Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Would there have been a problem with the guns firing through the propeller if the guns pointed forward?
Most hydraulics are driven by pumps that are mechanically driven off the engine right?
I believe they used 5 round boxes. ????How many rounds did the YFM-1 have in the 37mm cannon?
But, however, when the fuel pumps are electrically rather than mechanically driven, the engines ARE dependent. Crazy way to design an airplane, to my way of thinking, but I'm not Larry Bell.With a relative few exceptions aircraft engines are not dependent on the electrical system.
How often does theoretical knowledge turn into flawlessly working hardware without a passel of tweaking? Pretty damn rarely, as far as I can tell.So, the problem would have been not just hypothetical/theoretical but practical knowledge to make it work with both the particular gun and aircraft installation?
As I understand it, the rationale for the turret fighters were basically that it would have the benefit of upward tilted guns used in the Great War (so named because people largely did not expect a sequel that was bigger, longer, and uncut), with the ability to also vary the exact elevation, and also rotate them around.XBe02Drvr said:Angled 12 o'clock high. Sort of like Schrage Musik.
I quoted that section because I was trying to point out the absurdity of calling it an "auxiliary" system when it affected almost everything the plane had that was essential." all electrical systems became inoperative: NO fuel pressure, NO vacuum, NO hydraulic pressure, NO gear, NO flaps and NO ENGINES."
So, I guess the electrical system runs off the battery in that case?. . . some aircraft also had electric motors that worked as backup pumps for hydraulics if the aircraft suffers engine failure.
It's pretty dumb as that sounds like you couldn't get the engine restarted if you couldn't get the fuel pumps working, and if the fuel pumps are driven by the engine, you are screeewwed...But, however, when the fuel pumps are electrically rather than mechanically driven, the engines ARE dependent. Crazy way to design an airplane, to my way of thinking, but I'm not Larry Bell.
I would figure passel's of tweaking would almost be expected when translating theory into practice. The question is how big is that passel going to be?How often does theoretical knowledge turn into flawlessly working hardware without a passel of tweaking? Pretty damn rarely, as far as I can tell.
That seems like that would be a pretty large belt. From what I remember the P-39's ammo capacity for the 37mm was around 30 rounds, and 58 for the P-63Per the manuals, the 37mm guns were clip fed. There were 22x 5-round clips per gun, so 110 rpg.
In a conventional setup you would have an engine driven fuel pump AND an electrical boost pump. Basic redundancy. However with only an engine driven pump an engine failure does NOT necessarily mean you are screwed, as inflight engine failures don't automatically result in the engine stopping rotation. It will windmill unless the prop is feathered. If the failure resulted from a fuel system valvology brain fart, fixing the issue will restore fuel flow and return power to the still windmilling engine. This happens more often than the uninformed would suspect.It's pretty dumb as that sounds like you couldn't get the engine restarted if you couldn't get the fuel pumps working, and if the fuel pumps are driven by the engine, you are screeewwed...
Not in the house please! My cats'll be climbing the kitchen range. They KILL for bacon!"Fuel system valvology brain fart"
If that doesn't deserve a bacon nothing does.
Two guys in a Twin Comanche died at my local airport from a "fuel system valvology brain fart" back in 1978. They were just descending out of the soup when I heard the engine speeds diverging as one died and the ice laden plane augered in. They hit the ground a split second before the ramp agents slammed shut the baggage door on a Twin Otter over at the airline ramp, and the two sounds were practically identical from where I stood. I still hear that sound in a dream from time to time."Fuel system valvology brain fart"
If that doesn't deserve a bacon nothing does.
So, I guess the electrical system runs off the battery in that case?
Ouch!! Why was engine ignition on the same circuit and with no backup system? Speaking of brain farts! Hello? Anybody home?Read about a mishap on Youtube. It was a P-51 subscale replica powered by a automobile V-8 engine with a conventional automobile spark ignition system. For some reason the gear did not lock down - they did not seem to know why. But the electrically powered hydraulic power pack had been modified to not shut off until the limit switches tripped, rather than pressure switches as designed. With the gear not up the hydraulic pack ran until it blew the circuit breaker and that killed the engine ignition. Deadstick time, and with a gear that was not locked down....
I haven't flown a plane with a DC generator since the T34 in the early 70s. They've all had automotive style aircraft alternators, even the oldie goldie ones that originally had generators. The worst was an early Cherokee 140 that had no generator/alternator warning system, just a poorly lit, minuscule ammeter in an awkward location at the bottom of the instrument panel. You had to tilt your head to the side and look beneath the control yoke to check it, which would raise havoc with your sense of orientation if in IMC or under the hood. Oddly enough, the CFIIs in the club seemed to prefer it for instrument lessons. I've had a prejudice against "Hershey bar" Cherokees ever since, although I have done instrument instruction in them when necessary.Depends on the aircraft and the battery capacity. Big aircraft have multiple back-up systems, whereas most smaller aircraft had/have 12-volt batteries, which don't last very long if you run systems off them, hence AC and DC gennies. Smaller aircraft don't really need big capacity electrical systems so don't always need beefy AC power, a DC gennie or an alternator (which is AC current anyway) is enough, but in event of engine failure and your engine-driven electrical source failing, you're gonna head for the ground pretty quickly at any rate, so electrical systems might light your way to the crash site.
I've had a prejudice against "Hershey bar" Cherokees ever since, although I have done instrument instruction in them when necessary.
Only in a twin with feathering props does a failed engine consistently stop turning. Fixed pitch and most constant speed props on singles will windmill when they quit unless the pilot goes to great lengths to stop them by hovering on the edge of a stall and waiting for it to wind down. Only worthwhile if you've got plenty of altitude and need to maximize your glide distance to the nth degree. Otherwise, your increased sink rate during your ultra slow flight to get your prop stopped will likely negate your improved L/D from eliminating the windmill.Same result though, batteries aren't very useful for much else once the engine stops.
If you've got a windmilling prop (or stupidly "split" the BAT/ALT rocker switch) and a dead battery and can access the main bus through a cigarette lighter or 12V power socket, you can "flash" the alternator windings from the cockpit if you have a small portable 12V battery(alarm system or motorcycle) and the appropriate plug. Once "bootstrapped" this way the alternator will keep generating as long as its rotor turns. I've spoken with long range ferry/delivery pilots who carry a rig like that with them on long flights.An advantage of a generator is that if the battery is dead and you prop the airplane to get it started, the generator will still supply power; an alternator would not do that.