Cartridge starters. How did they work?
Erik Thomle Hoelsaeter
--
- Erik Thomle Hoelsæter
URL:http://www.sn.no/~thomle
-<tho...@sn.no>-
Eric Gross
>As I understand it, a start cartridge is rather like a shotgun shell without
>the shot. The exhaust gases from the detonation of the cartridge are used to
>get the engine turning in the same way as the compressed air from a start
>cart.
Essentially correct.
>I seem to recall reading somewhere about a similar system that could be used
>to turn over piston engined aircraft as well...
Actually, the system was used in some prop aircraft before it was used in jets.
BTW -- go to the video store and find an old classic movie, "The Flight Of The
Phoenix" -- features a nifty scene centered around a very important cartridge
start with limited cartridges . . . .
M Grigg
>>I seem to recall reading somewhere about a similar system that could be used
>>to turn over piston engined aircraft as well...
>
>Actually, the system was used in some prop aircraft before it was used in jets.
>
>BTW -- go to the video store and find an old classic movie, "The Flight Of The
>Phoenix" -- features a nifty scene centered around a very important cartridge
>start with limited cartridges . . . .
Good film
The RAF is in the process of retiring the Chipmunk elementary trainer
which still has 'a self-indexing percussion firing cartridge
starter,containing six cartridges,controlled by a trigger ring in the
front cockpit starboard side'
Mark
Martin/Jennifer Keenan
Erik Thomle Hoelsaeter <tho...@oslonett.no> wrote:
>How did the coffman cartridge starter system work?
>
>
like this:
A jet engine normally needs an external source of high pressure air to get
started. This gets the turbine/compressor going to the point where fuel will
lihgt and create thrust, and the process is self sustaining from there <Please
excuse gross oversimplification>.
As I understand it, a start cartridge is rather like a shotgun shell without
the shot. The exhaust gases from the detonation of the cartridge are used to
get the engine turning in the same way as the compressed air from a start
cart.
I seem to recall reading somewhere about a similar system that could be used
to turn over piston engined aircraft as well...
I think that's how it works - But I will bow at once to any expert here who
actually knows what they're talking about...
Martin
Pete Hughes
<kee...@inforamp.net> writes
>In article <4dtpc2$7...@hasle.sn.no>,
> Erik Thomle Hoelsaeter <tho...@oslonett.no> wrote:
>>How did the coffman cartridge starter system work?
>I seem to recall reading somewhere about a similar system that could be used
>to turn over piston engined aircraft as well...
>
>
such as the Chipmunk in UK military service!!
--
Pete Hughes
Jamie Sandford
>In article <4dtpc2$7...@hasle.sn.no>,
> Erik Thomle Hoelsaeter <tho...@oslonett.no> wrote:
>>How did the coffman cartridge starter system work?
>>
>>
>like this:
>
>A jet engine normally needs an external source of high pressure air to get
>started. This gets the turbine/compressor going to the point where fuel will
>lihgt and create thrust, and the process is self sustaining from there <Please
>excuse gross oversimplification>.
>
>As I understand it, a start cartridge is rather like a shotgun shell without
>the shot. The exhaust gases from the detonation of the cartridge are used to
>get the engine turning in the same way as the compressed air from a start
>cart.
>
>to turn over piston engined aircraft as well...
>
>actually knows what they're talking about...
>
>Martin
Didn't I see the piston version of this used somewhere in a movie one time? I
think the movie was about a twin engine plane that had crashed somewhere in the
desert, and the crew cut apart the plane and put it back together as a single engine
plane. (Does anyone know the name of this movie?). They started the plane with this
type of system, with the shotgun shells and such.
Jamie
Matthew Saroff
Hi,
I believe that it is "Kaufman".
It was used in the movie "Flight of the Phoenix".
It was also used in early model Hawker Typhoons. Isn't mixing shotgun
shells and AVGas neat?
--
--Matthew Saroff
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.
Check http://www.pobox.com/~msaroff, including The Bad Hair Web Page
Richard Caldwell
> Didn't I see the piston version of this used somewhere in a movie one
time? I
> think the movie was about a twin engine plane that had crashed somewhere in
the
> desert, and the crew cut apart the plane and put it back together as a
single engine
> plane. (Does anyone know the name of this movie?). They started the plane
with this
> type of system, with the shotgun shells and such.
