Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
travelavnut
Topic Author
Posts: 1327
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 1:35 pm

DC3 Engine Out Performance

Mon Jun 21, 2010 2:04 pm

Hi all!

Following the unfortunate news from Berlin this week ( http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ly-evidence-of-engine-failure.html ) and the DDA DC-3 crash in the Netherlands a few years ago got me wondering about the engine out performance of the DC-3.

Like most of us know modern twins can safily continue take-off or fly "normally" after losing an engine. Is this the same for the DC3? Did they have the same certification requirements back then? I know that in the case of the DDA DC-3 the left-prop couldn´t be feathered, which made the problem a lot bigger, but still.

What happens when an DC-3 near MTOW loses an engine right after V1?
 
413X3
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:59 pm

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Mon Jun 21, 2010 5:47 pm

Was talking with a cargo pilot who flew for a small outfit. One of their planes was a DC-3 and he said on a FAA check the instructor cut the fuel on one of the engines, and the pilot flying didn't even realize it
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Mon Jun 21, 2010 6:21 pm

Quoting TravelAVNut (Thread starter):
Like most of us know modern twins can safily continue take-off or fly "normally" after losing an engine. Is this the same for the DC3? Did they have the same certification requirements back then?

I am sure that, in the DC-3 (just like a GA piston twin), a favorable outcome to an engine out situation depends upon the flight crew recognizing the problem and feathering the prop in time...wonder if that happened in this situation? I would imagine that the DC-3 is capable of single-engined climb. Was Berlin excessively hot that day? What is the field elevation at the field in question?
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13899
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Mon Jun 21, 2010 7:42 pm

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 2):
What is the field elevation at the field in question?

About 200 ft MSL.
I talked to one of our pilots, who has once been flying a DC-3 in Africa. He suspects that there was something wrong with the other engine as well, so that it didn´t deliver enough power.

Jan
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Mon Jun 21, 2010 8:29 pm

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 3):
He suspects that there was something wrong with the other engine as well, so that it didn´t deliver enough power.

I hope that there wasn't a problem with water in the fuel system    That is the usual suspect in a multi-engine piston twin when both engines have problems...and sadly, one of the most preventable problems in GA flying (when proper inspection procedures are followed by the ground and flight crews).
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 7165
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Mon Jun 21, 2010 11:56 pm

The DC-3, when equipped with the origional PW R1830 engines, is a death trap compared to modern twins when it comes to single engine failure.

"Our" DC-3 was following the Dutch accident severely limited on TOW. Max pax load got limited to 18, and with that many souls an board it can lift fuel for hardly more than one hour. That way the authorities consider it "safe".

But there is no way it can be registered as a normal airliner any longer. "Ours" is registered in the experimental category. It puts a lot of limitations on its operation. One of them is that it cannot carry ordinary paying passengers, but only members of the DC-3 support club.

Sure if Douglas wanted to have the DC-3 certified as an airliner today, then the authorities would never stop laughing.
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13899
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:05 pm

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 5):
But there is no way it can be registered as a normal airliner any longer. "Ours" is registered in the experimental category. It puts a lot of limitations on its operation. One of them is that it cannot carry ordinary paying passengers, but only members of the DC-3 support club.

One reason is that the aircraft has been designed for 27 passengers. Since there exists the possibility of carrying more than 19 passengers, if used in regular passenger service, it must fullfill ALL modern EASA regulations.
This means that it needs overwing emergency exits, a secure cockpit door, and since the door sill is a few centimeters higher than the maximum 1.20 meters, it requires an escape slide.
These, and other modifications are so expensive, that e.g. Atlantic Airways stopped using their fleet of DC-3s for passenger service.

Flying the aircraft as experimental is the only chance, and then it can´t carry paying passengers (though contributing to the expeneses, as long as the owner doesn´t make a profit, is ok).

