Sounds like Citation is an easy one. Got to try it one day. In a Lear 35, it's very, very tricky.

The lear is different and some pilots have a hard time mastering its engine out characteristics.

During an engine failure the airplane will both yaw into the bad engine and begin to pitch up. The yaw will proportonaly increase with the pitch if the pitching is not nulled.

A pilot is required to impart significant downward force on the control column during take-off to offset this potential force and if a trainee allows the nose to come up during engine out training it requires significant effort to recover the airplane.

Additionally if the failure results in a fan seizure significant torque is imparted to the airframe that results in squirrelly yaw/roll moments. None of which can be duplicated in a simulator.

Some pilots seem to get it early but I have seen other, excellent pilots, have trouble getting the hang of Lear V1 cuts.

I did my LR-JET type rating in a Level C Lear 35A sim. The absolute hardest part of the whole training was V1 cuts. For way too long I was afraid I’d never get it. I did, but those V1 cuts were a lot tougher than the Cessna 414 that I now fly a lot. On a side note I was observing another crew’s sim session in the back with the instructor. One of this crew was a transitioning King Air Pilot. They gave him a V1 cut and I got to watch as he climbed and did a Vmc roll. Very eye opening (and hard on the sim).

Any Lear Vmc roll overs in the accident record?

Mike C.

Any Lear Vmc roll overs in the accident record?

Mike C.

Date and place?

Mike C.

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Repor ... y&IType=FA

There are at least two others in there that I saw. You will find many of the NTSB reports on GA to be sparse. I only know the details of that particular crash because they were discussed in more detail in the FAA directive to Lear instructor pilots.

Mikko raises an important point at "c".

Because I never trained in a Lear simulator I haven't experienced a V1 compressor stall or reverser deployment on that airplane.

I am not sure how good the fidelity is in any case as I requested a thrust reverser deployment the last time I was in the simulator (A-320) and even though it was a very late model sim it essentially duplicated an engine failure. I have experienced T/R deployments in older simulators and they made the airplane almost unflyable.

I have experienced a compressor stall in a Lear (during climb out) and it was what I would term violent. I was head down writing in the logbook when it happened and my first thought was that we had just had a midair and it was game over.

Since a compressor stall is essentially a reverse flow of the engine it is very draggy (mine dropped the airspeed from 330 Kias to about 240 in about one second). I am sure the real thing is pretty sporty at V1 in a lear and would probably need perfect technique to fly away.

Wonder if that’s why they started adding big bits to the rear, Strakes etc. Always wondered the same thing with a beech 1900D, lot hanging off the back.

Andrew

I believe the strakes on the Lear 31 were added to help mitigate the need for yaw damping.

I never flew that model but I have been told that it had generally more benign handling characteristics than the 35/36.

How much more I have no idea.

The 20 and 30 series handled a little bit differently; about the same delta as between a 737-200 and a 737-300. The 20 was just a little more responsive but it wasn't a huge difference.

The Lear 31 had training wheels. It was a fun scooter.

And yet, this claim is not supported by fact:


Nobody says a V1 cut in a jet, especially with a compressor stall or a TR deployment is not a handful and can be a serious emergency.

Under an asymmetric thrust condition even if an aircraft has more than adequate power for a single-engine climb and automated systems designed to reduce pilot workload, all aircraft, and a jet is no exception, require prompt and positive action to prevent a loss of directional control driving the aircraft into an unrecoverable attitude.

Controlling yaw and the associated roll, reducing thrust on the good engine if necessary, reducing drag (gear and flaps), building airspeed and climbing to a safe altitude are essential to not killing yourself. The drill is the same whether you are flying a Piper Apache, a Cheyenne VI, a Gulfstream or an A320. What's more violent? Examples on both sides abound.

Nevertheless, accident statistics have shown more people have killed themselves in piston twins and turboprops than in any turbojet powered aircraft - including the Lear. A sample of one or two shows nothing. You can dislike all you wish, but statistics show the above claim is BS.

The argument is about degree of difficulty not final outcomes.

The Lear is a challenging airplane but unlike a piston twin, as a condition of its type certificate, it is always flown by two pilots and at least one of them had to qualify for a type rating and must have had a check ride in the type within the last twelve or 24 months at the earliest.

It certainly is not a logical follow on to conclude that it is easier to lose an engine in a jet than a piston based on a count of the number of burning craters.

I think it is.

Put the same exact two pilots in a piston twin or a twin jet. I'll take the jet.

Mike C.

I think it is.

Put the same exact two pilots in a piston twin or a twin jet. I'll take the jet.

Mike C.