DC4boy
addicted user
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2002
- Posts
- 221
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
DC-6 picture and question
- Thread starter Typhoon1244
- Start date
- Watchers 9
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
Typhoon1244
Member in Good Standing
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2002
- Posts
- 3,078
Hello,
Just a couple of weeks ago to my surprise when I came into work a DC-6 was sitting on the ramp! When they left, they took-off on three engines.
It isn't uncommon or at least in the days of radial engines for three-engine ferry flights to be conducted. My Dad flew Lockheed EC-121 "Warning Star" (Airborne Early Warning version of the Connie). He was one of a few high-time Aircraft Commanders in his squadron checked out to do three-engine ferry flights. He was always off bringing back broken airplanes.
Regards,
ex-Navy Rotorhead
Just a couple of weeks ago to my surprise when I came into work a DC-6 was sitting on the ramp! When they left, they took-off on three engines.
It isn't uncommon or at least in the days of radial engines for three-engine ferry flights to be conducted. My Dad flew Lockheed EC-121 "Warning Star" (Airborne Early Warning version of the Connie). He was one of a few high-time Aircraft Commanders in his squadron checked out to do three-engine ferry flights. He was always off bringing back broken airplanes.
Regards,
ex-Navy Rotorhead
A Squared
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 3,006
More DC-6 Trivia
I noticed that the length for the DC-6A in Vector4fun's table is incorrect, the DC-6A is the same length as the DC-6B, 106'. The difference between the two is that the A was a dedicated cargo aircraft with a stronger floor and factory cargo doors, one forward of the wing and one aft. The B was a passenger model and had no cargo doors when it left the factory. There was also a C model, which was designed for a combi configuration. It had a cargo door forward of hte wing and a passenger door aft of the wing. Alaska Airlines operated DC-6C's.
Additional ways to tell a DC-4 from a DC-6:
The DC-4 props have "toothpick" props with slender blades and rounded tips, the DC-6 prop has much wider chord blades with square tips.
The DC-6 vertical stabilizer is much taller and more rectangular than the DC-4.
The DC-4 Nacelles are noticeably shorter than the DC-6 and the DC-4 exhaust is a single large stack, while the DC-6 exhaust is 2 clusters of smaller individual stacks, and is mostly concealed by the cowling.
I noticed that the length for the DC-6A in Vector4fun's table is incorrect, the DC-6A is the same length as the DC-6B, 106'. The difference between the two is that the A was a dedicated cargo aircraft with a stronger floor and factory cargo doors, one forward of the wing and one aft. The B was a passenger model and had no cargo doors when it left the factory. There was also a C model, which was designed for a combi configuration. It had a cargo door forward of hte wing and a passenger door aft of the wing. Alaska Airlines operated DC-6C's.
Additional ways to tell a DC-4 from a DC-6:
The DC-4 props have "toothpick" props with slender blades and rounded tips, the DC-6 prop has much wider chord blades with square tips.
The DC-6 vertical stabilizer is much taller and more rectangular than the DC-4.
The DC-4 Nacelles are noticeably shorter than the DC-6 and the DC-4 exhaust is a single large stack, while the DC-6 exhaust is 2 clusters of smaller individual stacks, and is mostly concealed by the cowling.
Timebuilder
Entrepreneur
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 4,625
Maybe you guys can answer this for me...
In 1997, I was flying therough ELP, and noticed a DC-6/7 taxiing out. What I'm curious about is it had (still has?) the AA orange lightning bolt on the fuselage. Did the owner purchase the airplane directly from AA and has it been in continuous service since then? One of the people with me was an AA captain.
I recall ground control telling me it was part of a frieght operation.
Fly safe!
In 1997, I was flying therough ELP, and noticed a DC-6/7 taxiing out. What I'm curious about is it had (still has?) the AA orange lightning bolt on the fuselage. Did the owner purchase the airplane directly from AA and has it been in continuous service since then? One of the people with me was an AA captain.
I recall ground control telling me it was part of a frieght operation.
Fly safe!
Vector4fun
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2003
- Posts
- 796
Slim said:
I was working at ELP Tower back then. I don't know who owned the -6 back then, but they used to keep it over at 5T6 when idle, bring it over to ELP a couple times a week for some freight runs down into Mexico. Sure was a pretty airplane. Lots of people asked about it.
So, did you also notice the CV-990 parked out there, or see the F-100 in NM Guard colors? Lots of odd/rare airplanes passed through there...
mar
Remember this one?
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2001
- Posts
- 1,929
The dreaded 3-engine ferry
Geeze, I'm sorry I missed this thread from the beginning. I was "on the road" as the airline pilots say--except there twern't no roads where I was.
Three engine ferrys are a fact of life. I don't have much to add except that maybe someone might find the actual documentation interesting. Here's my company's chapter on the subject.