Jan
 
travelavnut
Topic Author
Posts: 1327
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 1:35 pm

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:58 pm

But can I conclude from all the responses (thanks guys!) that there was no engine out certification requirement when the DC-3 was put in service? And can I also conclude that a DC-3 will have great difficulty in any engine-out situation, where a succesfull outcome is heavily dependant on other variables like getting a prop to feather and the weight?
 
nycbjr
Posts: 234
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:45 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Tue Jun 22, 2010 2:56 pm

The DC-(1/2) was designed with engine out in mind, did it do it well all the time? See responses above. The EASA situation is sad. But the aircraft was designed 80+ years ago!

I grew up around aviation (my dad was a base commander) but it was the 50th anniversary special in (i forget which magazine) that really exploded my interest in aviation, and I picked up every DC-3 book/mag I could find. I still have them all in a box someplace!

The design of the DC series was in response to a request from TWA to replace their trimoters, Boeing/UA has locked up Boeing 247 production and TWA needed something as they had a very high profile crash that killed Noter Dame Foot Ball coach Knute Rockne. They asked for a 3 engine, but Douglas thought they could meet the requirements with 2, and had to prove to TWA that it could remain flying even with one engine. Several tests were done to show it could do just hat. TWA loved the DC-1 asked for a few modifications (to increase seating to 14) and the DC-2 was born. It was then American that asked for more capacity and the DC-3 (DST) was designed..

I'm not sure about a requirement for engine out performance, the only change the CAB made after the TWA crash was that wood could no longer be used in and structural members.

I maybe off on some of this, I'm not an engineer, nor pilot. But I am a huge DC-3 Fan!
 
411A
Posts: 1788
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2001 10:34 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:18 pm

FAA ops.

Yes,the airplane can still be used as an airliner (normally operated under CFR135 for both cargo and passengers.
If passengers, the max seating is normally limited to 21 (down from 28 some years ago).
Also, the cabin must be equipped with all of the present day safety equipment, including floor emergency exit lighting.

Originally, the DC-3 was not certificated to CAR4b, and therefore does NOT meet the 4b performance criteria.

Systems.
Propeller feathering is accomplished with a DC powered feathering pump.
IF this feathering pump does not function properly and the propeller on the inoperative engine cannot be feathered, the airplane will NOT climb, except if empty and a very light fuel capacity.
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:48 pm

Interesting topic, probably related to a comment I made in the other thread  
Quoting TravelAVNut (Thread starter):
I know that in the case of the DDA DC-3 the left-prop couldn´t be feathered, which made the problem a lot bigger

It didn't just make the problem bigger, it made it unrecoverable.

Quoting 413X3 (Reply 1):
One of their planes was a DC-3 and he said on a FAA check the instructor cut the fuel on one of the engines, and the pilot flying didn't even realize it

Sorry but he must have been seriously drunk.
First of all nobody is going to shut down an engine in flight unless there is no other option, a throttle might be retarded during practice but nothing more than that.
Afaik with 8 years DC2 maintenance experience and about 30 flight hours it is not even possible to cut the fuel other then operating the emergency Shut-Off which will also cut the oil supply and probably cost you an engine.



Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 5):
The DC-3, when equipped with the origional PW R1830 engines

Preben, you know the original DC3 came with Wright R1820(DC2) engines  
Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 5):
"Our" DC-3 was following the Dutch accident severely limited on TOW. Max pax load got limited to 18, and with that many souls an board it can lift fuel for hardly more than one hour.

A wise decision, one that should be followed by all if you ask me.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 6):
it must fullfill ALL modern EASA regulations.
This means that it needs overwing emergency exits, a secure cockpit door, and since the door sill is a few centimeters higher than the maximum 1.20 meters, it requires an escape slide.

Yes and no.
The DDA is flying under Jar-OPS as they are an airliner(technically) but have several exemptions from the Dutch authority.
The other option in The Netherlands is to fly under the so called Historical Regulations and you end up very similar to the Danish DC3 (for members only)operations.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 6):
Flying the aircraft as experimental is the only chance, and then it can´t carry paying passengers (though contributing to the expeneses, as long as the owner doesn´t make a profit, is ok)

Afaik Experimental is for essential crew only.
Under US experimental regulations at least we can't take any pax in our Connie.