"Flight of the Phoenix" (I forget the year)
Starring: Jimmy Stuart, Richard Attenborough, Hardy Kruger, Dan Durea, Ernest
Borgnine, George Kennedy, and some other good actors that I can't
remember. (apologies for misspelled names)
This is a classic aviation movie. The chief stunt pilot (I forget his name)
was killed while making it.
Richard
Erik Shilling
Jim Lare
> Didn't I see the piston version of this used somewhere in a movie one time? I
>think the movie was about a twin engine plane that had crashed somewhere in the
>desert, and the crew cut apart the plane and put it back together as a single engine
>plane. (Does anyone know the name of this movie?). They started the plane with this
>type of system, with the shotgun shells and such.
> Jamie
You're thinking of Flight of the Phoenix" starring Jimmy Stewart. It
was on AMC about a month ago.
Jim Lare jl...@voicenet.com
LCDR USNR ex S-3A and P-3B Tacco
===============================================
"Come along let's have some fun, seems our work is done
We'll barrel roll into the sun, just for starters!" -Jimmy Buffett
Stephen Swartz
**** SNIP ****
>
>as far as the coffman starter goes, this seems to have been the
>theory of operation. but on the other side: i can not recall hearing
>an explosion when engines where started in my early days of flying
>(mid sixties). maybe this method was only implemented on military
>engines, and only as an emergency start method.
>i do not believe that this method is suitable for jet engine starting.
>i expect that you need a long, steady supply of compressed air to get
>turbine up and spinning, and therefore you find an apu that generates
>compressed air on jet planes.
>an "explosion" only gives a short, high energy impulse, that is well
>suited to piston engines.
>
Joe:
Don't mean to "pick nits" here, but using "gunpowder" in starter
cartridges doesn't necessarily mean an "explosion" (the chemists in the
group will, I'm sure, point out that gunpowder doesn't "explode," it
just "burns very rapidly!").
**** WAR STORY ALERT! DON YOUR PROTECTIVE GEAR! ****
On the KC-135 and B-52 starter cartridges, a "jelly roll" of powder
suspended in a suppressant medium was stuffed in a rather large bell-
shaped canister (large coffee can looking kind of thing).
An electrical impulse was passed through the igniter at the center of
the gunpowder/jelly roll. The powder burned in a spiral fashion (from
the inside out) over a period of about 12 seconds (if memory serves).
Being on the alert pad during a cart-start scramble of buffs and
tankers was an aromatic experience. Protective breathing equipment was
worn by ground crews during the event. Lots of smoke. Smelled like
black powder. Cartridges didn't always go off. The good old days.
When they did go off, the cartridges provided a more than ample amount
of hot air to get the J-57's up to start speed. But you only got the
one chance, and if that didn't work, well, there was always plan B . . .
Steve
dave_sutton
burning to build high pressure gas in leiu of air to begin
rotation. The Shotgun Shell type starter is quite
different, used on piston engines, similar only in that
pyrotechnics are the motive force.
***********************************************************************
* David Sutton, Red Star Aviation * pil...@planet.net *
***********************************************************************
dave_sutton
(Also the DH Venom)
Been thinking about buying a Hunter to add to
the MiG collection. Bloody cartridges cost about
$110 EACH. Makes the MiG seem cheap to run.
It could be worse, I could have my heart set on
a Canberra, needing TWO cartridges to get
the pair of Avon's running!!
I've got cases of Venom cartridges in the hanger.
Buggers are about 3/4 of an inch longer than
the Hunter ones. Just cannot win.
Better than needing to deal with isopropyl nitrate, though.
Stephen M. Ryan
: i do not believe that this method is suitable for jet engine starting.
: i expect that you need a long, steady supply of compressed air to get
: turbine up and spinning, and therefore you find an apu that generates
: compressed air on jet planes. an "explosion" only gives a short, high
: energy impulse, that is well suited to piston engines.
I am chagrined to find out we were starting our B-52's wrong all these
years! :^)
Seriously though, the cartridges were used on many jet aircraft (usually
on alert birds, which included the F-100, B-47, B-52). The cart *looked*
like big shell, and the sound of air rushing from it when started (no
explosion, so you're right) lasted about 5-8 seconds. So it wasn't
exactly a shotgun shell, but it was not sustained source of hi-pressure
air, either. We started engines on alert with cartridges at least once
during each alert tour, which means the planes were getting cart starts at
least once a week. Seemed to work pretty well.
