Quote:
Originally Posted by TA152
The proper term for what you are asking are "handed" props. Counter rotating props are props on the same engine going in different directions such as on some Griffin powered Spitfires with 6 blades. Three turn counter clockwise and three turn clockwise. Also the aircraft Howard Hughes nearly got killed in was an aircraft with counter rotating props. I can't recall the aircraft name but one set of props messed up while he was flying and he was injured pretty good.
I think the answer is that building different engines that turned the props in different directions to counter act the torque was not deemed worth the extra effort for war production and supply at the front. They thought it better to train the pilot to deal with the torque on take off using the rudder. Sometimes it worked and sometimes it did not. On a twin engined aircraft full of fuel and ammo and bombs, you lose an engine on take off you lose your life.  |
OK - you're probably correct regarding the 'counter-rotating' vs 'handed' nomenclature - I don't really know -
But, when it comes to which direction the engine/prop is rotating, it doesn't seem to me it would really matter WHICH way it was turning if it quit! I mean, you're still stuck with
one engine rotating in a given direction - whether you've got right-handed torque or left-handed torque....
...but, I may be wrong.... probably am....
-whatever
-Lou
EDIT: In rereading your response, I think I misunderstood your point - you were speaking of counteracting the torque with both engines turning - I think you just made the comment about losing power as an aside... anyway, why was the Lighting the only plane equipped with 'handed' propellers - I mean, every other twin-engine airplane seemed to do just fine with matching engines - why go to the trouble on the P-38? And if it made a difference, why didn't everyone else follow suit?