Quoting TravelAVNut (Reply 7):
where a succesfull outcome is heavily dependant on other variables like getting a prop to feather and the weight?

Well there is one little thingy not mentioned in this thread that should be well understood before a conclusion can be made.
The DC2 came with a serious design flaw.
The vertical stab and rudder were way to small and it is believed that the original Uiver entered a flat spin during cruise due to this.
In fact the aircraft was completely un-flyable for 2 man during bad weather.
Note: unlike the DC3 is the DC2 a single pilot aircraft.
http://www.wimparmentier.nl/Vliegrampen%20met%20de%20DC-2.html
http://www.nlrmuseum.nl/pdf/nb16.pdf

This was later modified and also the DC3 has a bigger surface but not by that much.
Recently we had the stabilizer removed for inspection and we could clearly see the old stabilizer outline about 25% smaller than it is today.
While sitting in the back you can feel that the aircraft makes a yaw motion during flight and if you compare the stabilizer surface with it's successor the Fokker F.27 you can see it is still missing about 50% to become a stable aircraft.
Also the DC2(and I suspect the DC3 aswell) is one of the few aircraft that can suffer from a Rudder Stall, I had never heard of this before but it really does.

So it's not only a matter of single engine but also weight(less is better), time(altitude - more is better), rudder authority(lack of), crew and aircraft responses(quick) and conditions(favorable).

DDA crash.
With 30 pax(not sure how many they had), a prop that didn't feather and the little time(altitude) they never had a fair chance.

Berlin.
As far as I can see the Crew of the Berlin Dak did an outstanding job.
I suspect they saw a landing spot and with the aircraft limitations in mind they went for it rather then trying to recover for which there was little time(given the low altitude and people on board) and might have ended in the middle of the city with all consequences.
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 7165
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Tue Jun 22, 2010 11:20 pm

Quoting Aviopic (Reply 10):
Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 5):
The DC-3, when equipped with the origional PW R1830 engines

Preben, you know the original DC3 came with Wright R1820(DC2) engines

Yup, I know that. "Our" DC-3 is a 1944 C-47 which retains its original PW R1830 engines. It was converted to airliner by SAS, then later returned to the air force and partially used as VIP plane for the royal family.

When I wrote "original engine", then it was a way to exclude planes which had been re-engined with RR Dart and such.

Quoting Aviopic (Reply 10):
DDA crash.
With 30 pax(not sure how many they had)...

My often rusty memory says 26 souls on board.
 
113312
Posts: 688
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:09 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Tue Jun 22, 2010 11:54 pm

Actually, when the DC-3 first was certified as a passenger airliner, in 1936, it was required to get off the ground with all engines running in 1000 feet and had to remain in the air with an engine shut down. Performance with all engines running and engine out is much more involved today. Gross weight limits, passenger seating configuration and many other variables are now a result of operating certificate requirements among other considerations. But you can bet that whatever country they are registered in or flown in, the requirements are not the same as an Airbus!
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Wed Jun 23, 2010 10:31 am

Quoting 113312 (Reply 12):
Actually, when the DC-3 first was certified as a passenger airliner, in 1936, it was required to get off the ground with all engines running in 1000 feet and had to remain in the air with an engine shut down.

That's probably correct for 1936 but all original specs are based upon the use of fuel with an octane number of 130 which allowed for a much higher compression ratio and thus power.
This fuel is no longer available in Europe and most likely not in the US anymore either.
All aircraft I know fly with de-rated versions for the use of 100LL which is great for a typical Cessna but not so great for a Wright and/or a P&W radial.

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 11):
Yup, I know that. "Our" DC-3 is a 1944 C-47 which retains its original PW R1830 engines.

I know, I've met your organisation and aircraft on several occasions.
 
nycbjr
Posts: 234
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:45 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Wed Jun 23, 2010 3:03 pm

Quoting Aviopic (Reply 13):
octane number of 130

Excellent point I completely forgot about..