Regards,
Steve Ryan
Chris Valentine
(Martin/Jennifer Keenan) wrote:
> I seem to recall reading somewhere about a similar system that could be used
> to turn over piston engined aircraft as well...
Yep, there certainly were cartridge-stated engines in some WWII planes,
coz my old Dad remebers them. I think it was sometimes a sort-of emergency
option when trolley starters were unavailable. The idea was simply to put
a cylinder into compression to turn the crankshaft, exactly like turning
the prop to start it.
Chris.
Multimedia Enabling Technologies Group,
KMi, The Open University, UK
http://met.open.ac.uk/
Personal: http://met.open.ac.uk/group/cpv/chris_valentine.html
Bill Huber
>A jet engine normally needs an external source of high pressure air to get
>started. This gets the turbine/compressor going to the point where fuel will
>lihgt and create thrust, and the process is self sustaining from there <Please
>excuse gross oversimplification>.
>As I understand it, a start cartridge is rather like a shotgun shell without
>the shot. The exhaust gases from the detonation of the cartridge are used to
>get the engine turning in the same way as the compressed air from a start
>cart.
>Martin
The starter cartridges used in the B-52 and are about 6" in diameter
and about 8" long. They don't explode but burn very rapidly and the
exhaust rotates the starter turbine the same as a ground air cart or
bleed air from another engine. Once the co-pilot pushes the cartridge
switch, any engine with one installed will be at 30% rpm in about
2 or 3 seconds which is enough to allow it to be self sustaining and
spin up to idle rpm. The exhaust is dumped straight down and is about
800F so we had a warning not to be anywhere near the engine when it
started.
This is all from memory so I don't claim any details.
Bill Huber
Philip Morten
edition)
Cartridge Starters
24. Cartridge starters consist of a magazine unit connected to a starter
breech. The magazine is loaded with a number of pyrotechnic cartridges,
each of which may be indexed into the firing position either manually (by
remote mechanical means) or electrically. The cartridges are
fired electrically, or in one type, by percussion mechanically. The gas
pressure from each cartridge is converted by the starter unit into a rotary
impulse sufficient to rotate the engine two or three times at high speed,
after which the starter unit becomes automatically disengaged from the
engine.
(it then goes on to describe in a little more detail the various types)
Andrew Madison
: **** SNIP ****
: >
: >as far as the coffman starter goes, this seems to have been the
: >theory of operation. but on the other side: i can not recall hearing
: >an explosion when engines where started in my early days of flying
: >(mid sixties). maybe this method was only implemented on military
: >engines, and only as an emergency start method.
: >i do not believe that this method is suitable for jet engine starting.
: >i expect that you need a long, steady supply of compressed air to get
: >turbine up and spinning, and therefore you find an apu that generates
: >compressed air on jet planes.
: >an "explosion" only gives a short, high energy impulse, that is well
: >suited to piston engines.
: Don't mean to "pick nits" here, but using "gunpowder" in starter
: cartridges doesn't necessarily mean an "explosion" (the chemists in the
: group will, I'm sure, point out that gunpowder doesn't "explode," it
: just "burns very rapidly!").
My dad, who was an ROTC officer once served in an Artillary group, and as
low guy on the totem, used to regulary be put in charge of disposing of
leftover gunpowder. He'd detail a couple of guys to dig a pit, they'd put
the excess powder in the hole, and set fire to it. When the powder was
gone, they'd fill the hole back in. He said it "burned slow" whatever that
means. (So gunpowder's properties can be modulated to burn at whatever
speed you want it to.)
--
A.J. Madison mad...@nexen.com
Ascom Nexion
289 Great Road phone: (508) 266-2332
Acton, MA 01720-4739 FAX: (508) 266-2300
Dan Ford
Okay, let's do starters. How many kinds were there in WWII?
Shotgun shells, if that's what in fact they were. I don't understand how
they worked. Surely it's not turning the engine. Maybe a radial engine?
Wind up the crank. Weren't the Germans big on those? Was that a flywheel
to store the energy, or an actual spring?
Battery starters on American planes. But of course those were inertia
starters too. A flywheel, wasn't it--get it spinning fast and then cut it
in?
The Japaanese drove a starter truck up to the nose of the plane; there
was an engine in the truck bed and a rod extending over the cab with a
claw that engaged the prop hub. If they didn't have the truck, they spun
the prop.