My comments italicized in brackets.
A. General
Three engine takeoffs are permitted to move the aircraft from an airport where no maintenance is possible or practical to a maintenance base with one engine and/or propeller inoperable.
B. Takeoff Restrictions
1. Obtain a 3 engine ferry permit from maintenance and make appropriate logbook entry.
2. No revenue cargo shall be on board.
3. Only the crew necessary for flight operation will be on board the aircraft.
4. Maximum gross weight must not exceed 81,000 pounds.
5. Adjust takeoff weight to meet the requirement for runway length and elevation in accordance with enroute limitations...etc...
6. The propeller of the inoperative engine must be removed or feathered prior to takeoff.
7. Close the cowl flaps on the inoperative engine (-4 degrees).
C. Prior to takeoff
Observe the following safety precautions:
1. Adjust the seat and rudder pedals so that FULL RUDDER can be applied.
2. Complete the clean up items on the engine failure checklist.
3. The propeller of the inoperative engine must be FEATHERED or REMOVED, the IGNITION OFF, and the cowl flaps FULLY CLOSED.
4. Set the trim tabs to ZERO TRIM.
5. Extend wing flaps to the 20 degree DOWN position [Yeah like we'd extend wing flaps to the 20 degree UP position...]
6. DO NOT RAISE THE NOSE WHEEL from the ground BELOW a speed of 91 KIAS [Three engine Vmc is 83 KIAS]
D. Takeoff procedure
1. After lining up with the runway, hold the brakes and perform the 30 inch check [manifold pressure] on the three operating engines. On gravel runways, perform the 30 inch check on the roll, if runway and conditions permit. Accelerate symmetrical engines to maximum wet power. [Water injection allows greater manifold pressure]
2. As soon as the airplane is rolling (approx. 9 to 17 knots) gradually accelerate the remaining engine up to take off power.
3. Maintain directional control with the nose wheel steering. As required, apply slight down elevator to obtain greater traction of the nose wheel. (With an aft CG down elevator is required throughout the takeoff run.)
4. Apply full rudder away from the inoperative engine until a speed of 61-69 knots is reached. Decrease rudder application to the amount required to hold the airplane straight.
5. After all throttles of the operative engines are set for takeoff power, apply about 1/2 aileron toward the side with two engines operating.
6. Directional control up to 61-69 knots must be maintained by the use of nose wheel steering. From this speed to the liftoff speed, directional control is maintained by a combination of nose wheel steering and displacement of the rudder and ailerons. At the liftoff speed lift the airplane off the ground cleanly and simultaneously roll the wings down about 5 degrees away from the inoperative engine. This will decrease the amount of rudder required to hold the airplane straight.
7. Caution must be excercised whenever the operating airspeed is below the two engine out VMCa airspeed of 115 knots.
8. If obstacle clearance is required, climb at V2 speed. When obstacles are cleared make the transition to enroute climb configuration and speed.
--So there you have it. Now you know how to takeoff a DC6 with three engines.
Obviously the most critical time during the entire manuever is when you're accelerating between the three-engine Vmc (83 knots) and the two-engine Vmc (115 knots).
An additional engine failure (on the same side) between these two speeds would ruin your whole day.
As for the procedure itself, it takes some teamwork and a really good briefing.
The FE (per the Book) will advance the symmetrical engines. The Capt will steer with the tiller and rudder and "feed in" the remaining engine as the rudder gains effectiveness. The FO will keep ailerons deflected into the good engines until the Capt releases the tiller and steers with the yoke. When the Capt is flying the plane with aileron and rudder and elevator he'll "give" the remaining engine to the FE and it's pretty much a three engine flight from there.
It really is no big deal *except* for that short time between 3-eng Vmc and 2-eng Vmc.
Not to mention contaminated runways...and skipping nosewheels.
Geeze, I'm sorry I missed this thread from the beginning. I was "on the road" as the airline pilots say--except there twern't no roads where I was.
Three engine ferrys are a fact of life. I don't have much to add except that maybe someone might find the actual documentation interesting. Here's my company's chapter on the subject.
My comments italicized in brackets.
A. General
Three engine takeoffs are permitted to move the aircraft from an airport where no maintenance is possible or practical to a maintenance base with one engine and/or propeller inoperable.
B. Takeoff Restrictions
1. Obtain a 3 engine ferry permit from maintenance and make appropriate logbook entry.
2. No revenue cargo shall be on board.
3. Only the crew necessary for flight operation will be on board the aircraft.
4. Maximum gross weight must not exceed 81,000 pounds.
5. Adjust takeoff weight to meet the requirement for runway length and elevation in accordance with enroute limitations...etc...
