Perfect loop

[More_Flaps]

My aerobatic traing is going very well, I'm having all the fun I
thought it should provide. So far I haven't messed up a manouver but
I'm nagged by the thought: How can I tell if my loops are perfect
circles? At present I go to full power at the vertical phase and over
the top but then throttle back a lot as I go vertical again .My wings
are level when inverted. I'm pulling 3.5 G as I pull up and level out
again. I hit my wake every time but I wonder how much I should
throttle back on the descent phase. Should I just try to keep rpm
constant? Any ifeas BtB or Dudley or other aerobatic pilot?

Cheers

[Viperdoc]

What kind of airplane? The G pull really doesn't matter. You can do a 2.5G
loop in a Pitts or Extra, or a 7G loop. It's all a matter of finesse and
feel.

People will talke about easing up as you slow at the top of the loop, but it
kind of depends on the plane as well as your energy and speed.

Really, the best way to tell would be to get a ground instructor to watch-
otherwise, you could practice a million loops but they could all be wrong.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

More_Flaps > wrote in news:7d7074a7-c7bc-4a8b-9fe8-
:

> My aerobatic traing is going very well, I'm having all the fun I
> thought it should provide. So far I haven't messed up a manouver but
> I'm nagged by the thought: How can I tell if my loops are perfect
> circles? At present I go to full power at the vertical phase and over
> the top but then throttle back a lot as I go vertical again .My wings
> are level when inverted. I'm pulling 3.5 G as I pull up and level out
> again. I hit my wake every time but I wonder how much I should
> throttle back on the descent phase. Should I just try to keep rpm
> constant? Any ifeas BtB or Dudley or other aerobatic pilot?
>

Dudley's the guy, but the only really reliable way I know of to tell
until you become experienced enough to know by feel is to get an outside
observer, or, better yet, a tripod mounted recording of them.
Into the wind helps a lot BTW, but "L" shaped or "granny" loops are
pretty much standard at this stage of your game!



Bertie

[More_Flaps]

On Jun 5, 9:18*am, "Viperdoc" > wrote:
> What kind of airplane? The G pull really doesn't matter. You can do a 2.5G
> loop in a Pitts or Extra, or a 7G loop. It's all a matter of finesse and
> feel.
>
> People will talke about easing up as you slow at the top of the loop, but it
> kind of depends on the plane as well as your energy and speed.
>
> Really, the best way to tell would be to get a ground instructor to watch-
> otherwise, you could practice a million loops but they could all be wrong.

I mentioned the G as I thought it might indicate that the entry and
exit radii were similar -it's the bit of the top I'm not suee about.
Could I use timing from vertical to vertical?

Cheers

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

More_Flaps wrote:
> My aerobatic traing is going very well, I'm having all the fun I
> thought it should provide. So far I haven't messed up a manouver but
> I'm nagged by the thought: How can I tell if my loops are perfect
> circles? At present I go to full power at the vertical phase and over
> the top but then throttle back a lot as I go vertical again .My wings
> are level when inverted. I'm pulling 3.5 G as I pull up and level out
> again. I hit my wake every time but I wonder how much I should
> throttle back on the descent phase. Should I just try to keep rpm
> constant? Any ifeas BtB or Dudley or other aerobatic pilot?
>
> Cheers

Constant speed prop or fixed pitch? Makes a difference.

Basically, what you're doing in a loop is controlling energy by varying
g and airspeed. The main error pilots make that causes egg shaped loops
is in not easing off the g through the high apex. If you don't ease off
the g through the top you pull the nose down and spoil the circumference
of the maneuver.
As for power control, if you are using a constant speed prop, leave it
alone and use MP (if at all) to control airspeed. In most trainers like
the Decathlon for example, you can just set the airplane up power and
prop wise and fly the loop starting with the suggested entry airspeed
and vary the g to control the shape of the maneuver without touching the
engine controls at all. With a fixed pitch prop, you can increase power
on the way up the vertical line (watch the redline) and decrease it on
the backside (watch the redline). Be especially watchful for overspeed
with the fixed pitch prop.
Generally your g profiule sounds about right 3.5 to 4.0 are good
profiles for the average trainer using about 140 for your entry.

Hitting the wake is a good sign. Sounds like you're doing ok to me.