- Dan
Martin/Jennifer Keenan
mad...@acton.timeplex.com (Andrew Madison) wrote:
>Stephen Swartz (swar...@pilot.msu.edu) wrote:
>My dad, who was an ROTC officer once served in an Artillary group,
and as
>low guy on the totem, used to regulary be put in charge of disposing
of
>leftover gunpowder. He'd detail a couple of guys to dig a pit,
they'd put
>the excess powder in the hole, and set fire to it. When the powder
was
>gone, they'd fill the hole back in. He said it "burned slow"
whatever that
>means. (So gunpowder's properties can be modulated to burn at
whatever
>speed you want it to.)
>
In chemical terms, gunpowder is considered a 'propellant' rather than
an 'explosive' As I understand it, the distinction is in the speed
and manner of combustion - propellants detonate more slowly, and the
actual detonation occurs as a result of combustion - thus a large
mass of gunpowder would take a certain amount of time to burn. An
explosive, on the other hand, detonates by what is known as
'brissage', where the detonation spreads much more quickly through
the entire mass of explosive by a shock wave. This produces a much
faster, sharper explosion.
This explanation derived from what I remember of an article on
explosives in a technical encyclopedia...
Martin
Dan Ford
On 23 Jan 1996, Erik Shilling wrote: (about shot gun starters in the
Curtiss P-36 with P&W radial engine):
Erik, since you also flew the P-40 with a battery-powered inertia
starter, and since the P-40 was basically just a P-36 with a
liquid-cooled Allison engine hung on front, how would you compare the two
systems?
Obviously the shotgun starter was lighter. (Even a box of 24 couldn't
have weighed as much as the inertia starter.) Which would be more
dependable in the boondocks? Did the P-36 have a battery for other
purposes or did it get its power from a magneto? Could you start a P-36
by pulling the prop, as the Japanese did when they didn't have a starter
truck?
I'm sure I'm not the only one interested in this stuff.
Regards from us all -- Dan
banjo
>
> Joerg Hermann (her...@frust.enet.dec.com) wrote:
> : i do not believe that this method is suitable for jet engine starting.
> : i expect that you need a long, steady supply of compressed air to get
> : turbine up and spinning, and therefore you find an apu that generates
> : compressed air on jet planes. an "explosion" only gives a short, high
> : energy impulse, that is well suited to piston engines.
>
> years! :^)
>
> Seriously though, the cartridges were used on many jet aircraft (usually
> on alert birds, which included the F-100, B-47, B-52). The cart *looked*
> like big shell, and the sound of air rushing from it when started (no
> explosion, so you're right) lasted about 5-8 seconds. So it wasn't
> exactly a shotgun shell, but it was not sustained source of hi-pressure
> air, either. We started engines on alert with cartridges at least once
> during each alert tour, which means the planes were getting cart starts at
> least once a week. Seemed to work pretty well.
> Regards,
> Steve Ryan
I seem to recall that the USAF Thunderbirds (could be the Blue Angels)
had to convert their F-4's to cartridge starting because when they went
overseas some bases didn't have the equipment to start the engines
normally.
Jim
Keith Wood
swar...@pilot.msu.edu (Stephen Swartz) wrote:
[**** WAR STORY ALERT! DON YOUR PROTECTIVE GEAR! ****
[
[ On the KC-135 and B-52 starter cartridges, a "jelly roll" of powder
[suspended in a suppressant medium was stuffed in a rather large bell-
[shaped canister (large coffee can looking kind of thing).
[ Being on the alert pad during a cart-start scramble of buffs and
[tankers was an aromatic experience. Protective breathing equipment was
[worn by ground crews during the event. Lots of smoke. Smelled like
[black powder. Cartridges didn't always go off. The good old days.
One of the early Cranberries (B-57) lit off with the "shotgun start" and threw
out so much smoke that it ended up under a load of foam.
--
===============================================================
Keith Wood TV-18 News anchor (Camp Verde AZ)
Host/Producer, The Computer Program, FLYING TIME!, and Infinity Focus.
Gunsite (Orange) alumnus, Team OS/2, Parrothead, N7JUZ, AZ0237 but not a
number (I'm a FREE MAN!), creator of FIRE TEAM and HERO SEEKER
===============================================================
Keith Wood
[Same-Same in the Hawker Hunter.
[(Also the DH Venom)
[
[Been thinking about buying a Hunter to add to
[the MiG collection. Bloody cartridges cost about
[$110 EACH.
