Radial Engine Starting Techniques
Phillip Hopkins
Among my colleagues, we have had much discussion about the methods used in
starting large radial engines - though none of us have any real knowledge on the
subject. We have guessed that some very large engines use a flywheel energy
storage mechanism which is somehow coupled to the engine crankshaft at start
time. The suggestion was also made of the use of gas cartridges which are used
to operate an air motor which turns over the crankshaft, a la the movie "The
Phoenix" with Jimmy Stewart.
******
******
I wonder if someone, who is knowledgeable on the subject, could describe the
methods used is cranking over large radial engines during starting, such as
those on B-17s, B-29s, B-36s, even DC-3s. A brief history of radial engine
starting techniques from the 1920s to the 1950s would also be very interesting.
Thanks in advance.
Phillip Hopkins
Charles K. Scott
Phillip Hopkins <p...@americasm01.nt.com> writes:
> I wonder if someone, who is knowledgeable on the subject, could describe the
> methods used is cranking over large radial engines during starting, such as
> those on B-17s, B-29s, B-36s, even DC-3s. A brief history of radial engine
> starting techniques from the 1920s to the 1950s would also be very interesting.
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Phillip Hopkins
Having sat in the jump seat on many occasions of the company DC-3 that
my father flew back when I was a kid I can verify that an electric
starter was used to get the engine going. B-17's used Wright Cyclones
and they were started by electrical starter as well. Same for the
B-29's and B-24's.
In watching flight deck operations from many documentaries and films I
can verify that many of the Navy's WWII aircraft used electric starters
although I think the F4F may have used a starter cartridge.
Corky Scott
Bob Chilcoat
At least some electric starters for radials still wind up a flywheel
before the engine actually turns over. I watched a BT-13 start up at
SMQ the other day. It had a manual crank input shaft on the left side
of the cowl, but also an electric starter. The pilot engaged the
electric starter, and you could hear the flywheel wind up. After it got
fast enough, he hit something that connected it to the crank and the
engine turned over. This is how many manual starters worked too, you
wound up a flywheel with the starting crank, and when it was truning
fast enough, the pilot engaged it to crank the engine. Presumably this
is exactly what would happen on the BT-13 if the manual crank was used.
Radials are probably to big to use a direct starter, either Armstrong or
electric.
My father always told a story relating to the differences between the
Army/Air Force B-25 and the Navy version, the PBJ-1 (see
http://users.erols.com/viewptmd/Dad6.html ) The Navy version used a
shotgun shell cartidge starter (Coffmann?), while the Army/Air Force
version used electric starting. Otherwise, the engines were identical.
Bob
Benton Holzwarth
Phillip Hopkins <p...@americasm01.nt.com> writes:
> I wonder if someone, who is knowledgeable on the subject, could
> describe the methods used is cranking over large radial engines
> during starting, such as those on B-17s, B-29s, B-36s, even DC-3s.
> A brief history of radial engine starting techniques from the 1920s
> to the 1950s would also be very interesting.
The hand-cranked inertial starter was used on some radial engines.
(Unless I'm crossing up stories -- ) The current _EAA_Experimenter_
has an article on the Fokker Super Universal that was at Oshkosh this
summer. This one was novel, in that the crank engaged the gear train
on the top of the cowl. The pilot could stand in the 'front office',
and just lean out over the windscreen, to wind up to about 100 RPM at
the crank.
The hand-cranked starter was particularly a feature for a bush
plane, where getting the battery recharged could be problematic.
See: <http://www.teleport.com/~bcgh/jpegs/254-24.jpeg> for my
picture of the subject (not terribly good), or backup to
<http://www.teleport.com/~bcgh> for the rest of my Oshkosh pictures.
Benton 3nov99
--
BC&G Holzwarth
bc...@teleport.com
Trevor Fenn
Phillip Hopkins wrote:
> I originally posted this on rec.aviation.military, with surprisingly no takers.
> Among my colleagues, we have had much discussion about the methods used in
> starting large radial engines
You might try posting to aus.aviation marked Attn: Sandy.
Sandy is a 747 Captain who also flies the Lockheed Constellation down in Australia
in his spare time.
Trevor Fenn
James Bieker
lower cylinders. I think there was something like a low speed starter that
facilitated this in later models.
Dale
<viewREM...@erols.com> wrote:
It seems everyone loves the sound of the Mustang's Merlin. A few years
ago I was able to fly the TF-51 Crazy Horse. The wife was there and
remarked how loud the Mustang was on takeoff.
