Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Single Engine Endurance!  
User currently offlineVinwow From Germany, joined Mar 2000, 21 posts, RR: 0
Posted (13 years 4 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2867 times:

A funny situation.
Let's get some guidelines.
a) For turbine engines, sfc (specific fuel consumption : kg of fuel to produce a unit of thrust or power) increases as the rating of the engine is reduced.
b) endurance mission require least fuel flow per unit of power used.
c) Typical Loiter missions need low power (30% of max power on the aircarft?)

From this point of view, is it practical (!) to use only one engine in a twin engine turboprop aircraft. Let's say 400 HP is required for the mission to be flown which may mean 30%-40% rating operation. This puts the engines in high fuel consumption operation.
On the other hand, if one engine is kept idle, and the other used at a higher rating (70% ?) to produce 400HP and improving the sfc, a significant gain can be made on the fuel flow rate. This should increase the endurance time.
Of course, rudder and ailerons need to be deflected to take care of the adverse yawing moment created due to asymmetric thrust. They will produce some drag which will reduce the fule flow rate gains to some extent.
Your comments on this type of operation are most welcome !

5 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineBen88 From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 1093 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (13 years 4 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2855 times:

That wouldn't work. The drag caused by the rudder would negate any fuel savings you would get from running with one engine idle. Also, what if you have a failure on the engine that is running full power?

User currently offlineJetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 4 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2786 times:

Actually, it does work; but there are other issues that must be dealt with. Shutting down engines to increase range and endurance, while not a wide-spread practice, is commonly used on some aircraft - for example the US Navy's P-3. I'm sure you've all seen pictures of the airplane in the "patrol mode" with the two outboard engines (#1 & #4) shutdown and feathered.

I remember from back in my airline days that the specific range of the B727 was greater on 2 engines than it was on 3, in other words, it could fly further on 2 engines. Granted, there could possibly be some maintenance issues to address if you tried this at home boys and girls - having all those engine components windmilling without normal oil pressure for extended periods of time would not be a good thing.

I would assume that the same principle would hold true for most turbine powered transport category aircraft regardless of the number of engines.

I know that for the Gulfstream G100 and G200 aircraft, the loss of an engine results in no loss of range, only in true airspeed and altitude capability. This makes oceanic crossings much safer by eliminating the "wet footprint" that one had to deal with in some aircraft in the past. Now, the main endurance issue that operators of twin-engine bizjets must contend with in the event of certain failures is oxygen capacity. "In the unlikely event of the loss of cabin pressure" it's the amount of O2 that you have on board that becomes the limiting factor, not fuel.


User currently offline411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (13 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 2766 times:

DanAir, the now defunct British airline, at one time proposed to the UK ARB, (now CAA) to be able to shut down one engine (in cruise) of their DeHavilland Comets, in order to save fuel (the Comet being very much overpowered)...this suggestion was politely declined.

IE; not possible or allowed with civil types. End of story.
With military types...up to the service concerned.

User currently offlineVinwow From Germany, joined Mar 2000, 21 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (13 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2661 times:

Thank you all for responding !

User currently offlineCx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6811 posts, RR: 55
Reply 5, posted (13 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2617 times:

At low level, the 777 burns less on one engine. In an extreme fuel critical state, such as a fuel leak, it would be an idea to bring one back to idle and cruise along like that, but it really would be a last ditch effort, before...well, ditching.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Single Engine Endurance!
No username? Sign up now!

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!
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

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

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Single Engine Procedures For Commuter Aircraft posted Sun Sep 17 2006 22:05:36 by AdamWright
Single Engine IFR Trainer posted Sun Sep 3 2006 22:11:22 by KingAirMan
Tri-jets Single Engine Capability posted Wed Jun 7 2006 18:03:16 by PolymerPlane
Single Engine Ceiling For A333/a332 posted Fri Mar 17 2006 19:47:22 by AirA380
Single Engine Turboprop "Ratings" posted Wed Sep 21 2005 01:34:56 by Corey07850
Flying A Single Engine Prop In Winter posted Tue Aug 2 2005 18:41:06 by Bruce
Odd Single Engine Light Aircraft posted Sat Mar 19 2005 02:05:50 by FlyMKG
Single Engine Acft East Coast To Bermuda posted Tue Feb 1 2005 21:00:03 by 762er
Single Engine Cessna Retracts, Gear Question posted Mon Jul 26 2004 04:07:16 by Baw2198
Single Engine Turboprops posted Tue Jul 6 2004 07:38:02 by 7574EVER

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format