[I've got cases of Venom cartridges in the hanger.
[Buggers are about 3/4 of an inch longer than
[the Hunter ones. Just cannot win.
Sounds like time for the machine shop, to me.
scha...@notis.com
In article
<Pine.OSF.3.91a.96012...@christa.unh.edu>,
<df@hopper> writes:
Dan,
I don't know about the lightness issue. Sure a case of cartridges
weighed less but what about the piston, its casing, connecting dog
and the breech mechanism? The armstrong method might be more
reliable, unless you lost the crank, but then there is the USN's
bungee cord method of pulling a prop arond fast enough to start even
a Hellcat.
Ben Schapiro
I predict that when we tire of talking about the planes we'll go on
to their sub systems (as we are now) till one day we're discussing
the merits of rivets made by different manufacturers.
Anthony Vancampen
get
>started. This gets the turbine/compressor going to the point where fuel
will
>lihgt and create thrust, and the process is self sustaining from there
<Please
>excuse gross oversimplification>.
Actually that's not a simplification. One of the most unique starter
systems was installed on the Me - 262. A 2-cycle gas engin was mounted
inside the diffuser hub. The engine was pull started like a lawn mower
and cut off when the jet started. All in all an elegant and effective
solution to the field support problem.
I've watch flight of the Phoenix several times and I always thought that
the plane was a DC-3/C-47.
-
ANTHONY VANCAMPEN NGR...@prodigy.com
rwa...@gcn.scri.fsu.edu
>hi all,
>the movie mentioned is 'Flight of the Phoenix' starring James Stewart
>and Hardy Krüger. You got the plot right. An excellent movie btw.
>I never believed that this beast they built really flew, because
>of the kinda very aerodynamic positioning of the 'passengers' along
>the top curvature of the wing, hidden behind a windshield. similar
>arrangements (although positioned more in the direction of the
>trailing edge) are called speed brakes on other airplanes.
>otoh this setup might have been present only in the studio version
>of the plane, whereas the real thing didn't have them for the filming
>flying. the plane was really flying, because it killed it's pilot
>in thge ever fatal "oh, lets do only one more...." shooting at the
>end of the production.
The pilot in question was the famous movie stunt pilot Paul Mantz, who
along with Frank Tallman ran Tallmantz Movie Air. Mantz started flying
in motion pictures back in the very early days of the cinema.
Tallman was recovering from an accident involving his kid's go-kart at
the time his partner was killed when the "Phoenix" flipped over.
Tallman was supposedly guilt-ridden about his friend's death and did
not allow his knee to heal properly, causing his leg to have to be
amputated from the knee down. This did not shorten his career as a
movie pilot though. He flew in motion pictures, including many scenes
in THE GREAT WALDO PEPPER until just before his death. His last movie
was CAPRICORN ONE, with James Brolin and some ex-football player
turned actor who I think was in some kind of trouble a while back, or
so I think I remember hearing on a news program or two. :-) In that
movie he did several neat chase scenes where a Stearman piloted by
himself is chased by a couple of Hughes 500s. One of the neatest
scenes in aviation filmdom is included in that sequence, where he does
a split-s over the edge of a cliff. The scene almost didn't make it to
film because the guys in the camera copter didn't know that he was
going to do it and almost missed it.
Tallman hit the side of a mountain out west somewhere in a plane back
in '78, but the coroner's report said that he died of a heart attack
in flight.
Sorry to get so far off the thread, but I thought you'd like to know!!
Mary Shafer
two guys from Tallmantz.
They dedicated the film to him, so if anyone has the video we can
solve this pretty quickly.
--
Mary Shafer NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, Edwards, CA
SR-71 Flying Qualities Lead Engineer Of course I don't speak for NASA
sha...@ferhino.dfrc.nasa.gov DoD #362 KotFR
URL http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/People/Shafer/mary.html
Larry Doering
Mary Shafer <sha...@ferhino.dfrc.nasa.gov> wrote:
>Then who was killed making "TopGun"? I was sure that was one of the
>two guys from Tallmantz.
>
>They dedicated the film to him, so if anyone has the video we can
>solve this pretty quickly.
No, that was Art Scholl. If I recall correctly, he was killed while
filming footage for the flat spin sequence off the California coast - he
couldn't recover in time, and crashed into the ocean.
ljd
Gene Cartee
BA>.@FROM :mus...@bga.com N
BA>.@MSGID :<31071E...@bga.com> N
BA>From: banjo <mus...@bga.com>
BA>Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
BA>Subject: Re: Cartridge starters. How did they work?