She's still a great lady tho.. I still haven't had a chance to fly on one, any one know of any in the NYC/Tristate area that offer rides?
 
MrFord
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2001 9:03 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Wed Jun 23, 2010 4:10 pm

Quoting nycbjr (Reply 14):

She's still a great lady tho.. I still haven't had a chance to fly on one, any one know of any in the NYC/Tristate area that offer rides?

I don't know how it works, or how often hat happens, but I've seen a C-47 at the Air Museum at Farmingdale Republic Airport flying, especially around Memorial Day weekend. They do offer ride on the B-17, and I think they do the same for the DC-3.
 
timz
Posts: 6581
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 7:43 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:40 pm

Quoting Aviopic (Reply 13):
That's probably correct for 1936 but all original specs are based upon the use of fuel with an octane number of 130

100/130, you mean?
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:54 pm

Quoting timz (Reply 16):
100/130, you mean?

Not sure what the exact type used to be as I am not that old  
Think it was 115/145 though but might have been 100/130.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avgas
 
PGNCS
Posts: 2268
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 5:07 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Wed Jun 23, 2010 10:49 pm

Quoting 413X3 (Reply 1):
Was talking with a cargo pilot who flew for a small outfit. One of their planes was a DC-3 and he said on a FAA check the instructor cut the fuel on one of the engines, and the pilot flying didn't even realize it

While I certainly believe that you were told this, I can't imagine an FAA Inspector actually doing that, and if he did, I definitely don't believe that any pilot with more than an hour of multiengine time wouldn't realize it. I'm sure the DC-3 is built like a tank, but I have to call "no way" on this one.
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 3547
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Thu Jun 24, 2010 12:08 am

Quoting Aviopic (Reply 13):
All aircraft I know fly with de-rated versions for the use of 100LL which is great for a typical Cessna but not so great for a Wright and/or a P&W radial.

Heck, many of the Cessna's don't even run well on 100LL. Some will run fine on 80 octane, IIRC. The 150's/152's are probably the best example of that.

-DiamondFlyer
 
413X3
Posts: 171
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:59 pm

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:28 am

Quoting PGNCS (Reply 18):
While I certainly believe that you were told this, I can't imagine an FAA Inspector actually doing that, and if he did, I definitely don't believe that any pilot with more than an hour of multiengine time wouldn't realize it. I'm sure the DC-3 is built like a tank, but I have to call "no way" on this one.

I mis-spoke and think he just retarded the throttle on one engine, and the pilot flies single pilot freight, so he has his own way of doing things. Apparently didn't notice it until after the instructor mentioned it. Sure it could have been a lie but I don't think so
 
411A
Posts: 1788
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2001 10:34 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:24 am

Quoting Aviopic (Reply 17):
Think it was 115/145 though but might have been 100/130.

115/145 is NOT correct, it was 100/130.

In addition, 100LL is perfectly acceptable, IE: no problems whatsoever with (full) engine performance or longevity.
And yes, I have flown the DC-3 in command.
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Thu Jun 24, 2010 2:00 pm

Quoting 411A (Reply 21):
no problems whatsoever with (full) engine performance

Not quite, the price is +/- 125 BHP per engine for our R-1820's or more than 10% and no I haven't flown in command but then again I do make my hands dirty 
 
nycbjr
Posts: 234
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:45 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Thu Jun 24, 2010 4:08 pm

Quoting MrFord (Reply 15):
I don't know how it works, or how often hat happens, but I've seen a C-47 at the Air Museum at Farmingdale Republic Airport flying, especially around Memorial Day weekend. They do offer ride on the B-17, and I think they do the same for the DC-3.

Thanks for the info, I flew in Fuddy Duddy (B-17) when it used to be in Geneso NY.
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:17 pm

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 19):


Heck, many of the Cessna's don't even run well on 100LL. Some will run fine on 80 octane, IIRC. The 150's/152's are probably the best example of that.

The O-200 in the 150 definitely doesn't like extended operation on 100LL   You will get problems with lead fouling the plugs. Great use for an auto fuel STC here in the US.

