RV-6 Snap Rolls

[Ted Timmons]

Van wrote an article in which he states "RV's are not well
suited for [snap rolls] because high G forces are needed to produce a
brisk snap roll."

When I do snap rolls in my Aerobat (perhaps that's an oxymoron) I do an
accelerated stall at 75kts which is well below my Va of 105 kts so there
is no possibility of over stressing the aircraft.

If the Va for the RV-6 is 120kts and I do an accelerated stall at 80
kts, the max load on the aircraft should only be 2.7 G's. Obviously
this is well below the 6 G limit so what am I missing?

[ShawnD2112]

You don't really put much of a g load on the airplane in that sense but you
put some strong bending moments on the airframe which wouldn't show up on
your g-meter. Snap rolls are easily controlled but could be classed as a
violent maneuver. One Pitts pilot I talked to complained that his airplane
seemed to take a semi-permanent "set" after snap rolls, assuming a slight
left roll after left snaps and a slight right roll after right snaps. I
also noticed that the paint on my Pitts started to crack on the tail only
after I started learning how to do snaps. If the fuselage isn't stressed
for those bending and torsional loads, it probably isn't a good idea to snap
it. Which is a shame because snaps are a blast!

Shawn

"Ted Timmons" > wrote in message
...
> Van wrote an article in which he states "RV's are not well
> suited for [snap rolls] because high G forces are needed to produce a
> brisk snap roll."
>
> When I do snap rolls in my Aerobat (perhaps that's an oxymoron) I do an
> accelerated stall at 75kts which is well below my Va of 105 kts so there
> is no possibility of over stressing the aircraft.
>
> If the Va for the RV-6 is 120kts and I do an accelerated stall at 80
> kts, the max load on the aircraft should only be 2.7 G's. Obviously
> this is well below the 6 G limit so what am I missing?
>
>