BA>Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 00:09:42 -0600
BA>Message-ID: <31071E...@bga.com>
BA>References: <4dtpc2$7...@hasle.sn.no> <4dv2mv$q...@sam.inforamp.net> <4dvvut$r
BA>ortal.gmu.edu> <4e2enb$8...@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> <4e30aa$2...@lastactionhero.rs.
BA>umich.edu>
BA>Stephen M. Ryan wrote:
BA>>
BA>> Joerg Hermann (her...@frust.enet.dec.com) wrote:
BA>> : i do not believe that this method is suitable for jet engine starting.
BA>> : i expect that you need a long, steady supply of compressed air to get
BA>> : turbine up and spinning, and therefore you find an apu that generates
BA>> : compressed air on jet planes. an "explosion" only gives a short, high
BA>> : energy impulse, that is well suited to piston engines.
BA>>
BA>> I am chagrined to find out we were starting our B-52's wrong all these
BA>> years! :^)
BA>>
BA>> Seriously though, the cartridges were used on many jet aircraft (usually
BA>> on alert birds, which included the F-100, B-47, B-52). The cart *looked*
BA>> like big shell, and the sound of air rushing from it when started (no
BA>> explosion, so you're right) lasted about 5-8 seconds. So it wasn't
BA>> exactly a shotgun shell, but it was not sustained source of hi-pressure
BA>> air, either. We started engines on alert with cartridges at least once
BA>> during each alert tour, which means the planes were getting cart starts at
BA>> least once a week. Seemed to work pretty well.
BA>> Regards,
BA>> Steve Ryan
BA>I seem to recall that the USAF Thunderbirds (could be the Blue Angels)
BA>had to convert their F-4's to cartridge starting because when they went
BA>overseas some bases didn't have the equipment to start the engines
BA>normally.
You left out the most notable, the B-57, Canberra.
---
. SLMR 2.1a #1791 . If at first you don't succeed, SkyDiving is not for you.
Ed Rasimus
>
>BA>> Joerg Hermann (her...@frust.enet.dec.com) wrote:
>BA>> : i do not believe that this method is suitable for jet engine starting.
>BA>> I am chagrined to find out we were starting our B-52's wrong all these
>BA>> years! :^)
>BA>>
>BA>I seem to recall that the USAF Thunderbirds (could be the Blue Angels)
>BA>had to convert their F-4's to cartridge starting because when they went
>BA>overseas some bases didn't have the equipment to start the engines
>BA>normally.
>
Actually, all USAF F-4s had cartridge start capability. It was the
primary start mode for all Victor alert aircraft and was used as well
at several SEA bases during the Vietnam conflict. It saved the expense
of a lot of AGE when large missions were launched.
In 1966 it was used exclusively for all starts in the F-105 wing at
Korat.
Cart starting was reliable, inexpensive and efficient. As long as the
system was maintained, it was a "sure shot".
Chris Morton
>The Japaanese drove a starter truck up to the nose of the plane; there
>was an engine in the truck bed and a rod extending over the cab with a
>claw that engaged the prop hub. If they didn't have the truck, they spun
>the prop.
This is called a "Hucks starter" I believe. I think it was developed
by the British.
The Soviet I-15 as issued had an electric starter. The Spanish built
versions used the Hucks starter and many of the imported Soviet models
were converted to it.
The drawback of the Hucks was that it was time consuming. The Spanish
Republicans lost a lot of I-15s and I-152s in suprise attacks before
they could get their engines started.
This is from the new Squadron/Signal book, "Polikarpov Fighters in
Action, Pt. I".
Keith Wood
sha...@ferhino.dfrc.nasa.gov (Mary Shafer) wrote:
[Then who was killed making "TopGun"? I was sure that was one of the
[two guys from Tallmantz.
Art Scholl. He was NOT a Tallmantz aviator. He failed to recover from a spin
over the Pacific.
As far as Tallmantz, Paul Mantz went in while filming "Flight of the Phoenix,"
and Frank Tallman found Cumulo Granitus on an IFR cross-country back in 1979 or
so.
--
===============================================================
Keith Wood TV-18 News anchor (Camp Verde AZ)
Host/Producer, The Computer Program, FLYING TIME!, and Infinity Focus.