--
Dudley Henriques

[More_Flaps]

On Jun 5, 9:18*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> More_Flaps > wrote in news:7d7074a7-c7bc-4a8b-9fe8-
> :
>
> > My aerobatic traing is going very well, I'm having all the fun I
> > thought it should provide. So far I haven't messed up a manouver but
> > I'm nagged by the thought: How can I tell if my loops are perfect
> > circles? At present I go to full power at the vertical phase and over
> > the top but then throttle back a lot as I go vertical again .My wings
> > are level when inverted. I'm pulling 3.5 G as I pull up and level out
> > again. I hit my wake every time but I wonder how much I should
> > throttle back on the descent phase. Should I just try to keep rpm
> > constant? Any ifeas BtB or Dudley or other aerobatic pilot?
>
> Dudley's the guy, but the only really reliable way I know of to tell
> until you become experienced enough to know by feel is to get an outside
> observer, or, better yet, a tripod mounted recording of them.
> Into the wind helps a lot BTW, but "L" shaped or "granny" loops are
> pretty much standard at this stage of your game!
>

OK but it's not practical for me to have a ground camera. Should rpm
be constant at all stages? What do you use in your Citabria? Could I
try counting through verticals to give me an indication? With a 3.5 G
entry I'm puliing about 0.5 G at the top is that going to give me a
near circular loop?

Cheers

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

More_Flaps > wrote in
:

> On Jun 5, 9:18*am, "Viperdoc" > wrote:
>> What kind of airplane? The G pull really doesn't matter. You can do a
>> 2.5G
>
>> loop in a Pitts or Extra, or a 7G loop. It's all a matter of finesse
>> and feel.
>>
>> People will talke about easing up as you slow at the top of the loop,
>> but
> it
>> kind of depends on the plane as well as your energy and speed.
>>
>> Really, the best way to tell would be to get a ground instructor to
>> watch-
>
>> otherwise, you could practice a million loops but they could all be
>> wrong.
>
>
> I mentioned the G as I thought it might indicate that the entry and
> exit radii were similar -it's the bit of the top I'm not suee about.
> Could I use timing from vertical to vertical?
>
> Cheers
>

Well, with your internal clock, but your speed is constantly changing.
From inside, it's all by feel and intuition, really and the only way
you're going to get that is by seeing it from outside, either through a
critique from someone else or by video ( useless unless the camera is
fixed, BTW) You're probably also torqueing out a bit at the top, which
is another common beginner error and the video will help you visualise
this more accurately when you get back in the airplane after viewing it.
Loops are pretty much the easiest thing to start with and the most
difficult to perfect!

Bertie

[More_Flaps]

On Jun 5, 9:40*am, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> More_Flaps wrote:
> > My aerobatic traing is going very well, I'm having all the fun I
> > thought it should provide. So far I haven't messed up a manouver but
> > I'm nagged by the thought: How can I tell if my loops are perfect
> > circles? At present I go to full power at the vertical phase and over
> > the top but then throttle back a lot as I go vertical again .My wings
> > are level when inverted. I'm pulling 3.5 G as I pull up and level out
> > again. I hit my wake every time but I wonder how much I should
> > throttle back on the descent phase. Should I just try to keep rpm
> > constant? Any ifeas BtB or Dudley or other aerobatic pilot?
>
> > Cheers
>
> Constant speed prop or fixed pitch? Makes a difference.
>
> Basically, what you're doing in a loop is controlling energy by varying
> g and airspeed. The main error pilots make that causes egg shaped loops
> is in not easing off the g through the high apex. If you don't ease off
> the g through the top you pull the nose down and spoil the circumference
> of the maneuver.
> As for power control, if you are using a constant speed prop, leave it
> alone and use MP (if at all) to control airspeed. In most trainers like
> the Decathlon for example, you can just set the airplane up power and
> prop wise and fly the loop starting with the suggested entry airspeed
> and vary the g to control the shape of the maneuver without touching the
> engine controls at all. With a fixed pitch prop, you can increase power
> on the way up the vertical line (watch the redline) and decrease it on
> the backside (watch the redline). Be especially watchful for overspeed
> with the fixed pitch prop.
> Generally your g profiule sounds about right 3.5 to 4.0 are good
> profiles for the average trainer using about 140 for your entry.
>
> Hitting the wake is a good sign. Sounds like you're doing ok to me.
>

Thanks D, my entry is 140 as you suggest and i'm exiting close to that
speed. Its a fixed pitch plane and I am trottling well back on the
dive (2000 rpm) and my G at the top is dropping to about 0.5, I'm
easing the stick only slightly as I go over. Any other ideas that I
can use to evaluate my circularity (or lack thereof?).