6. The propeller of the inoperative engine must be removed or feathered prior to takeoff.
7. Close the cowl flaps on the inoperative engine (-4 degrees).
C. Prior to takeoff
Observe the following safety precautions:
1. Adjust the seat and rudder pedals so that FULL RUDDER can be applied.
2. Complete the clean up items on the engine failure checklist.
3. The propeller of the inoperative engine must be FEATHERED or REMOVED, the IGNITION OFF, and the cowl flaps FULLY CLOSED.
4. Set the trim tabs to ZERO TRIM.
5. Extend wing flaps to the 20 degree DOWN position [Yeah like we'd extend wing flaps to the 20 degree UP position...]
6. DO NOT RAISE THE NOSE WHEEL from the ground BELOW a speed of 91 KIAS [Three engine Vmc is 83 KIAS]
D. Takeoff procedure
1. After lining up with the runway, hold the brakes and perform the 30 inch check [manifold pressure] on the three operating engines. On gravel runways, perform the 30 inch check on the roll, if runway and conditions permit. Accelerate symmetrical engines to maximum wet power. [Water injection allows greater manifold pressure]
2. As soon as the airplane is rolling (approx. 9 to 17 knots) gradually accelerate the remaining engine up to take off power.
3. Maintain directional control with the nose wheel steering. As required, apply slight down elevator to obtain greater traction of the nose wheel. (With an aft CG down elevator is required throughout the takeoff run.)
4. Apply full rudder away from the inoperative engine until a speed of 61-69 knots is reached. Decrease rudder application to the amount required to hold the airplane straight.
5. After all throttles of the operative engines are set for takeoff power, apply about 1/2 aileron toward the side with two engines operating.
6. Directional control up to 61-69 knots must be maintained by the use of nose wheel steering. From this speed to the liftoff speed, directional control is maintained by a combination of nose wheel steering and displacement of the rudder and ailerons. At the liftoff speed lift the airplane off the ground cleanly and simultaneously roll the wings down about 5 degrees away from the inoperative engine. This will decrease the amount of rudder required to hold the airplane straight.
7. Caution must be excercised whenever the operating airspeed is below the two engine out VMCa airspeed of 115 knots.
8. If obstacle clearance is required, climb at V2 speed. When obstacles are cleared make the transition to enroute climb configuration and speed.
--So there you have it. Now you know how to takeoff a DC6 with three engines.
Obviously the most critical time during the entire manuever is when you're accelerating between the three-engine Vmc (83 knots) and the two-engine Vmc (115 knots).
An additional engine failure (on the same side) between these two speeds would ruin your whole day.
As for the procedure itself, it takes some teamwork and a really good briefing.
The FE (per the Book) will advance the symmetrical engines. The Capt will steer with the tiller and rudder and "feed in" the remaining engine as the rudder gains effectiveness. The FO will keep ailerons deflected into the good engines until the Capt releases the tiller and steers with the yoke. When the Capt is flying the plane with aileron and rudder and elevator he'll "give" the remaining engine to the FE and it's pretty much a three engine flight from there.
It really is no big deal *except* for that short time between 3-eng Vmc and 2-eng Vmc.
Not to mention contaminated runways...and skipping nosewheels.
Typhoon1244
Member in Good Standing
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2002
- Posts
- 3,078
mar
Remember this one?
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2001
- Posts
- 1,929
You bet.
Empty. Sure. You bet.
Especially in cool dry air. Like in Alaska.
You know what the deal is about Alaska: We get away with a lot of crap up here just by virtue of the fact that our density altitude for most of the year is thousands of feet below sea level.
The DC6 flys like a normal airplane when it's empty.
Two engines, loaded, at night, over the mountains, picking up ice...my friend, that's an emergency. Dump the fuel, head for the low ground.
Empty. Sure. You bet.
Especially in cool dry air. Like in Alaska.
You know what the deal is about Alaska: We get away with a lot of crap up here just by virtue of the fact that our density altitude for most of the year is thousands of feet below sea level.
The DC6 flys like a normal airplane when it's empty.
Two engines, loaded, at night, over the mountains, picking up ice...my friend, that's an emergency. Dump the fuel, head for the low ground.
Typhoon1244
Member in Good Standing
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2002
- Posts
- 3,078
Just for comparison...I recently flew with a guy who is a KC-135R driver in his spare time. He told me that in the event of a loss of two engines on one side of that airplane, normal procedure is to pull the outboard engine on the other side to idle and climb away!
The thing must have the thrust-to-weight ratio of a Titan missile...
Must be nice...
The thing must have the thrust-to-weight ratio of a Titan missile...
Must be nice...