A few days later I flew a T-6 that uses an inertia type starter like you
described for the BT-13. She thought the screetch of the starter engaging
was "neat". She said I could buy a T-6. There's just no explaining some
people tastes. <G>
> At least some electric starters for radials still wind up a flywheel
> before the engine actually turns over. I watched a BT-13 start up at
> SMQ the other day. It had a manual crank input shaft on the left side
> of the cowl, but also an electric starter. The pilot engaged the
> electric starter, and you could hear the flywheel wind up. After it got
> fast enough, he hit something that connected it to the crank and the
> engine turned over. This is how many manual starters worked too, you
> wound up a flywheel with the starting crank, and when it was truning
> fast enough, the pilot engaged it to crank the engine. Presumably this
> is exactly what would happen on the BT-13 if the manual crank was used.
> Radials are probably to big to use a direct starter, either Armstrong or
> electric.
>
> My father always told a story relating to the differences between the
> Army/Air Force B-25 and the Navy version, the PBJ-1 (see
> http://users.erols.com/viewptmd/Dad6.html ) The Navy version used a
> shotgun shell cartidge starter (Coffmann?), while the Army/Air Force
> version used electric starting. Otherwise, the engines were identical.
>
> Bob
--
Dale L. Falk
Cessna 182A
N5912B
Keith Southard
Dehavilland Beavers and North American T6's.
In both cases, an electric motor engages a large inertial fly wheel. The
starter is disengaged and the inertia energy of the fly wheel is used to
turn the engine over. Magnetos are engaged only after the engine has turned
through 2 or 3 revolutions "4 to 6 blades". Magic happens and the sweet
music of that radial then begins.......
Keith Southard
Phillip Hopkins <p...@americasm01.nt.com> wrote in message
news:3820467F...@americasm01.nt.com...
> I originally posted this on rec.aviation.military, with surprisingly no
takers.
> Among my colleagues, we have had much discussion about the methods used in
> starting large radial engines - though none of us have any real knowledge
on the
> subject. We have guessed that some very large engines use a flywheel
energy
> storage mechanism which is somehow coupled to the engine crankshaft at
start
> time. The suggestion was also made of the use of gas cartridges which are
used
> to operate an air motor which turns over the crankshaft, a la the movie
"The
> Phoenix" with Jimmy Stewart.
>
> ******
> ******
>
> I wonder if someone, who is knowledgeable on the subject, could describe
the
> methods used is cranking over large radial engines during starting, such
as
> those on B-17s, B-29s, B-36s, even DC-3s. A brief history of radial
engine
> starting techniques from the 1920s to the 1950s would also be very
interesting.
HLAviation
>Australia
>in his spare time.
>
>Trevor Fenn
So, If he's flying it it down there, is he flying inverted?
HLAviation
>methods used is cranking over large radial engines during starting, such as
>those on B-17s, B-29s, B-36s, even DC-3s
The R 1820, R2800, R 4730, and R 1830s as well as 1340s and 985s I've ever had
the (mis)fortune of working on all had electric starters. I've had "Shotgun
Start" diesels in small ships, though with this system you crank the engine
mechanicaly till just ATDC and then fire in the #1 cyl to get the engine
turning I saw a Hell Cat I think it was with a crank on the cowl but no one
used it, I I never took it apart, so I'm not sure the details but I imagine
some flywheel, Idler/clutch wheel, assembly.
As far as technique, Either electric or wobble pump to fill bowl. Pump
throttle twice(cold engine) and let sit fot 1 minute. Mags off, start cranking
engine pumping throttle, 4 revolutions 1/3/throttle kick in the 1st mag if it
doesnt fire pump 3 more times first one quick slower , then slower. If the
engine is gonna fire, It would have. If it didn't quit cranking with the
throttle full open and giv it a few minutes to cool the starter before trying
again. If it's damp out youy'll probably need to dry out the mags. Thats the
#1 reason I usually have if they wont fire up using above method. Remember, a
gas engine just needs fuel spark, compression, and timing to fire. The 2
biggies are fuel and spark and big radial need a lot of fuel to start up.
Trevor Fenn
Dale wrote:
> In article <382082AF...@erols.com>, Bob Chilcoat
> <viewREM...@erols.com> wrote:
>
> It seems everyone loves the sound of the Mustang's Merlin. A few years
> ago I was able to fly the TF-51 Crazy Horse. The wife was there and
> remarked how loud the Mustang was on takeoff.