Cheers

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

More_Flaps > wrote in news:12a345a9-5ce8-4938-9b3e-
:

> On Jun 5, 9:18*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> More_Flaps > wrote in news:7d7074a7-c7bc-4a8b-
9fe8-
>> :
>>
>> > My aerobatic traing is going very well, I'm having all the fun I
>> > thought it should provide. So far I haven't messed up a manouver
but
>> > I'm nagged by the thought: How can I tell if my loops are perfect
>> > circles? At present I go to full power at the vertical phase and
over
>> > the top but then throttle back a lot as I go vertical again .My
wings
>> > are level when inverted. I'm pulling 3.5 G as I pull up and level
out
>> > again. I hit my wake every time but I wonder how much I should
>> > throttle back on the descent phase. Should I just try to keep rpm
>> > constant? Any ifeas BtB or Dudley or other aerobatic pilot?
>>
>> Dudley's the guy, but the only really reliable way I know of to tell
>> until you become experienced enough to know by feel is to get an
outside
>> observer, or, better yet, a tripod mounted recording of them.
>> Into the wind helps a lot BTW, but "L" shaped or "granny" loops are
>> pretty much standard at this stage of your game!
>>
>
> OK but it's not practical for me to have a ground camera. Should rpm
> be constant at all stages? What do you use in your Citabria? Could I
> try counting through verticals to give me an indication? With a 3.5 G
> entry I'm puliing about 0.5 G at the top is that going to give me a
> near circular loop?

Mine's stil not flying! Aaaargh! More delays now. I'm going on a fairly
rusty memory now, so take it al with a grain of salt, but just get a
friend to take a quick snip of you from a distance if you can. The other
option is a good ground observer, preferably with a viewing glass for
the loops ( something clear with a circle on it so he can hold it up
against your figure to compare)
Max poser as soon as it will take it all the way up and a bit over the
top and then reducing on the way down to about a third throttle or less
on the way down sounds about right for a Citabria. Your G figures sound
about right, though, so you're probably doing pretty good.


Bertie

[More_Flaps]

On Jun 5, 9:51*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> More_Flaps > wrote in news:12a345a9-5ce8-4938-9b3e-
> :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 5, 9:18*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> More_Flaps > wrote in news:7d7074a7-c7bc-4a8b-
> 9fe8-
> >> :
>
> >> > My aerobatic traing is going very well, I'm having all the fun I
> >> > thought it should provide. So far I haven't messed up a manouver
> but
> >> > I'm nagged by the thought: How can I tell if my loops are perfect
> >> > circles? At present I go to full power at the vertical phase and
> over
> >> > the top but then throttle back a lot as I go vertical again .My
> wings
> >> > are level when inverted. I'm pulling 3.5 G as I pull up and level
> out
> >> > again. I hit my wake every time but I wonder how much I should
> >> > throttle back on the descent phase. Should I just try to keep rpm
> >> > constant? Any ifeas BtB or Dudley or other aerobatic pilot?
>
> >> Dudley's the guy, but the only really reliable way I know of to tell
> >> until you become experienced enough to know by feel is to get an
> outside
> >> observer, or, better yet, a tripod mounted recording of them.
> >> Into the wind helps a lot BTW, but "L" shaped or "granny" loops are
> >> pretty much standard at this stage of your game!
>
> > OK but it's not practical for me to have a ground camera. Should rpm
> > be constant at all stages? What do you use in your Citabria? Could I
> > try counting through verticals to give me an indication? With a 3.5 G
> > entry I'm puliing about 0.5 G at the top is that going to give me a
> > near circular loop?
>
> Mine's stil not flying! Aaaargh! More delays now. I'm going on a fairly
> rusty memory now, so take it al with a grain of salt, but just get a
> friend to take a quick snip of you from a distance if you can. The other
> option is a good ground observer, preferably with a viewing glass for
> the loops ( something clear with a circle on it so he can hold it up
> against your figure to compare)
> Max poser as soon as it will take it all the way up

Love that typo!!!!! Max poser indeed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CHEERS!

