Zero G profile

[mike regish]

What's the best way to fly a zero G parabola? My kids are hooked on them and
they're actually learning some science from it. I'd like to get a little
more duration without getting too fast.

I usually do a little climb until the speed bleeds off some and then push
over firmly. Should I pull the power over the top as I'm pushing?

mike

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "mike regish" > said:
>What's the best way to fly a zero G parabola? My kids are hooked on them and
>they're actually learning some science from it. I'd like to get a little
>more duration without getting too fast.
>
>I usually do a little climb until the speed bleeds off some and then push
>over firmly. Should I pull the power over the top as I'm pushing?

Why don't you get up to full speed, pitch up, then push down a bit? That
way you can get negative G's on the way up while you're bleeding off the
speed.

--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
I mean, if went 'round saying I was a perl hacker, just because some
moistened bint lobbed a "Perl for Dummies" at me, they'd put me away!
-- Randy the Random

[Dale]

In article >,
"mike regish" > wrote:

> What's the best way to fly a zero G parabola? My kids are hooked on them and
> they're actually learning some science from it. I'd like to get a little
> more duration without getting too fast.
>
> I usually do a little climb until the speed bleeds off some and then push
> over firmly. Should I pull the power over the top as I'm pushing?
>
> mike

While your doing the zero G take a glance at the oil pressure
gauge...you may find it has dropped very low. FYI

[JGalban via AviationKB.com]

mike regish wrote:
>
>I usually do a little climb until the speed bleeds off some and then push
>over firmly. Should I pull the power over the top as I'm pushing?
>

That's what I do. Keeps me from accelerating excessively in the dive.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200705/1

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

"mike regish" > wrote in message
. ..
> What's the best way to fly a zero G parabola? My kids are hooked on them
> and they're actually learning some science from it. I'd like to get a
> little more duration without getting too fast.
>
> I usually do a little climb until the speed bleeds off some and then push
> over firmly. Should I pull the power over the top as I'm pushing?
>
> mike

If you pull first, you can start the push on the way up.

No need for power on the way down.

Are you really flying "zero" or just reduced G? A little positive G will
help keep oil flowing where it needs to go, but it is surprising how long an
engine will run with no oil pressure.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

[mike regish]

That's pretty much what I do, except that I haven't been pulling the power,
which means I have to pull out sooner. I've gotten a couple of seconds of
zero g, but mostly just reduced G's. One time, I got my son's soda bottle to
float up in front of him and hold there for a couple of seconds before I had
to start coming out of it. He got a huge kick out of that. I usually wait
until the pull out to pull power. I'll try it at the pushover next time.
I'll check out the oil pressure next time, too. I'd say the longest I've
maintained Zero G is no more than 5 seconds or so.

Thanks.

mike

"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com> wrote in message
news:bqOdnZ_3nI59ed3bnZ2dnUVZ_qupnZ2d@wideopenwest .com...
> "mike regish" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> What's the best way to fly a zero G parabola? My kids are hooked on them
>> and they're actually learning some science from it. I'd like to get a
>> little more duration without getting too fast.
>>
>> I usually do a little climb until the speed bleeds off some and then push
>> over firmly. Should I pull the power over the top as I'm pushing?
>>
>> mike
>
> If you pull first, you can start the push on the way up.
>
> No need for power on the way down.
>
> Are you really flying "zero" or just reduced G? A little positive G will
> help keep oil flowing where it needs to go, but it is surprising how long
> an engine will run with no oil pressure.
>
> --
> Geoff
> The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
> remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
> When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.
>

[Al G[_2_]]