>
> A few days later I flew a T-6 that uses an inertia type starter like you
> described for the BT-13. She thought the screetch of the starter engaging
> was "neat". She said I could buy a T-6. There's just no explaining some
> people tastes. <G>
>
So did you go ahead and buy one?
Trevor Fenn
Rick Macklem
: You mean the tremendous, terminal-window-shattering ***BANG*** followed
: by the sheet of flame that lights up half the airport that tells you
: you let off the primer too soon? ;-)
: To do that right, of course, requires an R2800...no flywheel.
Never seen that one, but you can get a nice "little pop" out of the
Havard (T-6) by flipping the mags off and bac on during runup. (Just
about takes your eardrums out:-) Been there, done that.. (My only
excuse was that you couldn't really feel any detent (sp?) on the old
switch.) You learn your lesson after only doing it once. (Actually it
took me twice, I did the same dang thing to a Stearman a few years ago.:-)
Have fun flying, rick
ps: The smaller engines in the Stearman seem to have a boring, just like
a Cessna starter in them these days. Actually, I have hand cranked
the inertial starter on a Harvard and it's kinda fun, the first time.
George R. Patterson III
>
> Radials are probably to big to use a direct starter, either Armstrong or
> electric.
I once saw a photo of a big radial being hand propped. One guy had his
hand around the prop, and another guy was pulling on his other arm. I
forget how many men were involved, but there was quite a chain of them.
George Patterson, N3162Q.
James Bieker
My CFI shook his head, said :"That's a good way to blow apart a muffler!"
There was no "bang", fortunately. (must have been too quick) He did add
grinningly that "Everybody does it early on"
David B. Schober
were mostly hand propped. Intertia starters were developed using a small flywheel
and gear network to transmit energy to the engine. The flywheel would be turned by
hand to about 12000 RPM then a clutch would be engaged to connect it to the engine.
This was further refined by adding an electric motor. The starter on my R985 could
be used as an electric starter or a hand crank starter. During WWII, many engines
used a cartridge type starter. That is what you saw on "Flight of the Phoenix". It
employs a shotgun shell(without shot) placed in a breach connected to a cylinder
with a piston. As the gasses from the explosion expand, the piston moves and the
linier motion is converted to rotory motion through a screw thread. That rotory
motion is then connected to the crankshaft.
Hope this helps.
Phillip Hopkins wrote:
> I originally posted this on rec.aviation.military, with surprisingly no takers.
> Among my colleagues, we have had much discussion about the methods used in
> starting large radial engines - though none of us have any real knowledge on the
> subject. We have guessed that some very large engines use a flywheel energy
> storage mechanism which is somehow coupled to the engine crankshaft at start
> time. The suggestion was also made of the use of gas cartridges which are used
> to operate an air motor which turns over the crankshaft, a la the movie "The
> Phoenix" with Jimmy Stewart.
>
> ******
> ******
>
> I wonder if someone, who is knowledgeable on the subject, could describe the
> methods used is cranking over large radial engines during starting, such as
N55BZ
This procedure worked for me on the R3350-32WA- (As far as I know there is
only one radial larger than this one)
Boost pump:ON LOW
Mags: OFF
Mixture: IDLE CUT-OFF
Throttle: CRACKED
Starter: ENGAGE, CRANK 8 BLADES
contuinue cranking
Mags: ON, BOTH
Prime: ON, STEADY
When the engine fires, stop cranking, adjust the throttle so that the engine
runs smoohly at 800-1000 r.p.m. on prime.
Check for indication of oil pressure
Mixture: RICH
When the the r.p. m. drops about 200 r.p.m., stop prime and adjust the
throttle so that the engine runs smoothly at approx. 1000 r.p.m.
Check the oil pressure.
This will work for a cold or a warm engine. The best procedure that I found
for a hot engine was to con the Plane Captain (FE) into starting it,
thereby avoiding the embarrasment of a backfire. "I think that you should
shoot it again, sir, its still running."
Keith Southard @ptialaska.net> <keiths<spam> wrote in message
news:s22b10...@corp.supernews.com...
> Don't know about "Large" radial engines but I do have some time in
> Dehavilland Beavers and North American T6's.
>
> In both cases, an electric motor engages a large inertial fly wheel. The
> starter is disengaged and the inertia energy of the fly wheel is used to
> turn the engine over. Magnetos are engaged only after the engine has
turned
> through 2 or 3 revolutions "4 to 6 blades". Magic happens and the sweet
> music of that radial then begins.......
>
> Keith Southard
>
> Phillip Hopkins <p...@americasm01.nt.com> wrote in message
> news:3820467F...@americasm01.nt.com...
