Skycatcher's End

[3Dreaming]

CTLSi,

While I don't think this would apply to the CT there have been many airplanes land only to have the propeller stop spinning on roll out because the engine has quit. Most aircraft have to be slowed to almost stall speed for the propeller to stop spinning if the engine is off. My question for you is if the propeller is spinning, but the engine is off would you need right rudder.

In the case of you CT on approach idling at 2100 the RPM is being driven by the airflow, otherwise it would not slow down when you are on the ground.

[Nomore767]

Regarding the issue of left/right rudder on approach and landing I wonder if there is a difference between airplanes with nose wheel steering and those that have a free castering nose wheel?

With nose wheel steering the nosewheel would turn as the rudder is deflected. You can see this on some pilots' videos when the camera is mounted under the fuselage. As the pilot moves the rudder the nose wheel follows it, not much but is it enough to aerodynamically affect the heading? If the nosewheel isn't straight on landing then the airplane might initially turn in the direction the rudder is deflection until a correction is applied. This would be different if the nose wheel is held off longer.

From memory the nosewheel steering in the Remos I flew was more effective, to me, than that in the CTLS. Both used rudder to steer but had a brake handle to slow the airplane.

In a crosswind landing, say from the right, with the right wing lowered into wind the rudder would be deflected left to maintain the runway centerline. On touchdown would this be enough to initially cause the plane to turn to the left until the rudder is straightened and right aileron increased into wind?

In many flight reviews of LSAs the writer often notes the preference to have the stick in their right hand and throttle in their left. Indeed some actually prefer to fly from the right seat ..unless..like the Remos and some Tecnam...there is an additional throttle on the left so the pilot can elect to change hands, perhaps for taxi.
I'm wondering if this arrangement causes the pilot to 'bias' control input just enough in an LSA, which are more sensitive, to cause it to be slightly off centerline on approach and landing.

Cheers, Howard

[Merlinspop]

My question for you is if the propeller is spinning, but the engine is off would you need right rudder. In the case of you CT on approach idling at 2100 the RPM is being driven by the airflow, otherwise it would not slow down when you are on the ground.

Might be a moot question; my understanding is that with geared drives, when the engine stops, the propeller can't/won't windmill.



[edited because I initially trimmed too much of the quoted post]

[drseti]

Correct, Bruce. There's a slipper clutch to keep the prop from stopping instantly, but that only gives you 30 degrees of additional prop flange movement when the crankshaft stops spinning.

[3Dreaming]

In the case of you CT on approach idling at 2100 the RPM is being driven by the airflow, otherwise it would not slow down when you are on the ground.

Might be a moot question; my understanding is that with geared drives, when the engine stops, the propeller can't/won't windmill.

I have not shut a Rotax down in flight, so I don't know if it will windmill or not. What I do know is that with the engine at idle it will indicate about 400-500 RPM higher on approach than sitting on the ground. This would be close to the 200 RPM increase you see for a direct drive engine.

[drseti]

Guys and gals, we've drifted pretty far off this thread's topic of "Skycatcher has no future." If someone wants to start a "right rudder on landing?" thread, I will be happy to move the relevant posts there.

[3Dreaming]

Correct, Bruce. There's a slipper clutch to keep the prop from stopping instantly, but that only gives you 30 degrees of additional prop flange movement when the crankshaft stops spinning.

The question is does the airflow accross the prop have enough force to keep the crankshaft turning? You do have a mechanical disadvantage as compared to a direct drive engine.

[CharlieTango]

Regarding the issue of left/right rudder on approach and landing I wonder if there is a difference between airplanes with nose wheel steering and those that have a free castering nose wheel?

With nose wheel steering the nosewheel would turn as the rudder is deflected. You can see this on some pilots' videos when the camera is mounted under the fuselage. As the pilot moves the rudder the nose wheel follows it, not much but is it enough to aerodynamically affect the heading? If the nosewheel isn't straight on landing then the airplane might initially turn in the direction the rudder is deflection until a correction is applied. This would be different if the nose wheel is held off longer.

From memory the nosewheel steering in the Remos I flew was more effective, to me, than that in the CTLS. Both used rudder to steer but had a brake handle to slow the airplane.