"mike regish" > wrote in message
...
> That's pretty much what I do, except that I haven't been pulling the
> power, which means I have to pull out sooner. I've gotten a couple of
> seconds of zero g, but mostly just reduced G's. One time, I got my son's
> soda bottle to float up in front of him and hold there for a couple of
> seconds before I had to start coming out of it. He got a huge kick out of
> that. I usually wait until the pull out to pull power. I'll try it at the
> pushover next time. I'll check out the oil pressure next time, too. I'd
> say the longest I've maintained Zero G is no more than 5 seconds or so.
>
> Thanks.
>
> mike
>
> "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" <The Sea Hawk at wow way d0t com> wrote in message
> news:bqOdnZ_3nI59ed3bnZ2dnUVZ_qupnZ2d@wideopenwest .com...
>> "mike regish" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>> What's the best way to fly a zero G parabola? My kids are hooked on them
>>> and they're actually learning some science from it. I'd like to get a
>>> little more duration without getting too fast.
>>>
>>> I usually do a little climb until the speed bleeds off some and then
>>> push over firmly. Should I pull the power over the top as I'm pushing?
>>>
>>> mike
>>
>> If you pull first, you can start the push on the way up.
>>
>> No need for power on the way down.
>>
>> Are you really flying "zero" or just reduced G? A little positive G will
>> help keep oil flowing where it needs to go, but it is surprising how long
>> an engine will run with no oil pressure.
>>
>> --
>> Geoff
>> The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
>> remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
>> When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.
>>
>
>

Tie everything down in back, I had a tow bar come out from under the
back seat in a 172, and poke a neat little hole in the back window.

Al G

[Carl Ellis]

> Tie everything down in back, I had a tow bar come out from under the
> back seat in a 172, and poke a neat little hole in the back window.
>

There's a video floating around the internet of a golden lab doing
something like that.

[James Sleeman]

On May 10, 12:43 pm, Carl Ellis > wrote:
> > Tie everything down in back, I had a tow bar come out from under the
> > back seat in a 172, and poke a neat little hole in the back window.
>
> There's a video floating around the internet of a golden lab doing
> something like that.

Ask and ye shall receive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SN77b9DqEbc

[[email protected]]

On May 8, 5:47 am, "mike regish" > wrote:
> What's the best way to fly a zero G parabola? My kids are hooked on them and
> they're actually learning some science from it. I'd like to get a little
> more duration without getting too fast.
>
> I usually do a little climb until the speed bleeds off some and then push
> over firmly. Should I pull the power over the top as I'm pushing?
>
> mike

Been a while, you might want to get some acro instruction to really
perfect it, but try this.

Dive so your airspeed is 10-15% below redline. You want enough energy
so that you can get established on a 35-40 degree upline. Once you
get the energy, begin a smooth 1.5-2.0 G pull so you're established on
the upline. Your airspeed will bleed off rapidly, even with full
power. As speed decays towards Vs, reduce power to idle while
smoothly unloading the wing. You want to float over the top with the
airspeed as close to 0 indicated as you can; remember- at 0G the wing
will NOT stall.

The key is to be smooth. Make sure there's no loose objects in the
plane; nothing sucks worse than having a pen lodged in the controls on
the downline. You may want to get instruction from a QUALIFIED acro
CFI.

[gatt]

"James Sleeman" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On May 10, 12:43 pm, Carl Ellis > wrote:
>> > Tie everything down in back, I had a tow bar come out from under
>> > the
>> > back seat in a 172, and poke a neat little hole in the back window.
>>
>> There's a video floating around the internet of a golden lab doing
>> something like that.
>
> Ask and ye shall receive.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SN77b9DqEbc


Am I insensitive for laughing my ass off at this one and watching it over
and over? That's the funniest video I've seen all week.

I showed that manuever one time to a pretty redhaired girl I'd just started
dating, who was wearing a really nice white coat on a cross-country one
time. I forgot she had a Dr. Pepper in her hand.

