C310 down at KSNA

Kritchlow said:
And there is some validity to that school of thought imo.
For one thing, in the king air vs piston twins, the KA has two separate columns of engine gauges vs one gauge with two needles. That makes a world of difference when identifying the failed engine.
Click to expand...
Also there is no manifold pressure, so you wouldn't be fooled by it rising or not going to zero, or close to it.
 
I saved this thread in case I decide to renew my multi-engine currency.
 
Kritchlow said:
While that's true about looking at gauges in certain airplains, I have yet to see a rudder bias system that can out yaw a failed engine, feathered or not.
Click to expand...

Kritchlow said:
Okay, but can't really compare a nearly centerline thrust Hawker to a C310 or King Air.
Click to expand...

Just mentioning for fun for folks reading along about the "different techniques for different aircraft"...

777 puts in 90% of the rudder necessary for an engine failure after the weight on wheels switch shows the aircraft off the ground. FAA was concerned that primacy and what-not, pilot would
always want to put in some rudder pressure out of many years of habit.

Turns out it's true, but it's also not too hard to learn not to. Aircraft was fully capable of doing 100% of the work and FAA balked a little at that during certification.

787 now puts in 100%. FAA got over it. :)

In 777 pushing a little is good. Pushing harder adds more rudder than needed.

In 787, any foot pressure adds more rudder than needed.

Anyone used to flying twins where rudder pedal pressure is mandatory with an engine failure tends to get surprised by this in the sim. Or so I'm told.

A friend told me this and joked that the smartest thing one can learn to do in the 78 is as soon as the aircraft comes off the ground, put your feet on the floor, so years of pushing rudder pedals won't kick in after that. :)

I forget what clicks off on the overhead panel but you can hear it click when the weight on wheels switch deactivates and that's your cue to not push on the pedals anymore if an engine goes bye bye after that.

Other examples out there, of course. Like the others mentioned above, but I just like these two contrasts from Boeing. 777 was capable of being programmed to do it all but the human trust and training factors made someone say "nah, make them push a little". By the time 787 came around nobody cared. Let the automation do its thing and any pressure adds or subtracts from whatever the airplane is already doing for you.

Interesting study in human factors and how decisions get made when things change via disruptive tech.
 
But in the sim, the 'TAC' is failed about half the time with engine failures, so one still needs to be thinking rudder.
 
denverpilot said:
I forget what clicks off on the overhead panel but you can hear it click when the weight on wheels switch deactivates and that's your cue to not push on the pedals anymore if an engine goes bye bye after that.
Click to expand...
That is the Rejected Take-Off feature of the Autobrake system.

There are some engine failure scenarios in which the automatic rudder inputs do not happen. So one must always be prepared to apply a boot full of rudder in case the automatic feature goes to lunch that day.

I always just do what it takes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top