Posted February 16, 2021 I believe that kitfox was heavy (over 400kg) empty, instead of spending a squillion on more power, it would of benefitted from a diet!
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now