-c

[Maxwell]

"gatt" > wrote in message
...
>
> "James Sleeman" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>> On May 10, 12:43 pm, Carl Ellis > wrote:
>>> > Tie everything down in back, I had a tow bar come out from under
>>> > the
>>> > back seat in a 172, and poke a neat little hole in the back window.
>>>
>>> There's a video floating around the internet of a golden lab doing
>>> something like that.
>>
>> Ask and ye shall receive.
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SN77b9DqEbc
>
>
> Am I insensitive for laughing my ass off at this one and watching it over
> and over? That's the funniest video I've seen all week.
>
> I showed that manuever one time to a pretty redhaired girl I'd just
> started dating, who was wearing a really nice white coat on a
> cross-country one time. I forgot she had a Dr. Pepper in her hand.
>

Oooopppppppppps! Sounds like something I would do, or should I say, the
kind of mistake I have made.

[Ron Garret]

In article om>,
wrote:

> On May 8, 5:47 am, "mike regish" > wrote:
> > What's the best way to fly a zero G parabola? My kids are hooked on them and
> > they're actually learning some science from it. I'd like to get a little
> > more duration without getting too fast.
> >
> > I usually do a little climb until the speed bleeds off some and then push
> > over firmly. Should I pull the power over the top as I'm pushing?
> >
> > mike
>
> Been a while, you might want to get some acro instruction to really
> perfect it, but try this.
>
> Dive so your airspeed is 10-15% below redline. You want enough energy
> so that you can get established on a 35-40 degree upline. Once you
> get the energy, begin a smooth 1.5-2.0 G pull so you're established on
> the upline. Your airspeed will bleed off rapidly, even with full
> power. As speed decays towards Vs, reduce power to idle while
> smoothly unloading the wing. You want to float over the top with the
> airspeed as close to 0 indicated as you can; remember- at 0G the wing
> will NOT stall.

Yes, but unless you're going straight up you will not be able to get
anywhere near 0 IAS at zero G.

rg

[DR]

wrote:
You want to float over the top with the
> airspeed as close to 0 indicated as you can; remember- at 0G the wing
> will NOT stall.

Now there was me thinking that stalling was only due to too high AOA...
Do you mean at 0 IAS?

Cheers MarkC

[John Clear]

In article >,
gatt > wrote:
>
>I showed that manuever one time to a pretty redhaired girl I'd just started
>dating, who was wearing a really nice white coat on a cross-country one
>time. I forgot she had a Dr. Pepper in her hand.

Oops.

I had a similar, but less messy, incident once. On the first push
over, 30 years of dust and dirt flew up. It was IFR in the cockpit.
Fortunately, she had a sense of humor about it. Her purse migrated
from her lap, over the back seat and onto the hat shelf.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

[Mxsmanic]

JGalban via AviationKB.com writes:

> That's what I do. Keeps me from accelerating excessively in the dive.

Your acceleration is fixed in a parabola. It is always exactly -1.0 G, which
precisely negates the pull of gravity and gives you the zero gravity
objective.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Maxwell]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> JGalban via AviationKB.com writes:
>
>> That's what I do. Keeps me from accelerating excessively in the dive.
>
> Your acceleration is fixed in a parabola. It is always exactly -1.0 G,
> which
> precisely negates the pull of gravity and gives you the zero gravity
> objective.
>

Clueless as usual.

[Mxsmanic]

Maxwell writes:

> Clueless as usual.

A zero-G parabola is a ballistic trajectory; it always involves acceleration
towards the ground (in the direction of gravity) at exactly 1.0 G. That's how
it produces the "zero-G" effect.

This being so, you cannot change the acceleration of the aircraft along the
vertical axis without losing the zero-G effect.

Essentially, if you fire a cannonball next to the aircraft, your aircraft
needs to follow the same path as the cannonball in order to become
"weightless."

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Maxwell]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
>
> A zero-G parabola is a ballistic trajectory; it always involves
> acceleration
> towards the ground (in the direction of gravity) at exactly 1.0 G. That's
> how
> it produces the "zero-G" effect.
>
> This being so, you cannot change the acceleration of the aircraft along
> the
> vertical axis without losing the zero-G effect.
>
> Essentially, if you fire a cannonball next to the aircraft, your aircraft
> needs to follow the same path as the cannonball in order to become
> "weightless."
>

Obviously,,, but it still has "zip" to do with reducing power to avoid
accelerating excessively in the dive.

[Mxsmanic]

Maxwell writes:

> Obviously,,, but it still has "zip" to do with reducing power to avoid
> accelerating excessively in the dive.

Accelerating excessively would destroy the zero-G trajectory.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Maxwell]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Maxwell writes:
>
>> Obviously,,, but it still has "zip" to do with reducing power to avoid
>> accelerating excessively in the dive.
>
> Accelerating excessively would destroy the zero-G trajectory.
>

Has "zip" to do with the subject at hand. Learn to read.

[mike regish]

Uhh..hate to burst your bubble again, but -1 g would have you straining at
your seatbelt with a force of 1 g. If you're not wearing one, you would be
exerting 1 g against the roof.

mike

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> JGalban via AviationKB.com writes:
>
>> That's what I do. Keeps me from accelerating excessively in the dive.
>
> Your acceleration is fixed in a parabola. It is always exactly -1.0 G,
> which
> precisely negates the pull of gravity and gives you the zero gravity
> objective.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[mike regish]

I'm sure he meant to reduce power in order to not exceed Vne.

mike

"Maxwell" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> A zero-G parabola is a ballistic trajectory; it always involves
>> acceleration
>> towards the ground (in the direction of gravity) at exactly 1.0 G.
>> That's how
>> it produces the "zero-G" effect.
>>
>> This being so, you cannot change the acceleration of the aircraft along
>> the
>> vertical axis without losing the zero-G effect.
>>
>> Essentially, if you fire a cannonball next to the aircraft, your aircraft
>> needs to follow the same path as the cannonball in order to become
>> "weightless."
>>
>
> Obviously,,, but it still has "zip" to do with reducing power to avoid
> accelerating excessively in the dive.
>
>

[Mxsmanic]

mike regish writes:

> I'm sure he meant to reduce power in order to not exceed Vne.

You reach Vne quickly in a parabola. Remember, you have to accelerate
downwards at 1 G in order to maintain the zero-G state. In five seconds your
rate of descent from the top of the parabola must be 9600 fpm, or 95 kts
_straight down_ (and thus much faster if you are also moving forward).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mxsmanic]

mike regish writes:

> Uhh..hate to burst your bubble again, but -1 g would have you straining at
> your seatbelt with a force of 1 g.

+1 G plus -1 G equals 0 G. In the zero-G state, you're accelerating downward
at 1 G, thus -1 G vertically. Since the acceleration due to gravity is +1 G,
they cancel, and the result is weightlessness.

> If you're not wearing one, you would be
> exerting 1 g against the roof.

You'll want to heavily pad the entire cabin, anyway, since the return to the 1
G state (and often higher than that, since you must pull out of the parabola)
can be abrupt.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[mike regish]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> mike regish writes:
>
>> Uhh..hate to burst your bubble again, but -1 g would have you straining
>> at
>> your seatbelt with a force of 1 g.
>
> +1 G plus -1 G equals 0 G. In the zero-G state, you're accelerating
> downward
> at 1 G, thus -1 G vertically. Since the acceleration due to gravity is +1
> G,
> they cancel, and the result is weightlessness.

You're accelerating downward at exactly 1 g, or 32 feet per second per
second. Zero g is zero g.

>
>> If you're not wearing one, you would be
>> exerting 1 g against the roof.
>
> You'll want to heavily pad the entire cabin, anyway, since the return to
> the 1
> G state (and often higher than that, since you must pull out of the
> parabola)
> can be abrupt.

My seat belt can hold me in quite nicely at zero g. Even at -1 g, which
would have me exerting a 1 g force against the belt. I'm not flying the
freakin' vomit comet. I'm in a freakin' Tripacer and we're all strapped in.

Again...1 g is straight and level. Zero g is downward acceleration at 32
feet per second per second. -1 g is downward acceleration at 64 feet per
second per second.
>
mike (I've done it already...in a real plane...just wanted to know how to do
it longer...which I now know how to do thanks to info from a real pilot)
regish

P.S. I don't think I'm going to defend you against your flame club anymore.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> mike regish writes:
>
>> Uhh..hate to burst your bubble again, but -1 g would have you
>> straining at your seatbelt with a force of 1 g.
>
> +1 G plus -1 G equals 0 G. In the zero-G state, you're accelerating
> downward at 1 G, thus -1 G vertically. Since the acceleration due to
> gravity is +1 G, they cancel, and the result is weightlessness.

Nope, you're anm idiot.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> mike regish writes:
>
>> I'm sure he meant to reduce power in order to not exceed Vne.
>
> You reach Vne quickly in a parabola.

No, you don't moron


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Maxwell writes:
>
>> Obviously,,, but it still has "zip" to do with reducing power to avoid
>> accelerating excessively in the dive.
>
> Accelerating excessively would destroy the zero-G trajectory.

You;re an idiot.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> JGalban via AviationKB.com writes:
>
>> That's what I do. Keeps me from accelerating excessively in the
>> dive.
>
> Your acceleration is fixed in a parabola.

No, it isn't


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Maxwell writes:
>
>> Clueless as usual.
>
> A zero-G parabola is a ballistic trajectory;

No, it isn't.


bertie

[Mxsmanic]

mike regish writes:

> You're accelerating downward at exactly 1 g, or 32 feet per second per
> second.

Yes: -1.0 G.

> Zero g is zero g.

You're not actually at zero G. You're in free fall, accelerating with the
aircraft at exactly -1.0 G, which negates the acceleration due to gravity.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> mike regish writes:
>
>> You're accelerating downward at exactly 1 g, or 32 feet per second
>> per second.
>
> Yes: -1.0 G.
>
>> Zero g is zero g.
>
> You're not actually at zero G. You're in free fall, accelerating with
> the aircraft at exactly -1.0 G, which negates the acceleration due to
> gravity.

You're a moron.


Bertie

[Mxsmanic]

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

> No, it isn't.

A ballistic trajectory in a vacuum above the Earth's surface and subject only
to gravity.

A more precise but abstract description of the path is an orbital trajectory.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[[email protected]]

Mxsmanic > wrote:
> mike regish writes:

> > You're accelerating downward at exactly 1 g, or 32 feet per second per
> > second.

> Yes: -1.0 G.

> > Zero g is zero g.

> You're not actually at zero G. You're in free fall, accelerating with the
> aircraft at exactly -1.0 G, which negates the acceleration due to gravity.

Velocity and acceleration are vectors and the sign depends on the
coordinate system you define.

Since you didn't define a coordinate system your use of negative
numbers is just a pile of steaming crap designed to produce an
endless arguement since you know most people would just use the
absolute values when diving towards the Earth as the direction is
understood by everyone not designing their responses to start an
endless ****ing contest to show how smart they are.

If you are accelerlating at 1 G in the direction of the Earth, you
experience a force of 0 G.

If you are accelerlating at -1 G in the direction of the Earth, you
experience a force of 2 G.

If you are accelerlating at 1 G in the direction away from Earth, you
experience a force of 2 G.

If you are accelerlating at -1 G in the direction away from Earth, you
experience a force of 0 G.

Twit.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_2_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip writes:
>
>> No, it isn't.
>
> A ballistic trajectory in a vacuum above the Earth's surface and
> subject only to gravity.
>
> A more precise but abstract description of the path is an orbital
> trajectory.


Oops, you're wrong again!
Don't you ever get tired of that?


Bertie