Charles Downing
The Navy as well as the Btrits along with a few other countries favored the
cartridge start, very impressive when the bird spewed that stream of smoke
on start-up, It ment numerous calls to the Fire Dept by the uniformed.
The inertial hand crank, method did allow for a crank installed at the side
of the aircraft just aft of the engine. The crew chief would crank the
flywheel until it reached a specified RPM the pilot would then call out
clear, the chief would then remove the crakn handle, pull the Tee handle to
engage the starter and the prop spun and Holy Cow it runs. Later there were
electric starters the accomplished the same thing with the engagment located
in the cockpit. My guess is that, the unsafe manner of the crew chief that
close to the prop, was the reason for the change.
the only radial that I knew of to hang prop start were most of the smaller
one 985s and smaller never did see anything lager hand proped. Could hahve
been done. However I seriously doubt it.
And, of course the old stand-by, the old high touque electric starter.
Certainly almost all big radials used the electric start method, and still
do today.
Now as to start procedured, the first thing you always do before first
flight is to pull/push the prop thru, at least 4 to 6 revolutians, this
clears the lower cylinder of any residule oil that may hav accumulated in
the bottom cylinders. It also prevente bending of the articulating rods of
thos cyl, as well. you then proceeded to the cockpit and did the proper
check list procedures, as with all engines there is an established method to
start them and if one is available follow it. IT would take to many pages to
describe startin methods here.
Improper start procedeure with any engine will meet with funny results.
I have to agree with the wif about the T-6 noyhing sounds sweeter that a
radial of any size.
-**** Posted from RemarQ, http://www.remarq.com/?b ****-
Real Discussions for Real People
Jim Beasley Jr.
information.
Many motors are direct drive from the starter, and some use an inertial
starter. That is interchangeable (R1340). The old P-36 used a shotgun
shell to get it going.
Ken L
The procedure was to use the starter motor to run the engine through "5 blades". Usually the ground crew has already turned the engines by propeller to ensure that there is not a lot of oil sitting in the lower cylinders which would cause a hydrostatic lock and most-likely blow a cylinder off the block. By motoring the engine for 5 blades you are confirming the engine is not locked plus circulating a little oil. After the 5 blades you introduce fuel through a toggle switch and high voltage spark to combust the fuel. The magnetos are on and will provide the normal charge to the plugs but this high voltage switch really ensures a smoother start. As you toggle the fuel switch you slowly advance the mixture and the engine will start to run on its own and you can release the fuel and high voltage toggle switches. The co-pilot counts the blades for the captain on the number 2 engine. The captain counts blades on the number one. It really did take two pilots to get an engine started to make a smooth transition from start phase to run phase. There were hands going all over to keep the engines running. The captain's right hand would work the start toggles and his thumb was pushing up on the toggle that activated the start switches.
It was a lot of fun flying that old bird. In my later career flying jets you just push the start button and monitor temps. Too easy!
On Wednesday, November 3, 1999 at 7:00:00 PM UTC+11, Charles K. Scott wrote:
> In article <3820467F...@americasm01.nt.com>
> Phillip Hopkins <p...@americasm01.nt.com> writes:
> > methods used is cranking over large radial engines during starting, such as
> > those on B-17s, B-29s, B-36s, even DC-3s. A brief history of radial engine
> > starting techniques from the 1920s to the 1950s would also be very interesting.
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> > Phillip Hopkins
Ken L
On Sunday, November 7, 1999 at 7:00:00 PM UTC+11, Jim Beasley Jr. wrote:
> Why don't you buy the engine manuals? They will provide the best source of
> information.
> Many motors are direct drive from the starter, and some use an inertial
> starter. That is interchangeable (R1340). The old P-36 used a shotgun
> shell to get it going.
> Phillip Hopkins <p...@americasm01.nt.com> wrote in message
> news:3820467F...@americasm01.nt.com...
> > I originally posted this on rec.aviation.military, with surprisingly no
> takers.
> > Among my colleagues, we have had much discussion about the methods used in
> > starting large radial engines - though none of us have any real knowledge
> on the
> > subject. We have guessed that some very large engines use a flywheel
> energy
> > storage mechanism which is somehow coupled to the engine crankshaft at
> start
> > time. The suggestion was also made of the use of gas cartridges which are
> used
> > to operate an air motor which turns over the crankshaft, a la the movie
> "The
> > Phoenix" with Jimmy Stewart.
> >
> > ******
> > ******
> >