Mr Spaceman From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 2780 posts, RR: 15 Posted (11 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3554 times:
I have a few questions about the De Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter.
Would I be correct in assuming that the throttles are located on the overhead panel because there's no room at the traditional location (lower center area of the instrument panel), thanks to the V shape design of the control columns?
Does it make any difference to the pilots that the throttles are overhead? By this I mean do pilots like this overhead set-up better or worse or just the same as other twins. (hopefully someone out there has flown a Twin Otter).
Twotterwrench From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (11 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3472 times:
I am not sure why the power levers were originally put overhead, but I do know that it works great that way. DeHaviland likes to use that space...ie.. the Beaver has trim controls up there, so does the Otter. The Twotter has P/L's prop and fuel controls as well as flap controls overhead. Once you get used to it, it feels really natural. You don't have to lean forward to reach the controls, they are literally right at your fingertips. Also, when two pilots are used, one has hands on the p/l's and the flying pilot on the controls, you have a lot less twister action going on. Hope this helps...
T prop From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 996 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (11 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3439 times:
I would guess for simplicity. Since it's a high wing the cable runs just go straight back from the quadrant and turn out to the wings.
If they were mounted on a traditionaly they would most likely go under the floor then have to go up to the wings. Not to mention the control column set up would have to be different and more complicated if the engine controls were there.
I used to get a kick watching our long time Twin Otter pilots transitioning onto the Dash 8 years ago. While they were new on the 8's, you could still see them reaching up for the thottles every now and then.
Great airplanes those Twin Otters, how I miss them.
Mac From United States of America, joined May 2001, 293 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (11 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3353 times:
If an aircraft with a high or parasol wing is equipped
with engines embedded in those wings you will most likely find the control pedestal not on the floor or on the instrument panel but up above. It makes it a whole
lot easier to run the engine control cables through the top of the flight deck through the wings and into the engines.
Aircraft I recall having the overhead engine controls:
Most all multi-engine seaplanes and flying boats since
many had high wing configurations. There were also
a number of european made multi-engine high wing aircraft and possibly they too were equipped with overhead engine controls.
Does anyone have knowledge of other aircraft with this type of overhead engine control configuation?
Mr Spaceman From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 2780 posts, RR: 15 Reply 5, posted (11 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3332 times:
Well, there does appear to be a "trend" regarding a connection between aircraft that can land on water and overhead throttle/prop/mixture controls. But, then I found photo's of Canadair CL-215's and CL-415 "water bombers". Their power controls are in the traditional location.
Regarding the idea of the power controls being located overhead because of easier engine control cable routing, that makes sense to me; however there's many multi engine aircraft with a high wing/engine configuration, with the controls on a normal throttle quadrant, such as the Dash-7 and Dash-8. Perhaps the location of these controls is a matter of the aircraft's age, and thus the technology of it's time.
Here's a few more photo's of these aircraft we're talking about.
Francoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3195 posts, RR: 10 Reply 7, posted (11 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3283 times:
Well I don't know about how comfy this setup is. It looks like it has to get painfull in the arm having to reach up there every once in a while... Unless you can hang your arm from the lever...
I agree with the explanation of the cable routing.
On high-winged twins, the cables have to rise, somewhere... Usually, designers use the bulkhead aft of the flightdeck (separation cockpit-cargo or pax cabin) to get those cables from the floor (originally from the pedestal between the pilots) up to the roof.
Now, if you look at that bulkhead on the twin otter, you'll notice it's just a wood plank... For weight, space and complexity, I guess, the Dhc-6 having a very small cabin for 19 pax.
You'll also notice there's no high pedestal between the pilots. The reason for that being (I think) that the pax must have access to the cockpit doors in case of an emergency evacuation. (or vice-versa). Again, it's very cramped in there...
And even if there was one, I don't think there is any space that would permit those cables to run up to the wings.
That's what I think is the explanation. I have never flown one, except as a passenger, but thousands of pilots have used it, and apparently had no complains!
Except when it came to be rated in a more conventional plane...
Hope it helps.
Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...