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

More_Flaps > wrote in news:3d5df584-796e-4cfd-96a5-
:

> On Jun 5, 9:51*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> More_Flaps > wrote in news:12a345a9-5ce8-4938-
9b3e-
>> :
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jun 5, 9:18*am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> More_Flaps > wrote in news:7d7074a7-c7bc-4a8b-
>> 9fe8-
>> >> :
>>
>> >> > My aerobatic traing is going very well, I'm having all the fun I
>> >> > thought it should provide. So far I haven't messed up a manouver
>> but
>> >> > I'm nagged by the thought: How can I tell if my loops are
perfect
>> >> > circles? At present I go to full power at the vertical phase and
>> over
>> >> > the top but then throttle back a lot as I go vertical again .My
>> wings
>> >> > are level when inverted. I'm pulling 3.5 G as I pull up and
level
>> out
>> >> > again. I hit my wake every time but I wonder how much I should
>> >> > throttle back on the descent phase. Should I just try to keep
rpm
>> >> > constant? Any ifeas BtB or Dudley or other aerobatic pilot?
>>
>> >> Dudley's the guy, but the only really reliable way I know of to
tell
>> >> until you become experienced enough to know by feel is to get an
>> outside
>> >> observer, or, better yet, a tripod mounted recording of them.
>> >> Into the wind helps a lot BTW, but "L" shaped or "granny" loops
are
>> >> pretty much standard at this stage of your game!
>>
>> > OK but it's not practical for me to have a ground camera. Should
rpm
>> > be constant at all stages? What do you use in your Citabria? Could
I
>> > try counting through verticals to give me an indication? With a 3.5
G
>> > entry I'm puliing about 0.5 G at the top is that going to give me a
>> > near circular loop?
>>
>> Mine's stil not flying! Aaaargh! More delays now. I'm going on a
fairly
>> rusty memory now, so take it al with a grain of salt, but just get a
>> friend to take a quick snip of you from a distance if you can. The
other
>> option is a good ground observer, preferably with a viewing glass for
>> the loops ( something clear with a circle on it so he can hold it up
>> against your figure to compare)
>> Max poser as soon as it will take it all the way up
>
> Love that typo!!!!! Max poser indeed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>

Heh heh. Stay well away form showing off for those on the ground though!


Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

More_Flaps wrote:
> On Jun 5, 9:40 am, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> More_Flaps wrote:
>>> My aerobatic traing is going very well, I'm having all the fun I
>>> thought it should provide. So far I haven't messed up a manouver but
>>> I'm nagged by the thought: How can I tell if my loops are perfect
>>> circles? At present I go to full power at the vertical phase and over
>>> the top but then throttle back a lot as I go vertical again .My wings
>>> are level when inverted. I'm pulling 3.5 G as I pull up and level out
>>> again. I hit my wake every time but I wonder how much I should
>>> throttle back on the descent phase. Should I just try to keep rpm
>>> constant? Any ifeas BtB or Dudley or other aerobatic pilot?
>>> Cheers
>> Constant speed prop or fixed pitch? Makes a difference.
>>
>> Basically, what you're doing in a loop is controlling energy by varying
>> g and airspeed. The main error pilots make that causes egg shaped loops
>> is in not easing off the g through the high apex. If you don't ease off
>> the g through the top you pull the nose down and spoil the circumference
>> of the maneuver.
>> As for power control, if you are using a constant speed prop, leave it
>> alone and use MP (if at all) to control airspeed. In most trainers like
>> the Decathlon for example, you can just set the airplane up power and
>> prop wise and fly the loop starting with the suggested entry airspeed
>> and vary the g to control the shape of the maneuver without touching the
>> engine controls at all. With a fixed pitch prop, you can increase power
>> on the way up the vertical line (watch the redline) and decrease it on
>> the backside (watch the redline). Be especially watchful for overspeed
>> with the fixed pitch prop.
>> Generally your g profiule sounds about right 3.5 to 4.0 are good
>> profiles for the average trainer using about 140 for your entry.
>>
>> Hitting the wake is a good sign. Sounds like you're doing ok to me.
>>
>
> Thanks D, my entry is 140 as you suggest and i'm exiting close to that
> speed. Its a fixed pitch plane and I am trottling well back on the
> dive (2000 rpm) and my G at the top is dropping to about 0.5, I'm
> easing the stick only slightly as I go over. Any other ideas that I
> can use to evaluate my circularity (or lack thereof?).
>
> Cheers

Many display pilots (myself included) will develop a set reference plane
for vertical maneuvers in the interest of establishing a continuity of
visual cues.