Gunsite (Orange) alumnus, Team OS/2, Parrothead, N7JUZ, AZ0237 but not a
number (I'm a FREE MAN!), creator of FIRE TEAM and HERO SEEKER
Copyright c 1996 All rights reserved. Distribution by Microsoft Network
constitutes agreement by Microsoft Corporation to pay me $25 per instance
===============================================================
Ulrich Kenter
>Yep, there certainly were cartridge-stated engines in some WWII planes,
>coz my old Dad remebers them.
I remember a flight-show on a british helicopter base in
Lohne / Germany ca. 17 years ago, where an early
Spitfire-model (Mk V ?) was shown.
The engine was started by cartridges, the pilot had to
fire some of them until the Merlin responded. Great sounds
and very interesting for the visitors, a highlight in my
rememberings.
So long, Ulrich
k. sherman
>From: Jamie Sandford <jsan...@gmu.edu>
>Subject: Re: Cartridge starters. How did they work?
>kee...@inforamp.net (Martin/Jennifer Keenan) wrote:
>>In article <4dtpc2$7...@hasle.sn.no>,
>> Erik Thomle Hoelsaeter <tho...@oslonett.no> wrote:
>>>How did the coffman cartridge starter system work?
>>>
>>>
>>I don't know the specifics of this system, but I understand it works something
>>like this:
>>
>>A jet engine normally needs an external source of high pressure air to get
>>started. This gets the turbine/compressor going to the point where fuel will
>>lihgt and create thrust, and the process is self sustaining from there <Please
>>excuse gross oversimplification>.
>>
>>As I understand it, a start cartridge is rather like a shotgun shell without
>>the shot. The exhaust gases from the detonation of the cartridge are used to
>>get the engine turning in the same way as the compressed air from a start
>>cart.
>>
>>I seem to recall reading somewhere about a similar system that could be used
>>to turn over piston engined aircraft as well...
>>
>>I think that's how it works - But I will bow at once to any expert here who
>>actually knows what they're talking about...
>>
>>Martin
> Didn't I see the piston version of this used somewhere in a movie one time? I
>think the movie was about a twin engine plane that had crashed somewhere in the
>desert, and the crew cut apart the plane and put it back together as a single engine
>plane. (Does anyone know the name of this movie?). They started the plane with this
>type of system, with the shotgun shells and such.
> Jamie
================================================================
"The Flight of the Phoenix," 1966, starring James Stewart, Richard
Attenborough, Hardy Krueger, George Kennedy, Ernest Borgnine -- an all-time
great movie!!
kba
Charles Holzer
the F-110) had cartridge starters as standard equipment. The B-52 and KC-
135 had them as well. The cartridge came in a can about the size of a 5
pound coffee can. Battery buss voltage was used to fire the cart, which
was a slow burning solid propellant, usually gunpowder. This produced a
very high pressure in the breech cap, which was then routed through the
cartridge starter turbine. The starter drive shaft, which was connected
to engine gear box, provided the energy to turn the engine compressor
section through a series of drive gears and tower shafts. The burn time
was normally 7-12 seconds, so you had to be quick with the fuel and
ignition. Once the engine lit off and started to come up on speed, the
starter had an over-running dog gear which stopped the starter from
turning as the engine speed increased to idle speed and above. Worked
good, lasted a long time---just don't get the cartridge wet before
starting the engine. But that's another story. Chuck-7MY
Bob Hankinson
Phil Garey
line it would surely wake you up! Pgarey
rick...@phxonline.com
> All Century series fighters, including the F-4, (which started life as
> the F-110) had cartridge starters as standard equipment.
When I sat air defense alert in the F-4 in Korea, the primary method of
starting the engines was via a cartridge start. If it worked, it was the
quickest way to start the engines. Sometimes the procedure just didn't result
in starting an engine, in which case the crew chief turned on the aux power
unit and did a normal pnuematic start. If the cartridge start didn't work, I
think you had to wait at least 10 minutes before trying another one. The wait
may have been longer. The cartridge start caused a large cloud of acrid black
smoke, which was especially bad when the airplane was inside a concrete
reinforced hangar. I always had my mask on and went to 100% oxygen.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Rick Keyt, Sysop | Phoenix Online
rick...@phxonline.com \__[O]__/ | Phantoms
602-678-5776 (BBS) \__[O]__/ Forever
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++