In a crosswind landing, say from the right, with the right wing lowered into wind the rudder would be deflected left to maintain the runway centerline. On touchdown would this be enough to initially cause the plane to turn to the left until the rudder is straightened and right aileron increased into wind?

In many flight reviews of LSAs the writer often notes the preference to have the stick in their right hand and throttle in their left. Indeed some actually prefer to fly from the right seat ..unless..like the Remos and some Tecnam...there is an additional throttle on the left so the pilot can elect to change hands, perhaps for taxi.
I'm wondering if this arrangement causes the pilot to 'bias' control input just enough in an LSA, which are more sensitive, to cause it to be slightly off centerline on approach and landing.

Cheers, Howard

Howard,

I think you are exactly right, I keep suggesting the same thing.

[CharlieTango]

Correct, Bruce. There's a slipper clutch to keep the prop from stopping instantly, but that only gives you 30 degrees of additional prop flange movement when the crankshaft stops spinning.

The question is does the airflow accross the prop have enough force to keep the crankshaft turning? You do have a mechanical disadvantage as compared to a direct drive engine.

The Rotax high compression ratio would play a part.

[Merlinspop]

Back to the topic of the thread...

My guess is that the Skycatcher will still be supported by Cessna, at least the airframe, for some relatively short period of time. Then, OEM parts will become overly expensive and trickle to a halt. Which is not necessarily a problem, provided owners convert to E-LSA, since the airframe is made out of good old aluminum (that archaic, dinosaur-like material that no good, modern airplane could possibly be made of) fabricating parts would be relatively simple for any moderately skilled craftsman.

I doubt that Cessna would sell the type certificate to anyone (much the way Piper has refused to sell any of the Cub TCs).

[3Dreaming]

Back to the topic of the thread...

My guess is that the Skycatcher will still be supported by Cessna, at least the airframe, for some relatively short period of time. Then, OEM parts will become overly expensive and trickle to a halt. Which is not necessarily a problem, provided owners convert to E-LSA, since the airframe is made out of good old aluminum (that archaic, dinosaur-like material that no good, modern airplane could possibly be made of) fabricating parts would be relatively simple for any moderately skilled craftsman.

I doubt that Cessna would sell the type certificate to anyone (much the way Piper has refused to sell any of the Cub TCs).

It is a light sport, it wasn't built under a type certificate.

[MrMorden]

You have to stop giving advice on how to fly when it is backwards. Right rudder on landings is backwards, most of us trim for left rudder on approach to land and most of us do not land at full power.

This from the guy that thinks the CT has a flaperon...care to tell the crowd about it?

CTs do have flaperons and do not require right rudder to land. They may require right rudder to correct for the pilot landing with the nose pulled to the left.

This reminds me of a story a friend once told me...

He was working for a company that required him to travel with some real low-brow grease monkey types. One of the grease monkeys looked at their airplane tickets, and the conversation went like this:

Grease Monkey: "This ticket must be wrong...how can we take off at nine thirty, AND land at nine thirty?!?"

Friend: "It's because of the time zones."

Grease Monkey: "Sure...'time zones', haha...this ain't no Star Trek, buddy."

Friend:

[KSCessnaDriver]

I have not shut a Rotax down in flight, so I don't know if it will windmill or not. What I do know is that with the engine at idle it will indicate about 400-500 RPM higher on approach than sitting on the ground. This would be close to the 200 RPM increase you see for a direct drive engine.

I have shut a 912 down in flight and no, it did not windmill (granted we were only doing 30 knots). I doubt it will windmill at all.

[Merlinspop]

It is a light sport, it wasn't built under a type certificate.

True enough, but there IS a set analogous documentation, drawings, copyrights, perhaps even a patent for that joy/yoke thing. All that "stuff" that makes a Skycatcher a Skycatcher.

[3Dreaming]

It is a light sport, it wasn't built under a type certificate.

True enough, but there IS a set analogous documentation, drawings, copyrights, perhaps even a patent for that joy/yoke thing. All that "stuff" that makes a Skycatcher a Skycatcher.

Taylorcraft had a a joy/yoke thingy back in 1940 as an option. I had one for my old airplane, but it was not a joy to fly with it.