The 152, on the other hand, has a higher compression version of the Lycoming O-235 (which is designed to take advantage of 100-octane fuel). Cessna introduced the 152 because the petroleum industry decided to drop 80 octane avgas (which was just old "regular" [leaded] automotive fuel that was refined to a purer standard and dyed red) in the late 1970's as leaded automotive gasoline was being phased out in the US. The industry, at the same time, stopped refining the old 100/130 (green) avgas, and introduced 100LL (1/2 the lead content as 100/130, with some synthetic anti-knock compunds, which means the lead content of of 100LL is something like 2.5 grams of Tetraethly Lead per US gallon) to be more "friendly" to the older, low compression aviation engines that were designed for 80 octane. BTW, the highest lead content that 80 octane ever had was about 0.7 grams/US gallon...so you can see why older, low compression engines have a little bit of trouble even on 100LL.
 
timz
Posts: 6581
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 7:43 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Thu Jun 24, 2010 5:27 pm

Quoting 411A (Reply 21):
100LL is perfectly acceptable

1941 Jane's says the R-1820 and R-1830 use 90 or 91 or 95 octane.

Originally 2,2,4-trimethyl pentane was defined as 100 octane; was that what later became 100/130? Was it even available for airliners circa 1936?
 
Buzz
Posts: 694
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 1999 11:44 pm

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Fri Jul 02, 2010 2:31 am

Hi Timz, Buzz here. 100 Octane was shipped to Great Britain in time for the Sept. 1940 blitz. I don't know what octane the RAF's fuel was back then, but the 100 octane was an improvement - permitted more manifold pressure - more horsepower.

That 1941 Janes all the word aircraft and engines, was that specification for the R-1820 F, or the G. Compression Ratio and supercharger differences. Higher horsepower engines.

g'day
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 6488
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Fri Jul 02, 2010 2:56 pm

Quoting nycbjr (Reply 14):
She's still a great lady tho.. I still haven't had a chance to fly on one, any one know of any in the NYC/Tristate area that offer rides?

This might be a bit of a drive for you, but the Canadian Warplane Heritage in Hamilton, Ontario offers rides in their C-47, for the price of joining the museum association. Last I checked it was about CAD 150.00.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael Fast



For the record, you can also fly in a:

Boeing Steerman
Harvard
DC-3
Beech 18
Chipmonk
Cornell
TIger Moth
PBY Canso
B-25 Mitchell
Avro Lancaster

(Yup, you can go for a ride in a Lancaster ... it ain't cheap!)

http://www.warplane.com/index.html
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Fri Jul 02, 2010 6:31 pm

Apart from 80/87, 91/96, 100/130 respectively 100LL and 115/145, there was another fuel grade, 108/135. Might have been that one?

Regards,

A342
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Fri Jul 02, 2010 8:13 pm

Quoting A342 (Reply 28):
80/87, 91/96, 100/130

My old boss at the FBO (years back) told me that 91/96 was simply a 50/50 blend of 100/130 and 80/87. The refineries didn't deliver it that way, you selected the right levers on the fuel truck, and 91/96 was delivered down the hose  

Of course, 91/96 was way before my time...but I recalled rumaging around the wreckage of a Navion Rangemaster H (which was put away in the back of the FBO's hangar) and encountering a 91/96 placard on one of the fuel tank filler necks  
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Fri Jul 02, 2010 9:31 pm

Quoting KELPkid (Reply 29):
Of course, 91/96 was way before my time

Dito. However, a Swedish company has been making an approved, unleaded 91/96 fuel for several years:

http://www.hjelmco.com/pages.asp?r_id=13395
 
timz
Posts: 6581
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 1999 7:43 am

RE: DC3 Engine Out Performance

Fri Jul 02, 2010 11:12 pm

Quoting Buzz (Reply 26):
was that specification for the R-1820 F, or the G.

Jane's lists 20 variants of R-1820-- says 91 octane for all of them.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ikolkyo, N0dak and 22 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos