Favorite panel gadget?

[Mxsmanic]

If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a single
new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything else--assume
you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install, and
why?

[Tina]

Antispamometer, for noise reduction.



On May 14, 8:25 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a single
> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything else--assume
> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install, and
> why?

[Gig 601Xl Builder]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a single
> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything else--assume
> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install, and
> why?

A Flux-Capacitor.

[Stefan Hueneburg[_2_]]

Mxsmanic wrote:

> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a single
> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything else--assume
> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install, and
> why?

Try a "simulated" electronic flight bag.

http://fswidgets.com/shop/product_info.php?cPath=23&products_id=44

cu

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a
> single new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything
> else--assume you have the room for something new), which instrument
> would you install, and why?
>

Machine gun just in case you ever decided to go fly.


Bertie

[Steve Foley]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a
single
> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything
else--assume
> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install,
and
> why?

A KX-155A, because my radio sux.

[Mxsmanic]

Stefan Hueneburg writes:

> Try a "simulated" electronic flight bag.

Are the real ones any good? And I thought they were independent of the
instrument panel.

[Darkwing]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a
> single
> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything
> else--assume
> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install,
> and
> why?


Passenger eject button.

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a
> single
> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything
> else--assume
> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install,
> and
> why?

Weapons. I'd really, really like machine guns. Warp drive would be cool,
too.

Barring that, however, I think the absolute coolest thing would be a FLIR
(Forward-Looking-InfraRed) camera hooked up to a large multi-function
display. I've seen enough flight demos to believe that (when they become
more affordable) these things will be the greatest advance in flight safety
since the artificial horizon was invented.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a
> single
> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything
> else--assume
> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install,
> and
> why?

Maybe a dedicated photo printer.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
:

>
> "Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
> ...
>> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a
>> single
>> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything
>> else--assume
>> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you
>> install, and
>> why?
>
> Maybe a dedicated photo printer.
>
>
>

Awww, ain't you kewt?



Bertie

[Tina]

How about control-alt-delete keys?

[Steve Foley]

"Tina" > wrote in message
...
> How about control-alt-delete keys?
>

Certainly a pause button.

[Robert M. Gary]

On May 14, 8:33*am, "Steve Foley" > wrote:

> A KX-155A, because my radio sux.

Wow, don't shoot too high dude! ;)

-Robert

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
news:_WHWj.15064$6D1.10743@trndny02...
> "Tina" > wrote in message
> ...
>> How about control-alt-delete keys?
>>
>
> Certainly a pause button.
>

Good idea! Can I change mine to an UNDUE button.

[Tina]

I think a horn might be a good idea. Or turn signals.

In real life a cup holder would be nice.



On May 14, 4:49 pm, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
> "Steve Foley" > wrote in message
>
> news:_WHWj.15064$6D1.10743@trndny02...
>
> > "Tina" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> How about control-alt-delete keys?
>
> > Certainly a pause button.
>
> Good idea! Can I change mine to an UNDUE button.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a single
> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything else--assume
> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install, and
> why?
Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Jim Burns[_2_]]

Blender... for margaritas and other fruity drinks.
Jim
(beat ya to it Allison!)

"Tina" > wrote in message
...
> Antispamometer, for noise reduction.
>
>
>
> On May 14, 8:25 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> > If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a
single
> > new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything
else--assume
> > you have the room for something new), which instrument would you
install, and
> > why?
>

[Viperdoc]

I thought about a blender, but was worried that if I spilled one it would
ruin the seats, so now I just drink chilled vodka straight up.

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Viperdoc" > wrote in message
...
>I thought about a blender, but was worried that if I spilled one it would
>ruin the seats, so now I just drink chilled vodka straight up.
>
>

Remember, were talking about Anthony's panel here. You could always get up
and walk over to bar to use the blender.

[Tina]

IV is a lot less messy if there are some bumps around. I'd not
suggest chilled, though.


On May 14, 7:18 pm, "Viperdoc" > wrote:
> I thought about a blender, but was worried that if I spilled one it would
> ruin the seats, so now I just drink chilled vodka straight up.

[Tina]

Mr H, you simply have to get into the spirit of things here. AOA
indeed. That is sick, I tell you, sick!



On May 14, 6:28 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> Mxsmanic wrote:
> > If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a single
> > new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything else--assume
> > you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install, and
> > why?
>
> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Tina wrote:
> Mr H, you simply have to get into the spirit of things here. AOA
> indeed. That is sick, I tell you, sick!
>
>
>
> On May 14, 6:28 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> Mxsmanic wrote:
>>> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a single
>>> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything else--assume
>>> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install, and
>>> why?
>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques
>
Must be getting old. I don't understand your post.

--
Dudley Henriques

[[email protected]]

> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a single
> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything else--assume
> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install, and
> why?

Perhaps an instrument that shows wind velocity.. I guess this can only
be calculated if there is a GPS to figure out ground speed.

[Steve Foley]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
...
>On May 14, 8:33 am, "Steve Foley" > wrote:

>> A KX-155A, because my radio sux.

>Wow, don't shoot too high dude! ;)

>-Robert

I'd say I have a really good chance of getting what I want before anyone
else :)

[Dave[_5_]]

> Passenger eject button.

Hey! I had one of those at one time. I even put it in an empty hole in
the panel of the plane I flew at one point. It was a genuine military
surplus Eject Button (big, red, and engraved "EJECT") and associated
switch. Of course it didn't do anything - but was an excellent
conversation piece.

Dave

[Dave Doe]

In article >,
says...
> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a single
> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything else--assume
> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install, and
> why?

Expresso coffee machine

--
Duncan

[Paul M. Anton]

A no limit gas card that required no repayment

Paul
N1431A
KPLU

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Tina > wrote in news:2ffb4a7e-35ae-4612-8728-
:

> How about control-alt-delete keys?
>

Actually, a nice globe compass owuld be nice.

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
:

>
> "Steve Foley" > wrote in message
> news:_WHWj.15064$6D1.10743@trndny02...
>> "Tina" > wrote in message
>> news:2ffb4a7e-35ae-4612-8728-219bdb393c26
@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com
>> ...
>>> How about control-alt-delete keys?
>>>
>>
>> Certainly a pause button.
>>
>
> Good idea! Can I change mine to an UNDUE button.
>


An yew kin stick it on wif duck tape!




Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
:

>
> "Viperdoc" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I thought about a blender, but was worried that if I spilled one it
>>would ruin the seats, so now I just drink chilled vodka straight up.
>>
>>
>
> Remember, were talking about Anthony's panel here. You could always
> get up and walk over to bar to use the blender.


And in your's you could just walk over to the trailer fo another rice
beer. Keerful not to knock the ol cherokee of it's cinder blocks though.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Tina > wrote in
:

> I think a horn might be a good idea. Or turn signals.
>
> In real life a cup holder would be nice.

Got one in the work airplane. Just use sa thermos in the little ones.


Bertie

[Steve Foley]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...

> >
> Must be getting old. I don't understand your post.
>

All of the other posts are more aligned with MX's needs. Wall clocks, eject
buttons, Undo buttons, etc.

An AOA indicator is simply too useful to belong in this list.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Steve Foley wrote:
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Must be getting old. I don't understand your post.
>>
>
> All of the other posts are more aligned with MX's needs. Wall clocks, eject
> buttons, Undo buttons, etc.
>
> An AOA indicator is simply too useful to belong in this list.
>

Pertinent and politely offered question...........answer given in kind.
Individuals will have to make up their own mind on these issues, but I
see no positive result from adding to the forum's noise level.

For me anyway, if it's a normal post, I'll at least make an attempt to
handle it without nailing the poster. If it's noise, I'll attempt to
pass on it. If it's a troll and the poster attempts to argue with the
answer, I'll consider the argument on it's merit and engage or disengage
as the post warrants.
Either way, the control of how I handle Usenet will rest with me and not
with others :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

[JB]

On May 14, 8:25*am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> If money were not an issue, and you had the opportunity to install a single
> new gadget in your instrument panel (without removing anything else--assume
> you have the room for something new), which instrument would you install, and
> why?

Flush toilet. I am REALLY tired of trying to stand up in a single
engine, pull my pants around my ankles, and take care of business
without totally ending up in some vertical dive-bombing death spiral.
Sticking my crank in a hole in the instrument panel would be
wonderful. Ladies...sorry, I don't know what to suggest.

--Jeff

[Shirl]

JB > wrote:
> Flush toilet. I am REALLY tired of trying to stand up in a single
> engine, pull my pants around my ankles, and take care of business
> without totally ending up in some vertical dive-bombing death spiral.
> Sticking my crank in a hole in the instrument panel would be
> wonderful. Ladies...sorry, I don't know what to suggest.

I know this will sound like "mom", but ... don't have coffee before you
leave, and "go" before you saddle up?
;-)

[Mxsmanic]

Dudley Henriques writes:

> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.

I can understand that. Why are angle-of-attack indicators so rare in
aircraft? Is it something that is difficult to measure? I should think it
would be far more useful than trying to figure out what combination of speed,
weight, pitch angle, etc., is likely to produce a stall.

[Gezellig]

On Wed, 14 May 2008 18:28:16 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:

> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.

Why is this not standard?

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
>
> I can understand that. Why are angle-of-attack indicators so rare in
> aircraft? Is it something that is difficult to measure? I should think it
> would be far more useful than trying to figure out what combination of speed,
> weight, pitch angle, etc., is likely to produce a stall.

You are absolutely correct. The military for years has used AOA to
determine cruise, climb, descent, and approach speeds. Almost all high
performance aircraft performance charts use AOA to determine performance
criteria.
For example, a T38 is flown on approach at an optimum AOA of .6 units.
This optimizes the aircraft at whatever approach airspeed the GW
dictates. (remaining fuel). The aircraft can also be flown manually on
approach using an IAS of 155kts plus fuel, which is an additional 1kt
for every l00lbs remaining over 1000lbs. You can fly the approach either
way but as you can see, it's a lot easier using AOA.
Some T38's BTW, incorporate an AOA indexer on the glare shield that will
automatically keep you on speed if you fly the airplane in the on speed
green "donut". The top of the indexer is a red chevron pointing downward
to indicate you're too slow on the approach. The bottom is a red chevron
pointing upward showing too high an airspeed. Keeping the airplane right
on speed in the green donut gives you .6 units AOA regardless of the
gross weight of the airplane.
To expand just a bit on the T38, the AOA indicator shows up as arbitrary
"units" ranging from 0 to 1.0 based on the angle range of the AOA vane.
Some other helpful data supplied by the AOA indicator if I remember
right for the Talon is a maximum range at about .2 units, and a maximum
endurance at .3 units. Initial stall buffet is t about .9 units.

In light civilian airplanes, AOA indicators can be quite useful although
the low speeds involved don't necessarily produce the same advantages
found in much higher performance airplanes where the slightest
difference between optimum and off optimum AOA for a specific
configuration can mean big differences in performance.

Personally, I like the idea of basing even light airplane performance on
AOA. If this format is begun at the manufacturer's level and proper
testing on the aircraft done at that point, the end user has a simple
and precise instrument on which to base the aircraft's performance. This
decreases cockpit workload which is a good thing in itself.

It is my understanding after talking to some ATR (ATP) friends of mine
flying for major air carriers that their companies have been engaged
with manufacturers on better ways to use AOA in their aircraft operations.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Gezellig wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 18:28:16 -0400, Dudley Henriques wrote:
>
>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
>
> Why is this not standard?

I gave up years ago trying to figure out why things that make flying
safer and better are not made standard. :-)))
AOA indication has always as far as I know been considered an option on
light civilian aircraft. There are costs involved as well as performance
testing to determine optimum parameters....another step in the process.
The main reason I believe is the fact that light civilian airplanes fly
in the area of lowest performance where the raw data already existing
using basic instrumentation is sufficient.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Dudley Henriques wrote:
> Mxsmanic wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques writes:
>>
>>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
>>
>> I can understand that. Why are angle-of-attack indicators so rare in
>> aircraft? Is it something that is difficult to measure? I should
>> think it
>> would be far more useful than trying to figure out what combination of
>> speed,
>> weight, pitch angle, etc., is likely to produce a stall.
>
> You are absolutely correct. The military for years has used AOA to
> determine cruise, climb, descent, and approach speeds. Almost all high
> performance aircraft performance charts use AOA to determine performance
> criteria.
> For example, a T38 is flown on approach at an optimum AOA of .6 units.
> This optimizes the aircraft at whatever approach airspeed the GW
> dictates. (remaining fuel). The aircraft can also be flown manually on
> approach using an IAS of 155kts plus fuel, which is an additional 1kt
> for every l00lbs remaining over 1000lbs. You can fly the approach either
> way but as you can see, it's a lot easier using AOA.
> Some T38's BTW, incorporate an AOA indexer on the glare shield that will
> automatically keep you on speed if you fly the airplane in the on speed
> green "donut". The top of the indexer is a red chevron pointing downward
> to indicate you're too slow on the approach. The bottom is a red chevron
> pointing upward showing too high an airspeed. Keeping the airplane right
> on speed in the green donut gives you .6 units AOA regardless of the
> gross weight of the airplane.
> To expand just a bit on the T38, the AOA indicator shows up as arbitrary
> "units" ranging from 0 to 1.0 based on the angle range of the AOA vane.
> Some other helpful data supplied by the AOA indicator if I remember
> right for the Talon is a maximum range at about .2 units, and a maximum
> endurance at .3 units. Initial stall buffet is t about .9 units.
>
> In light civilian airplanes, AOA indicators can be quite useful although
> the low speeds involved don't necessarily produce the same advantages
> found in much higher performance airplanes where the slightest
> difference between optimum and off optimum AOA for a specific
> configuration can mean big differences in performance.
>
> Personally, I like the idea of basing even light airplane performance on
> AOA. If this format is begun at the manufacturer's level and proper
> testing on the aircraft done at that point, the end user has a simple
> and precise instrument on which to base the aircraft's performance. This
> decreases cockpit workload which is a good thing in itself.
>
> It is my understanding after talking to some ATR (ATP) friends of mine
> flying for major air carriers that their companies have been engaged
> with manufacturers on better ways to use AOA in their aircraft operations.
>
Correction on the indexer. The lower chevron should read yellow and not red.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Benjamin Dover]

Shirl > wrote in news:Xmnushal8y-
:

> JB > wrote:
>> Flush toilet. I am REALLY tired of trying to stand up in a single
>> engine, pull my pants around my ankles, and take care of business
>> without totally ending up in some vertical dive-bombing death spiral.
>> Sticking my crank in a hole in the instrument panel would be
>> wonderful. Ladies...sorry, I don't know what to suggest.
>
> I know this will sound like "mom", but ... don't have coffee before you
> leave, and "go" before you saddle up?
> ;-)
>

Isn't "Pee - take" on every pilot's pre-flight check list?

[[email protected]]

On May 15, 4:16*pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> I gave up years ago trying to figure out why things that make flying
> safer and better are not made standard. :-)))
> AOA indication has always as far as I know been considered an option on
> light civilian aircraft. There are costs involved as well as performance
> testing to determine optimum parameters....another step in the process.
> The main reason I believe is the fact that light civilian airplanes fly
> in the area of lowest performance where the raw data already existing
> using basic instrumentation is sufficient.

They're somewhat more common on experimentals (i.e., homebuilts), and
I agree, I wish I had one on even my lowly Cherokee.

[Tina]

For plain vanilla flying, D, (point to point in an M20J) what
improvement might we expect using aoa instead of what we use now in
takeoff, cruise, or landing phases?

I can appreciate aoa's utility in higher performance a/c, or maybe
when flying close to some edge, but am not sure how it would improve,
for example, our take off (best rate for the first few hundred feet,
that's less than 30 seconds of flying) , then a prudent cruise climb
to our en route altitude. En route, usually as high as possible
consistent with the trip length and winds, we go to the lowest rpm we
can, and maintain the same ias going lower until approaching the OM.

[Kloudy via AviationKB.com]

Benjamin Dover wrote:
>Shirl > wrote in news:Xmnushal8y-
:
>
>
>Isn't "Pee - take" on every pilot's pre-flight check list?

Dunno 'bout you but I tend to

"Pee- Leave"

Unless I'm in need of some ballast.

Ya know, we glider guys already have this stuff figgered out.
I learned the hard way that if the guy above you opens the gear doors while
on cruise... : )

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/aviation/200805/1

[Gig 601Xl Builder]

HARRY POTTER wrote:
> Mxsmanic wrote:
>
>> Dudley Henriques writes:
>>
>>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
>> I can understand that. Why are angle-of-attack indicators so rare in
>> aircraft? Is it something that is difficult to measure? I should think
>> it would be far more useful than trying to figure out what combination of
>> speed, weight, pitch angle, etc., is likely to produce a stall.
>
> It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most singles because
> there is no place to put it. The prop creates circling air currents all
> through the fuselage, making any kind of AOA indication incorrect. You
> can't put it on the wing, because whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA
> would move.
>
> This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles, like the Extra
> 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>


Out on the wing is where most singles have them.

http://www.aircraftspruce.com/menus/in/angleofattackindicators.html


Dynon who has the indicator built into their EFIS puts the probe out on
the pitot tube.

http://dynonavionics.com/docs/D180_Feature_AOA.html

[Ken S. Tucker]

On May 16, 9:11 am, Gig 601Xl Builder >
wrote:
> HARRY POTTER wrote:
> > Mxsmanic wrote:
>
> >> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
> >>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
> >> I can understand that. Why are angle-of-attack indicators so rare in
> >> aircraft? Is it something that is difficult to measure? I should think
> >> it would be far more useful than trying to figure out what combination of
> >> speed, weight, pitch angle, etc., is likely to produce a stall.
>
> > It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most singles because
> > there is no place to put it. The prop creates circling air currents all
> > through the fuselage, making any kind of AOA indication incorrect. You
> > can't put it on the wing, because whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA
> > would move.
>
> > This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles, like the Extra
> > 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>
> Out on the wing is where most singles have them.
>
> http://www.aircraftspruce.com/menus/in/angleofattackindicators.html
>
> Dynon who has the indicator built into their EFIS puts the probe out on
> the pitot tube.
>
> http://dynonavionics.com/docs/D180_Feature_AOA.html

An AoA is an interesting instrument. For me (in a sim
with a customized AoA indicator), I had difficulty due to
information overload, probably because I rely on my
Attitude indicator, IAS, Rate of Descent and Altimeter,
with an ear alert for a stall buzzer.
On top of that, (in real flying), is radio, traffic, weather
such as cross-winds, flap settings, RPM, seat belt,
mooses on the runway bla-bla-bla.
All those instruments need to jive and are vital to make
a safe landing.
I've tried using modified instrument panels with some
limited success gauged subjectively, but an AoA was
a "recreational instrument", fun to watch during stalls.
Ken

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Tina wrote:
> For plain vanilla flying, D, (point to point in an M20J) what
> improvement might we expect using aoa instead of what we use now in
> takeoff, cruise, or landing phases?
>
> I can appreciate aoa's utility in higher performance a/c, or maybe
> when flying close to some edge, but am not sure how it would improve,
> for example, our take off (best rate for the first few hundred feet,
> that's less than 30 seconds of flying) , then a prudent cruise climb
> to our en route altitude. En route, usually as high as possible
> consistent with the trip length and winds, we go to the lowest rpm we
> can, and maintain the same ias going lower until approaching the OM.
>
>
>
>

Generally, even in high performance airplanes, you don't reference AOA
on takeoff during rotation. If the airplane, (any airplane) has been
tested and charted for optimum climb AOA, you could set that up after
rotation for best rate for example.
The bottom line for light airplanes concerning AOA is that if it's
available, it can optimize performance for you referencing one instrument.
You can of course, as you have correctly noted, accomplish these things
manually as well.
I'm simply used to using AOA for various performance references so it's
normal for me to think in these terms.
For most pilots in light airplanes, using AOA would simply be another
option.


--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

HARRY POTTER wrote:
> Mxsmanic wrote:
>
>> Dudley Henriques writes:
>>
>>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
>> I can understand that. Why are angle-of-attack indicators so rare in
>> aircraft? Is it something that is difficult to measure? I should think
>> it would be far more useful than trying to figure out what combination of
>> speed, weight, pitch angle, etc., is likely to produce a stall.
>
> It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most singles because
> there is no place to put it. The prop creates circling air currents all
> through the fuselage, making any kind of AOA indication incorrect. You
> can't put it on the wing, because whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA
> would move.
>
> This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles, like the Extra
> 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>

It's true the port should be placed in an area of undisturbed airflow.
This is usually out on the wing upper surface somewhere near the leading
edge but will vary from type to type. Thus placed, prop circulation
shouldn't be an issue.

Can't say I've seen an Extra with an AOA system, but there's no reason
at all the aircraft shouldn't have one if the owner so desired as far as
I can see.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Ken S. Tucker]

On May 16, 12:14 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> HARRY POTTER wrote:
> > Mxsmanic wrote:
>
> >> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
> >>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
> >> I can understand that. Why are angle-of-attack indicators so rare in
> >> aircraft? Is it something that is difficult to measure? I should think
> >> it would be far more useful than trying to figure out what combination of
> >> speed, weight, pitch angle, etc., is likely to produce a stall.
>
> > It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most singles because
> > there is no place to put it. The prop creates circling air currents all
> > through the fuselage, making any kind of AOA indication incorrect. You
> > can't put it on the wing, because whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA
> > would move.
>
> > This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles, like the Extra
> > 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>
> It's true the port should be placed in an area of undisturbed airflow.
> This is usually out on the wing upper surface somewhere near the leading
> edge but will vary from type to type. Thus placed, prop circulation
> shouldn't be an issue.
>
> Can't say I've seen an Extra with an AOA system, but there's no reason
> at all the aircraft shouldn't have one if the owner so desired as far as
> I can see.
> Dudley Henriques

What an SOB like myself would do flying a low wing
monoplane is tape fluff on the the upper surface to
observe turbulence variation over wing's lifting surface.
Maybe not the AoA you want, but it's a proportional
effect, and easy to see at a glance.

That's SOP filmed using X-craft during maneuvers.
Ken

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Ken S. Tucker wrote:
> On May 16, 12:14 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> HARRY POTTER wrote:
>>> Mxsmanic wrote:
>>>> Dudley Henriques writes:
>>>>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
>>>> I can understand that. Why are angle-of-attack indicators so rare in
>>>> aircraft? Is it something that is difficult to measure? I should think
>>>> it would be far more useful than trying to figure out what combination of
>>>> speed, weight, pitch angle, etc., is likely to produce a stall.
>>> It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most singles because
>>> there is no place to put it. The prop creates circling air currents all
>>> through the fuselage, making any kind of AOA indication incorrect. You
>>> can't put it on the wing, because whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA
>>> would move.
>>> This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles, like the Extra
>>> 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>> It's true the port should be placed in an area of undisturbed airflow.
>> This is usually out on the wing upper surface somewhere near the leading
>> edge but will vary from type to type. Thus placed, prop circulation
>> shouldn't be an issue.
>>
>> Can't say I've seen an Extra with an AOA system, but there's no reason
>> at all the aircraft shouldn't have one if the owner so desired as far as
>> I can see.
>> Dudley Henriques
>
> What an SOB like myself would do flying a low wing
> monoplane is tape fluff on the the upper surface to
> observe turbulence variation over wing's lifting surface.
> Maybe not the AoA you want, but it's a proportional
> effect, and easy to see at a glance.
>
> That's SOP filmed using X-craft during maneuvers.
> Ken

Back in the early days this was how they looked at airflow over a wing
surface. Still a viable plan and not too costly to boot :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

[Ken S. Tucker]

On May 16, 12:42 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> Ken S. Tucker wrote:
> > On May 16, 12:14 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> >> HARRY POTTER wrote:
> >>> Mxsmanic wrote:
> >>>> Dudley Henriques writes:
> >>>>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
> >>>> I can understand that. Why are angle-of-attack indicators so rare in
> >>>> aircraft? Is it something that is difficult to measure? I should think
> >>>> it would be far more useful than trying to figure out what combination of
> >>>> speed, weight, pitch angle, etc., is likely to produce a stall.
> >>> It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most singles because
> >>> there is no place to put it. The prop creates circling air currents all
> >>> through the fuselage, making any kind of AOA indication incorrect. You
> >>> can't put it on the wing, because whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA
> >>> would move.
> >>> This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles, like the Extra
> >>> 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
> >> It's true the port should be placed in an area of undisturbed airflow.
> >> This is usually out on the wing upper surface somewhere near the leading
> >> edge but will vary from type to type. Thus placed, prop circulation
> >> shouldn't be an issue.
>
> >> Can't say I've seen an Extra with an AOA system, but there's no reason
> >> at all the aircraft shouldn't have one if the owner so desired as far as
> >> I can see.
> >> Dudley Henriques
>
> > What an SOB like myself would do flying a low wing
> > monoplane is tape fluff on the the upper surface to
> > observe turbulence variation over wing's lifting surface.
> > Maybe not the AoA you want, but it's a proportional
> > effect, and easy to see at a glance.
>
> > That's SOP filmed using X-craft during maneuvers.
> > Ken
>
> Back in the early days this was how they looked at airflow over a wing
> surface. Still a viable plan and not too costly to boot :-)
> Dudley Henriques

Yeah, and you get to watch laminar <sp?> airflow.
When the fluffs go backward, the amount of energy
that has been removed from the air stream shows up
as suction, indicative of a crappy airfoil profile in cruise
or the onset of a stall creeping from the traiing edge,
which is good stuff.
Ken

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in
:

> On May 16, 12:14 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> HARRY POTTER wrote:
>> > Mxsmanic wrote:
>>
>> >> Dudley Henriques writes:
>>
>> >>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
>> >> I can understand that. Why are angle-of-attack indicators so rare
>> >> in aircraft? Is it something that is difficult to measure? I
>> >> should think it would be far more useful than trying to figure out
>> >> what combination of speed, weight, pitch angle, etc., is likely to
>> >> produce a stall.
>>
>> > It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most singles
>> > because there is no place to put it. The prop creates circling air
>> > currents all through the fuselage, making any kind of AOA
>> > indication incorrect. You can't put it on the wing, because
>> > whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA would move.
>>
>> > This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles, like
>> > the Extra 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>>
>> It's true the port should be placed in an area of undisturbed
>> airflow. This is usually out on the wing upper surface somewhere near
>> the leading edge but will vary from type to type. Thus placed, prop
>> circulation shouldn't be an issue.
>>
>> Can't say I've seen an Extra with an AOA system, but there's no
>> reason at all the aircraft shouldn't have one if the owner so desired
>> as far as I can see.
>> Dudley Henriques
>
> What an SOB like myself would do flying a low wing
> monoplane is tape fluff on the the upper surface to
> observe turbulence variation over wing's lifting surface.
> Maybe not the AoA you want, but it's a proportional
> effect, and easy to see at a glance.
>
> That's SOP filmed using X-craft during maneuvers.


You've just been demoted from half wit to 3/8 wit.



Bertie
>

[More_Flaps]

On May 17, 10:52*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 16, 12:14 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> >> HARRY POTTER wrote:
> >> > Mxsmanic wrote:
>
> >> >> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
> >> >>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
> >> >> I can understand that. *Why are angle-of-attack indicators so rare
> >> >> in aircraft? *Is it something that is difficult to measure? *I
> >> >> should think it would be far more useful than trying to figure out
> >> >> what combination of speed, weight, pitch angle, etc., is likely to
> >> >> produce a stall.
>
> >> > It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most singles
> >> > because there is no place to put it. The prop creates circling air
> >> > currents all through the fuselage, making any kind of AOA
> >> > indication incorrect. You can't put it on the wing, because
> >> > whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA would move.
>
> >> > This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles, like
> >> > the Extra 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>
> >> It's true the port should be placed in an area of undisturbed
> >> airflow. This is usually out on the wing upper surface somewhere near
> >> the leading edge but will vary from type to type. Thus placed, prop
> >> circulation shouldn't be an issue.
>
> >> Can't say I've seen an Extra with an AOA system, but there's no
> >> reason at all the aircraft shouldn't have one if the owner so desired
> >> as far as I can see.
> >> Dudley Henriques
>
> > What an SOB like myself would do flying a low wing
> > monoplane is tape fluff on the the upper surface to
> > observe turbulence variation over wing's lifting surface.
> > Maybe not the AoA you want, but it's a proportional
> > effect, and easy to see at a glance.
>
> > That's SOP filmed using X-craft during maneuvers.
>
> You've just been demoted from half wit to 3/8 wit.
>

My you're in a good mood. His fluff as an AOA indicator suggestion is
so moronic I was sure he would be rated as a complete twit. Anyway,
first aero. lesson completed and enjoyed immensly!

Cheers

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in
:

> On May 16, 12:42 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> Ken S. Tucker wrote:
>> > On May 16, 12:14 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> >> HARRY POTTER wrote:
>> >>> Mxsmanic wrote:
>> >>>> Dudley Henriques writes:
>> >>>>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
>> >>>> I can understand that. Why are angle-of-attack indicators so
>> >>>> rare in aircraft? Is it something that is difficult to measure?
>> >>>> I should think it would be far more useful than trying to
>> >>>> figure out what combination of speed, weight, pitch angle, etc.,
>> >>>> is likely to produce a stall.
>> >>> It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most singles
>> >>> because there is no place to put it. The prop creates circling
>> >>> air currents all through the fuselage, making any kind of AOA
>> >>> indication incorrect. You can't put it on the wing, because
>> >>> whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA would move.
>> >>> This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles, like
>> >>> the Extra 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>> >> It's true the port should be placed in an area of undisturbed
>> >> airflow. This is usually out on the wing upper surface somewhere
>> >> near the leading edge but will vary from type to type. Thus
>> >> placed, prop circulation shouldn't be an issue.
>>
>> >> Can't say I've seen an Extra with an AOA system, but there's no
>> >> reason at all the aircraft shouldn't have one if the owner so
>> >> desired as far as I can see.
>> >> Dudley Henriques
>>
>> > What an SOB like myself would do flying a low wing
>> > monoplane is tape fluff on the the upper surface to
>> > observe turbulence variation over wing's lifting surface.
>> > Maybe not the AoA you want, but it's a proportional
>> > effect, and easy to see at a glance.
>>
>> > That's SOP filmed using X-craft during maneuvers.
>> > Ken
>>
>> Back in the early days this was how they looked at airflow over a
>> wing surface. Still a viable plan and not too costly to boot :-)
>> Dudley Henriques
>
> Yeah, and you get to watch laminar <sp?> airflow.
> When the fluffs go backward, the amount of energy
> that has been removed from the air stream shows up
> as suction, indicative of a crappy airfoil profile in cruise
> or the onset of a stall creeping from the traiing edge,
> which is good stuff.
> Ken
>

1/4 now.



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

More_Flaps > wrote in
:

> On May 17, 10:52*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote
>> innews:2c2cac6f-783f-4b99-b9
> :
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On May 16, 12:14 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> >> HARRY POTTER wrote:
>> >> > Mxsmanic wrote:
>>
>> >> >> Dudley Henriques writes:
>>
>> >> >>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
>> >> >> I can understand that. *Why are angle-of-attack indicators so
>> >> >> rare
>
>> >> >> in aircraft? *Is it something that is difficult to measure? *I
>> >> >> should think it would be far more useful than trying to figure
>> >> >> out what combination of speed, weight, pitch angle, etc., is
>> >> >> likely to produce a stall.
>>
>> >> > It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most
>> >> > singles because there is no place to put it. The prop creates
>> >> > circling air currents all through the fuselage, making any kind
>> >> > of AOA indication incorrect. You can't put it on the wing,
>> >> > because whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA would move.
>>
>> >> > This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles,
>> >> > like the Extra 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>>
>> >> It's true the port should be placed in an area of undisturbed
>> >> airflow. This is usually out on the wing upper surface somewhere
>> >> near the leading edge but will vary from type to type. Thus
>> >> placed, prop circulation shouldn't be an issue.
>>
>> >> Can't say I've seen an Extra with an AOA system, but there's no
>> >> reason at all the aircraft shouldn't have one if the owner so
>> >> desired as far as I can see.
>> >> Dudley Henriques
>>
>> > What an SOB like myself would do flying a low wing
>> > monoplane is tape fluff on the the upper surface to
>> > observe turbulence variation over wing's lifting surface.
>> > Maybe not the AoA you want, but it's a proportional
>> > effect, and easy to see at a glance.
>>
>> > That's SOP filmed using X-craft during maneuvers.
>>
>> You've just been demoted from half wit to 3/8 wit.
>>
>
> My you're in a good mood. His fluff as an AOA indicator suggestion is
> so moronic I was sure he would be rated as a complete twit. Anyway,
> first aero. lesson completed and enjoyed immensly!


Good man. Didn't get sick obviously!



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Ken S. Tucker" > wrote in
:

> On May 16, 9:11 am, Gig 601Xl Builder >
> wrote:
>> HARRY POTTER wrote:
>> > Mxsmanic wrote:
>>
>> >> Dudley Henriques writes:
>>
>> >>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
>> >> I can understand that. Why are angle-of-attack indicators so rare
>> >> in aircraft? Is it something that is difficult to measure? I
>> >> should think it would be far more useful than trying to figure out
>> >> what combination of speed, weight, pitch angle, etc., is likely to
>> >> produce a stall.
>>
>> > It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most singles
>> > because there is no place to put it. The prop creates circling air
>> > currents all through the fuselage, making any kind of AOA
>> > indication incorrect. You can't put it on the wing, because
>> > whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA would move.
>>
>> > This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles, like
>> > the Extra 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>>
>> Out on the wing is where most singles have them.
>>
>> http://www.aircraftspruce.com/menus/in/angleofattackindicators.html
>>
>> Dynon who has the indicator built into their EFIS puts the probe out
>> on the pitot tube.
>>
>> http://dynonavionics.com/docs/D180_Feature_AOA.html
>
> An AoA is an interesting instrument. For me (in a sim
> with a customized AoA indicator), I had difficulty due to
> information overload,

You get information overload reading the tag on your undies.


Bertie

[More_Flaps]

On May 17, 11:37*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> More_Flaps > wrote :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 17, 10:52*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote
> >> innews:2c2cac6f-783f-4b99-b9
> > :
>
> >> > On May 16, 12:14 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> >> >> HARRY POTTER wrote:
> >> >> > Mxsmanic wrote:
>
> >> >> >> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
> >> >> >>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack indicator.
> >> >> >> I can understand that. *Why are angle-of-attack indicators so
> >> >> >> rare
>
> >> >> >> in aircraft? *Is it something that is difficult to measure? *I
> >> >> >> should think it would be far more useful than trying to figure
> >> >> >> out what combination of speed, weight, pitch angle, etc., is
> >> >> >> likely to produce a stall.
>
> >> >> > It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most
> >> >> > singles because there is no place to put it. The prop creates
> >> >> > circling air currents all through the fuselage, making any kind
> >> >> > of AOA indication incorrect. You can't put it on the wing,
> >> >> > because whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA would move.
>
> >> >> > This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles,
> >> >> > like the Extra 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>
> >> >> It's true the port should be placed in an area of undisturbed
> >> >> airflow. This is usually out on the wing upper surface somewhere
> >> >> near the leading edge but will vary from type to type. Thus
> >> >> placed, prop circulation shouldn't be an issue.
>
> >> >> Can't say I've seen an Extra with an AOA system, but there's no
> >> >> reason at all the aircraft shouldn't have one if the owner so
> >> >> desired as far as I can see.
> >> >> Dudley Henriques
>
> >> > What an SOB like myself would do flying a low wing
> >> > monoplane is tape fluff on the the upper surface to
> >> > observe turbulence variation over wing's lifting surface.
> >> > Maybe not the AoA you want, but it's a proportional
> >> > effect, and easy to see at a glance.
>
> >> > That's SOP filmed using X-craft during maneuvers.
>
> >> You've just been demoted from half wit to 3/8 wit.
>
> > My you're in a good mood. His fluff as an AOA indicator suggestion is
> > so moronic I was sure he would be rated as a complete twit. Anyway,
> > first aero. lesson completed and enjoyed immensly!
>
> Good man. Didn't get sick obviously!
>

No way, was way too engaged for that. Found the barrel roll pretty
disorienting, I sort of had no idea where where we going... Stall turn
was a complete blast -better than a loop. Manouvers were less than
3.5g I did a bunch of wingovers quite smoothly (but not very air/
land coverage precise) and started to get my feet working... Nice
plane, seems sensitive to rudder and stick compared to a 172(!) but a
certain smoothness to it.

Cheers

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

More_Flaps > wrote in
:

> On May 17, 11:37*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> More_Flaps > wrote
>> innews:5a213b39-2be7-4cab-80e8-6076
> :
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On May 17, 10:52*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote
>> >> innews:2c2cac6f-783f-4b99-b9
>> > :
>>
>> >> > On May 16, 12:14 pm, Dudley Henriques >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> HARRY POTTER wrote:
>> >> >> > Mxsmanic wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> Dudley Henriques writes:
>>
>> >> >> >>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack
>> >> >> >>> indicator.
>> >> >> >> I can understand that. *Why are angle-of-attack indicators
>> >> >> >> so rare
>>
>> >> >> >> in aircraft? *Is it something that is difficult to measure?
>> >> >> >> *
> I
>> >> >> >> should think it would be far more useful than trying to
>> >> >> >> figure out what combination of speed, weight, pitch angle,
>> >> >> >> etc., is likely to produce a stall.
>>
>> >> >> > It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most
>> >> >> > singles because there is no place to put it. The prop creates
>> >> >> > circling air currents all through the fuselage, making any
>> >> >> > kind of AOA indication incorrect. You can't put it on the
>> >> >> > wing, because whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA would
>> >> >> > move.
>>
>> >> >> > This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles,
>> >> >> > like the Extra 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>>
>> >> >> It's true the port should be placed in an area of undisturbed
>> >> >> airflow. This is usually out on the wing upper surface
>> >> >> somewhere near the leading edge but will vary from type to
>> >> >> type. Thus placed, prop circulation shouldn't be an issue.
>>
>> >> >> Can't say I've seen an Extra with an AOA system, but there's no
>> >> >> reason at all the aircraft shouldn't have one if the owner so
>> >> >> desired as far as I can see.
>> >> >> Dudley Henriques
>>
>> >> > What an SOB like myself would do flying a low wing
>> >> > monoplane is tape fluff on the the upper surface to
>> >> > observe turbulence variation over wing's lifting surface.
>> >> > Maybe not the AoA you want, but it's a proportional
>> >> > effect, and easy to see at a glance.
>>
>> >> > That's SOP filmed using X-craft during maneuvers.
>>
>> >> You've just been demoted from half wit to 3/8 wit.
>>
>> > My you're in a good mood. His fluff as an AOA indicator suggestion
>> > is so moronic I was sure he would be rated as a complete twit.
>> > Anyway, first aero. lesson completed and enjoyed immensly!
>>
>> Good man. Didn't get sick obviously!
>>
>
> No way, was way too engaged for that. Found the barrel roll pretty
> disorienting, I sort of had no idea where where we going... Stall turn
> was a complete blast -better than a loop. Manouvers were less than
> 3.5g I did a bunch of wingovers quite smoothly (but not very air/
> land coverage precise) and started to get my feet working... Nice
> plane, seems sensitive to rudder and stick compared to a 172(!) but a
> certain smoothness to it.
>

Ooop, disregard the other.

Everyhting is more sensitve than a 172. You can take a nap in those
things!
Is it a new or old Citabria? Nice that you got so much covered in one
lesson, though!

Bertie

[More_Flaps]

On May 18, 12:52*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> More_Flaps > wrote :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 17, 11:37*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> More_Flaps > wrote
> >> innews:5a213b39-2be7-4cab-80e8-6076
> > :
>
> >> > On May 17, 10:52*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> >> "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote
> >> >> innews:2c2cac6f-783f-4b99-b9
> >> > :
>
> >> >> > On May 16, 12:14 pm, Dudley Henriques >
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> HARRY POTTER wrote:
> >> >> >> > Mxsmanic wrote:
>
> >> >> >> >> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
> >> >> >> >>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack
> >> >> >> >>> indicator.
> >> >> >> >> I can understand that. *Why are angle-of-attack indicators
> >> >> >> >> so rare
>
> >> >> >> >> in aircraft? *Is it something that is difficult to measure?
> >> >> >> >> *
> > I
> >> >> >> >> should think it would be far more useful than trying to
> >> >> >> >> figure out what combination of speed, weight, pitch angle,
> >> >> >> >> etc., is likely to produce a stall.
>
> >> >> >> > It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most
> >> >> >> > singles because there is no place to put it. The prop creates
> >> >> >> > circling air currents all through the fuselage, making any
> >> >> >> > kind of AOA indication incorrect. You can't put it on the
> >> >> >> > wing, because whenever you banked the aircraft, the AOA would
> >> >> >> > move.
>
> >> >> >> > This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic singles,
> >> >> >> > like the Extra 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>
> >> >> >> It's true the port should be placed in an area of undisturbed
> >> >> >> airflow. This is usually out on the wing upper surface
> >> >> >> somewhere near the leading edge but will vary from type to
> >> >> >> type. Thus placed, prop circulation shouldn't be an issue.
>
> >> >> >> Can't say I've seen an Extra with an AOA system, but there's no
> >> >> >> reason at all the aircraft shouldn't have one if the owner so
> >> >> >> desired as far as I can see.
> >> >> >> Dudley Henriques
>
> >> >> > What an SOB like myself would do flying a low wing
> >> >> > monoplane is tape fluff on the the upper surface to
> >> >> > observe turbulence variation over wing's lifting surface.
> >> >> > Maybe not the AoA you want, but it's a proportional
> >> >> > effect, and easy to see at a glance.
>
> >> >> > That's SOP filmed using X-craft during maneuvers.
>
> >> >> You've just been demoted from half wit to 3/8 wit.
>
> >> > My you're in a good mood. His fluff as an AOA indicator suggestion
> >> > is so moronic I was sure he would be rated as a complete twit.
> >> > Anyway, first aero. lesson completed and enjoyed immensly!
>
> >> Good man. Didn't get sick obviously!
>
> > No way, was way too engaged for that. Found the barrel roll pretty
> > disorienting, I sort of had no idea where where we going... Stall turn
> > was a complete blast -better than a loop. Manouvers were less than
> > 3.5g *I did a bunch of wingovers quite smoothly *(but not very air/
> > land coverage precise) and started to get my feet working... Nice
> > plane, seems sensitive to rudder and stick compared to a 172(!) but a
> > certain smoothness to it.
>
> Ooop, disregard the other.
>
> Everyhting is more sensitve than a 172. You can take a nap in those
> things!
> Is it a new or old Citabria? Nice that you got so much covered in one
> lesson, though!
>

6 years new..,

Cheers

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

More_Flaps > wrote in
:

> On May 18, 12:52*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> More_Flaps > wrote
>> innews:1af38f97-0880-40ef-a297-eb9f
> :
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On May 17, 11:37*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> More_Flaps > wrote
>> >> innews:5a213b39-2be7-4cab-80e8-6076
>> > :
>>
>> >> > On May 17, 10:52*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> >> "Ken S. Tucker" > wrote
>> >> >> innews:2c2cac6f-783f-4b99-b9
>> >> > :
>>
>> >> >> > On May 16, 12:14 pm, Dudley Henriques >
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >> HARRY POTTER wrote:
>> >> >> >> > Mxsmanic wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> >> Dudley Henriques writes:
>>
>> >> >> >> >>> Not a moment's hesitation.......An angle of attack
>> >> >> >> >>> indicator.
>> >> >> >> >> I can understand that. *Why are angle-of-attack
>> >> >> >> >> indicators so rare
>>
>> >> >> >> >> in aircraft? *Is it something that is difficult to
>> >> >> >> >> measure? *
>> > I
>> >> >> >> >> should think it would be far more useful than trying to
>> >> >> >> >> figure out what combination of speed, weight, pitch
>> >> >> >> >> angle, etc., is likely to produce a stall.
>>
>> >> >> >> > It's my understanding that AOA indicators are not on most
>> >> >> >> > singles because there is no place to put it. The prop
>> >> >> >> > creates circling air currents all through the fuselage,
>> >> >> >> > making any kind of AOA indication incorrect. You can't put
>> >> >> >> > it on the wing, because whenever you banked the aircraft,
>> >> >> >> > the AOA would move.
>>
>> >> >> >> > This makes me wonder, do high performance aerobatic
>> >> >> >> > singles, like the Extra 300 have AOA's? If so, how?
>>
>> >> >> >> It's true the port should be placed in an area of
>> >> >> >> undisturbed airflow. This is usually out on the wing upper
>> >> >> >> surface somewhere near the leading edge but will vary from
>> >> >> >> type to type. Thus placed, prop circulation shouldn't be an
>> >> >> >> issue.
>>
>> >> >> >> Can't say I've seen an Extra with an AOA system, but there's
>> >> >> >> no reason at all the aircraft shouldn't have one if the
>> >> >> >> owner so desired as far as I can see.
>> >> >> >> Dudley Henriques
>>
>> >> >> > What an SOB like myself would do flying a low wing
>> >> >> > monoplane is tape fluff on the the upper surface to
>> >> >> > observe turbulence variation over wing's lifting surface.
>> >> >> > Maybe not the AoA you want, but it's a proportional
>> >> >> > effect, and easy to see at a glance.
>>
>> >> >> > That's SOP filmed using X-craft during maneuvers.
>>
>> >> >> You've just been demoted from half wit to 3/8 wit.
>>
>> >> > My you're in a good mood. His fluff as an AOA indicator
>> >> > suggestion is so moronic I was sure he would be rated as a
>> >> > complete twit. Anyway, first aero. lesson completed and enjoyed
>> >> > immensly!
>>
>> >> Good man. Didn't get sick obviously!
>>
>> > No way, was way too engaged for that. Found the barrel roll pretty
>> > disorienting, I sort of had no idea where where we going... Stall
>> > turn was a complete blast -better than a loop. Manouvers were less
>> > than 3.5g *I did a bunch of wingovers quite smoothly *(but not very
>> > air/ land coverage precise) and started to get my feet working...
>> > Nice plane, seems sensitive to rudder and stick compared to a
>> > 172(!) but a certain smoothness to it.
>>
>> Ooop, disregard the other.
>>
>> Everyhting is more sensitve than a 172. You can take a nap in those
>> things!
>> Is it a new or old Citabria? Nice that you got so much covered in one
>> lesson, though!
>>
>
> 6 years new..,
>

They're supossed to be a bit tighter than even a good old one. I like
the stain;ess panel on the belly as well. Makes cleaning up the burps a
bit easier! I believe spades are standard on them? We've got the STC for
our's. Never flown one with them. Be interesting to see how much they
help with stick pressures.

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Tina" > wrote in message
...
>I think a horn might be a good idea. Or turn signals.

There was a plane at OSH a couple years ago, can't remember the make, but it
was like a super cub turbine, and the joker put a train air horn in the
thing, running off of plenty of the bleed air...

He snuck up on me while I was directing traffic at a taxiway intersection,
and blew the thing.

I really thought I was about to be run over by the crash truck, and this was
the last seconds of my life!
It was funny, later. <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Dan Camper]

On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 01:59:52 -0500, Morgans wrote:

> "Tina" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I think a horn might be a good idea. Or turn signals.
>
> There was a plane at OSH a couple years ago, can't remember the make, but it
> was like a super cub turbine, and the joker put a train air horn in the
> thing, running off of plenty of the bleed air...
>
> He snuck up on me while I was directing traffic at a taxiway intersection,
> and blew the thing.
>
> I really thought I was about to be run over by the crash truck, and this was
> the last seconds of my life!
> It was funny, later. <g>

ha
--
http://tr.im/1f9p

[John Clear]

In article >,
Morgans > wrote:
>
>"Tina" > wrote in message
...
>>I think a horn might be a good idea. Or turn signals.
>
>There was a plane at OSH a couple years ago, can't remember the make, but it
>was like a super cub turbine, and the joker put a train air horn in the
>thing, running off of plenty of the bleed air...

It was a Helio Courier. It was a great example of boys and their
toys. It also had off-road truck tires and other examples of "Don't
even bother asking 'why?'".

http://www.etigerrr.com/Skypark/jay_jensen.htm
http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/photo/047270.html

I recall reading somewhere (perhaps Sport Aviation) that they took
off some of the sillyness (air horn, monster truck tires) and
returned it to a somewhat more mundane configuration.

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

[Morgans[_2_]]

"John Clear" > wrote
>
> It was a Helio Courier. It was a great example of boys and their
> toys. It also had off-road truck tires and other examples of "Don't
> even bother asking 'why?'".
>
> http://www.etigerrr.com/Skypark/jay_jensen.htm
> http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/photo/047270.html

Yep, that was it! Vuuury, vuuuury strange. I liked it though!
--
Jim in NC

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tina" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I think a horn might be a good idea. Or turn signals.
>
> There was a plane at OSH a couple years ago, can't remember the make, but
> it was like a super cub turbine, and the joker put a train air horn in the
> thing, running off of plenty of the bleed air...
>
> He snuck up on me while I was directing traffic at a taxiway intersection,
> and blew the thing.
>
> I really thought I was about to be run over by the crash truck, and this
> was the last seconds of my life!
> It was funny, later. <g>

Haw! Good story.

I've yearned for a big-asssed air horn on my airplane many times. Mostly
when the dweeb in front of me waits 'til he's at the hold short line to put
his flight plan in his GPS.

BRRRAAAAAZZZZZZZZZZ!

Move it, asshole!

--
Dan

T182T at 4R4

[Frank Stutzman[_3_]]

Dan Luke > wrote:

> I've yearned for a big-asssed air horn on my airplane many times. Mostly
> when the dweeb in front of me waits 'til he's at the hold short line to put
> his flight plan in his GPS.

I carry a portable marine air horn (not unlike http://tinyurl.com/d6sukp) in
my plane for such situations. Lean out the window, push the button, usually
gets the offender to get his head out of the cockpit.

Best of all, its fairly cheap (for aviation) and requires no FAA
paperwork.

--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Boise, ID