TonyC
Frederick's Happy Face
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2002
- Posts
- 3,050
The T-38 at one time held several time-to-climb records. When I went to UPT at Columbus, the very aircraft that set those records was on the line being used every day - - had a placard of sorts on the left side of the nose. A stenciled record of which records, what times, what days they were set. Not a bad ride for a trainer, huh?Typhoon1244 said:Just for comparison...I recently flew with a guy who is a KC-135R driver in his spare time. He told me that in the event of a loss of two engines on one side of that airplane, normal procedure is to pull the outboard engine on the other side to idle and climb away!
The thing must have the thrust-to-weight ratio of a Titan missile...
Must be nice...
Anyway - - the KC-135R outclimbs the T-38.
I've never flown the R-model, but from what I've heard, they've had to restrict the nose-high attitude that they're allowed to use in order to prevent overshooting leveloff altitudes without severely under-"G"ing it.
It's good to know there's a written procedure for a 3-engine taxi in the -6. The other -135's I've flown were expected to takeoff in wartime even with only 3 engines, but there was not a procedure prescribed to do it. I suppose that if it had ever come to that, I would have advanced the symmetric engines to takeoff power, used full rudder and nosewheel steering, and advanced the third engine as much as those controls allowed. As the rudder became more effective, I could advance the third engine to takeoff power. We didn't have any takeoff data for that kind of takeoff, so we would have just been goin' on luck. If we'd lost another engine, we'd have been looking for a place to crash that wouldn't block the takeoffs behind us.
mar
Remember this one?
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2001
- Posts
- 1,929
Must be *really* nice
I've often thought (guilty of Monday morning quarter-backing) that if the crew of Yukla 27 Heavy would've just retarded the power they may have survived.
Here's a link if you're interested:CVR transcript Boeing E-3 USAF Yukla 27 - 22 SEP 1995
I've often thought (guilty of Monday morning quarter-backing) that if the crew of Yukla 27 Heavy would've just retarded the power they may have survived.
Here's a link if you're interested:CVR transcript Boeing E-3 USAF Yukla 27 - 22 SEP 1995
TonyC
Frederick's Happy Face
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2002
- Posts
- 3,050
Re: Must be *really* nice
I don't know enough about what happened to really offer an intelligent comment about the accident, but here I am blabbin' anyway. From the transcript it sounds like they're dumping fuel - - so they're heavy enough to be concerned about that, and they're "coming back around for an emergency return." If that involved a turn towards the bad engine, your advice to retard the symmetric engine might be right on the money. I thought I remembered, though, that the airplane continued straight ahead. I had just separated from the Air Force, though, and didn't have that stream of information anymore.
Understand that the E-3 doesn't have the same engines that the R-model tanker has. While the TF-33's that they have are far superior to the turbojets on the A-model tanker, they're still nowhere as powerful as the CFM-56's. I have no idea what their weights were that fateful day, but I know I would have had a hard time thinking about retarding another engine while the stick shaker was going and with rapidly-rising terrain in the windscreen.mar said:
I don't know enough about what happened to really offer an intelligent comment about the accident, but here I am blabbin' anyway. From the transcript it sounds like they're dumping fuel - - so they're heavy enough to be concerned about that, and they're "coming back around for an emergency return." If that involved a turn towards the bad engine, your advice to retard the symmetric engine might be right on the money. I thought I remembered, though, that the airplane continued straight ahead. I had just separated from the Air Force, though, and didn't have that stream of information anymore.
mar
Remember this one?
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2001
- Posts
- 1,929
Counter-intuitive improvisation
Yup.
Retarding the power after a bird strike and subsequent stick shaker is not a natural act.
That's why I say I'm guilty of Monday Morning Quarterbacking.
I would've done exactly what they did: Called for max power.
When a DC6 suffered a wing separation after an inflight fire while attempting to land at Russian Mission, a remote Yukon village, I was guilty then too of asserting they should've just landed on the tundra.
My logic in both cases is that an off-airport landing straight ahead and under control is much better than a Vmc roll or wing separation.
But hindsight is 20/20 and I've looked at both accidents in detail and try to keep them in the front of my mind every time I commit aviation.
Fly safe.
Yup.
Retarding the power after a bird strike and subsequent stick shaker is not a natural act.
That's why I say I'm guilty of Monday Morning Quarterbacking.
I would've done exactly what they did: Called for max power.
When a DC6 suffered a wing separation after an inflight fire while attempting to land at Russian Mission, a remote Yukon village, I was guilty then too of asserting they should've just landed on the tundra.
My logic in both cases is that an off-airport landing straight ahead and under control is much better than a Vmc roll or wing separation.
But hindsight is 20/20 and I've looked at both accidents in detail and try to keep them in the front of my mind every time I commit aviation.
Fly safe.
Share this page
Latest posts
-
-
Connecting Jump Pack to EarthX Battery
- Latest: Cactus Charlie
-
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
