Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Allison 501-D/T56, Top Intake FOD Hazard?  
User currently offlineNorthwest727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 491 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4568 times:

Just curious as to why on some aircraft, the Allison 501-D//T56 was mounted on the top of the nacelle vs. the bottom on others. The two that come to mind are the Lockheed L-188/P-3 and the Convair 580, vs. a C-130. I've noticed on other turboprop aircraft (with engines such as the PWC PT-6 and PW120), the intake is on the bottom. Near the rear of the intake duct, is a bypass door that allows FOD (ice, snow, junk off the ramp, etc) to "fall out" and thus not get sucked into the engine where it can cause damage.

I'm just curious as to why the engine intake was on the top of these aircraft despite said advantages of a bottom intake.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Udo K. Haafke


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alastair T. Gardiner - WorldAirImages



[Edited 2010-10-22 10:52:19]

9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3521 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4527 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The 130 had plenty of room for the exhaust duct underneath the wing... the Electra, P-3, and 580 did not due to the MLG being in the way.


Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25300 posts, RR: 22
Reply 2, posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4508 times:

Propeller clearance must have been a major factor.

User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3521 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4478 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The C-2 also uses the T-56 but runs the exhaust duct underneath wing along with the MLG...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael Priesch - Spotterteam Graz



probably not the best configuration for a short or medium range airliner with a low wing and built in airstair...



Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (3 years 10 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4465 times:

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 2):
Propeller clearance must have been a major factor.

It certainly was with the Electra.
I've flown the Electra for about 600 hours, no FOD that I can remember a problem with, personally.


User currently offlinebroke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4218 times:

Occasionally the inlet would become blocked on a L-188 by a sheet of plastic while the engine was running. This would require changing the engine because the turbulent airflow would result in first stage compressor blade fatigue failures. To let the engine continue in service will eventually result in messy failure, usually sooner than later.

User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6381 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4183 times:

Quoting Northwest727 (Thread starter):
Near the rear of the intake duct, is a bypass door that allows FOD (ice, snow, junk off the ramp, etc) to "fall out" and thus not get sucked into the engine where it can cause damage.

As I recall, this feature requires something pretty unique to the P&W designs, namely, a flow reversal   Technically, the PT6 is mounted "Backwards" compared with most other turboprop engines, so the intake air comes in the engine's "arse" so to speak (and my apologies to the Brits for stealing your particular dialect). This is also the reason for the usual dual exhaust ducts in a PT6 installation: the flow is split since you can't just pipe it straight out the back.

If you walk up to a turbine Aero Commander 690, for example, and look up its (smile-shaped) intake duct, you can see the compressor blades of the Garrett TPE-331 as I recall  



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlinevzlet From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 835 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4082 times:

Quoting Northwest727 (Thread starter):
Near the rear of the intake duct, is a bypass door that allows FOD (ice, snow, junk off the ramp, etc) to "fall out"

I'm not positive you're still refering to T56s here, but if so, it's my understanding that that door (the one open on the #3 nacelle in the below photo) is for an oil cooler.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Carlisle




"That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
User currently offlineNorthwest727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 491 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3876 times:

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 6):
As I recall, this feature requires something pretty unique to the P&W designs, namely, a flow reversal Technically, the PT6 is mounted "Backwards" compared with most other turboprop engines, so the intake air comes in the engine's "arse" so to speak (and my apologies to the Brits for stealing your particular dialect). This is also the reason for the usual dual exhaust ducts in a PT6 installation: the flow is split since you can't just pipe it straight out the back.

I know about the flow reversal with the PT-6, but the PW120 is a straight-through kind of turboprop. As I recall from doing Dash 8 ground school once, the doors should be left open, despite that they cause a marginal loss in power.

Quoting vzlet (Reply 7):
I'm not positive you're still refering to T56s here, but if so, it's my understanding that that door (the one open on the #3 nacelle in the below photo) is for an oil cooler.

I was referring to the T56; I thought that opening on the bottom was this bypass door...I guess not.


User currently offlineAAR90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3474 posts, RR: 46
Reply 9, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3865 times:

Quoting Northwest727 (Thread starter):
Near the rear of the intake duct, is a bypass door that allows FOD (ice, snow, junk off the ramp, etc) to "fall out" and thus not get sucked into the engine where it can cause damage.

That is an oil cooler exhaust door.

Quoting Northwest727 (Thread starter):
I'm just curious as to why the engine intake was on the top of these aircraft despite said advantages of a bottom intake.

Different designs of the nacelle, not the engine itself. In your two photos you have two different nacelle designs due to one having the MLG enclosed within the nacelle and one that does not.

The first photo is of a plane with dual wheel MLG which must fit inside the nacelle. Move the intake (it is a simple S-curve) to the top of the nacelle provides more room on the underside to store that dual wheel with minimal drag increase. This is also a low-wing design so having the intake on the top of the nacelle helps keep the overall plane design lower to the ground. The second photo is of a plane with no storage requirements and a high wing mount location so the intake can be anywhere and since the nacelle is already "hung" below the wing, putting the intake there smooths out the upper wing surface.

The C-2 photo shows a plane with a single-wheel MLG on a high-wing mount design. The single-wheel does not take up much space (rotates 90 degrees) and the intake S-curve easily fits in front of the wheel well without changing the frontal area of the nacelle.

Bottom line is that it all depends upon what the plane designer is trying to accomplish. The large intake is for air to the engine and is a simple S-curve with the engine mostly in-line with the propeller [not quite, but pretty close]. That gives airplane designers plenty of flexibility in how they design the nacelles.

Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 3):
probably not the best configuration for a short or medium range airliner with a low wing and built in airstair...

The C-2 was a modification to the E-2 design and was never designed for "transits." The "Hummer" was designed to place the radar in a position and loiter for long periods of time. The C-2 replaced the C-1 (much smaller piston engine plane) as the Carrier On-board Delivery (COD) plane. Being able to get on/off a ship being much more important than transit speeds.   

Quoting Northwest727 (Reply 8):
I was referring to the T56; I thought that opening on the bottom was this bypass door...I guess not.

Oil cooler exhaust door --note that it is always located near the smaller oil cooler intake. The T-56 exhausts bleed air out the oil cooler exhaust in order to draw cooling air into the oil cooler during ground operations. The bleed air cuts off during flight and the oil cooler exhaust door (normally) closes automatically.

AAR90
ex-AirPac E2/C2 Evaluator



*NO CARRIER* -- A Naval Aviator's worst nightmare!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Allison 501-D/T56, Top Intake FOD Hazard?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Super 727 Engine #2 Intake posted Tue Mar 9 2010 14:11:20 by TupolevTu154
Intake On The Side Of DC-8s Noses? posted Mon Mar 1 2010 12:31:20 by 747400sp
Calculating Top Of Descent (TOD) posted Sun Dec 20 2009 21:19:15 by Wardialer
What Determines Top Of Descent? posted Mon Dec 7 2009 05:52:08 by Jgarrido
What's That On Top Of JAL 744 Fuselage? posted Sun Nov 1 2009 14:18:48 by RIX
MD 80 Top Windows posted Fri Sep 25 2009 09:09:44 by Jtamu97
Installing TV/Internet "Hump" On Top Of Fuselage? posted Thu Feb 26 2009 10:27:18 by Hatbutton
Why No Extra "cockpit" Windows On The Top Of A-380 posted Tue May 27 2008 04:10:37 by L1011CPH
TU-154 Engine Intake Shape posted Mon Jan 7 2008 13:49:29 by RussianJet
The Impact Of FOD - Concorde Story posted Sat Dec 22 2007 05:33:30 by HAWK21M

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format