Basically what this means is that referencing the same side for your
visuals can result in the establishment of a continuity reference wise
that is a great help with energy management and timing. Eventually,you
will be "matching" what the airplane is telling you audibly and through
the controls, with the visual cues you are receiving on the horizon and
wingtip.

My reference sequencing for Loops, Immelmanns , and Cubans was the nose
initially in the pull, then the left wingtip through 120 degrees, then
the nose again.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Viperdoc wrote:
> However, it's important to remember that the technique needs to vary with
> the plane and amount of energy going into the loop. From the front in the
> Decathlon/Citabria, after the initial pull, the back of the lift strut
> should carve a small circle around the horizon. It is pretty easy to get a
> sense if the loop is pinched at the top. Unfortunately, without a sight
> gauge it is somewhat harder (in my opinion) to get a sense of flying over
> the top and knowing when to ease up on the pull.
>
> In the Extra, on the other hand, it generally takes around a 6.5-7G pull to
> get a good looking loop, since entry speed is generally around 160-180k, and
> the pull needs to be harder to get the loop at around the same size. Pulling
> only 3-4g will get a giant loop, but doesn't present well. Because of the
> greater energy going into the loop in an Extra or equivalent plane, there is
> less need to ease off and float over the top.
>
> If you really want a challenge in energy management, try flying a loop with
> an entry speed of around 100 or even 80k. It is a great drill in learning
> how to manage your energy for any given situation.
>
> The best way to accurately assess your loop is to get a ground critique,
> which is also true of any other figure. Without this, you could do the same
> figure over and over but have it wrong and never know. (at least this was my
> excuse during competitions).
>
> Flying acro is a great flying experience and confidence builder- it will
> never get boring and will always present new challenges. Just be sure to get
> good spin recognition and recovery training (for both upright and inverted
> spins). In this vein, I think most instructors are not a big fan of the
> Beggs-Mueller method of 1. power off, 2. let go of the stick, and 3. rudder
> opposite the yaw (not direction of spin).
>
> This is the topic for a whole thread in itself.
>
> Best of luck and have fun!
>
>
Respectfully as I know you own and fly an Extra :-)

1. Sensing a loop profile through the float is not especially hard to
accomplish without a sight gauge.

2. 6.5 to 7.0 g's even in the Extra is an extremely aggressive loop
entry and totally unnecessary for any pilot flying normal aerobatics.
A 170 entry speed using 4g's will get you a nice even looking loop in a
Pitts S1S, and this is for demonstration.
But what you said is interesting. Patty Wagstaff is a friend and flies
her Extra in extremely aggressive displays; in fact, some of the best
and most aggressive flying I've ever seen. I'll email her tonight and
ask her what she uses for loop entry in her displays. I'll be surprised
if she uses 6.5 to 7 but I could be wrong. She's EXTREMELY aggressive
acrobatically.

--
Dudley Henriques

[TheSmokingGnu]

More_Flaps wrote:
> How can I tell if my loops are perfect
> circles?

Ask Dudley for technique, but as for the physics: a perfect loop would
have a constant acceleration. Just take an accelerometer with you and
see how consistent you are (preferably one that can discount the Earth's
gravity, and one that you can download the data from, so that you don't
have to stare at it while in flight).

TheSmokingGnu

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Viperdoc" > wrote in
:

> Let me know what she says- I've spoken with her a number of times, at
> OSH as well as St. Augustine (I doubt she would remember, but I have
> the photos). I flew with Phil Knight in some of my intro flights in
> the Extra, as well as Nicolai Timofeev on several occasions for
> instruction. Phil was much more aggressive, but he had me pulling on
> looping maneuvers (full, half, and quarter pulls to vertical) pretty
> hard, just to where the stick pressure got "soft" at the edge of a
> stall, in all of the looping maneuvers. With a reasonable pull, this
> was around 6-7G, as were the pulls to vertical, after doing a bump to
> load the G. In general, my impression of the same figures in the Extra
> were around 2-3G more than the Super Decathlon I flew prior to getting
> the Extra.
>
> Klein G, who is on the board of the IAC and frequents this NG, also
> owns an Extra, and may have a different opinion.
>
> In an early contest after getting the Extra, I flew it in sportsman
> with around the same pulls as with the Decathlon (4.5-4.5G), and the
> figures were of course a lot bigger due to the higher speed, but
> didn't present well. It seems that with a high performance monoplane
> it takes more g to keep the figures tight and present better.
>
> However, I'm far from an expert, and now I fly acro for fun- it's just
> as enjoyable, without the compulsion to make everything perfect. It
> had started to get to be too much of an obsession, and the fun factor
> decreased. At this point I figured that if I was looking for stress I
> could park the plane and go back to work!
>
> I would be interested in Patty's comments, but my guess is that
> looking at the tight corners she pulls that they're at least 7G,
> particularly when entered with a lot of energy.
>
>
>

Oh my God. I'm getting a headache just reading this! I suppose it;s not
so bad when you're semi reclined, but still. I've rarely been over five
even in square loops.

Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Viperdoc wrote:

> In an early contest after getting the Extra, I flew it in sportsman with
> around the same pulls as with the Decathlon (4.5-4.5G), and the figures were
> of course a lot bigger due to the higher speed, but didn't present well. It
> seems that with a high performance monoplane it takes more g to keep the
> figures tight and present better.
>
> However, I'm far from an expert, and now I fly acro for fun- it's just as
> enjoyable, without the compulsion to make everything perfect. It had started
> to get to be too much of an obsession, and the fun factor decreased. At this
> point I figured that if I was looking for stress I could park the plane and
> go back to work!
>
> I would be interested in Patty's comments, but my guess is that looking at
> the tight corners she pulls that they're at least 7G, particularly when
> entered with a lot of energy.
>
>

I've never flown competition having mostly done demonstration flying in
military prop fighters, the AT6, Decathlons and the Pitts, but I agree
totally with you that 3 to 4 wouldn't present well in an Extra routine
being judged from the ground.

The problem I see with 6+ to 7 is snatch factor (no pun intended :-). At
that much positive g into the pull you are really close to alpha crit
and could easily slide the airplane deep into drag rise or into
accelerated stall from the high aoa delta (rates). In your airplane
could be done however with a steady hand :-)
Of course having a 10g spread both ways can be helpful :-)

I emailed Patty already. Don't know where she is today but she said
something a few days ago about showing her horse. She usually answers
when she gets a few moments.
We work together on a display flying workgroup. She's a great person and
is deeply invlved as I am in the human factors involved in display
flight safety issues.
If I hear back from her I'll post a ping for you.

The question as I put it to her was for her entry g profile for a single
loop during her demonstration in the 300S. I specified single maneuver
realizing her entry speed and g would be higher for a sequence starting
with a loop.
--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> "Viperdoc" > wrote in
> :

>> I would be interested in Patty's comments, but my guess is that
>> looking at the tight corners she pulls that they're at least 7G,
>> particularly when entered with a lot of energy.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Oh my God. I'm getting a headache just reading this! I suppose it;s not
> so bad when you're semi reclined, but still. I've rarely been over five
> even in square loops.
>
> Bertie

You and I BOTH get a headache :-))

I don't think I've ever seen anyone work a routine more aggressively
than Wags. She works out physically constantly to stay in shape and I
know for certain she uses most of the 10g's she has available in her 300S.
I'll tell you this much. I flew acro most of my life and I never even
came close to doing with an airplane what Patty does in her Extra
display routine.
MAN..that woman can fly!!! :-))
--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> "Viperdoc" > wrote in
>> :
>
>>> I would be interested in Patty's comments, but my guess is that
>>> looking at the tight corners she pulls that they're at least 7G,
>>> particularly when entered with a lot of energy.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Oh my God. I'm getting a headache just reading this! I suppose it;s
>> not so bad when you're semi reclined, but still. I've rarely been
>> over five even in square loops.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> You and I BOTH get a headache :-))
>
> I don't think I've ever seen anyone work a routine more aggressively
> than Wags. She works out physically constantly to stay in shape and I
> know for certain she uses most of the 10g's she has available in her
> 300S. I'll tell you this much. I flew acro most of my life and I never
> even came close to doing with an airplane what Patty does in her Extra
> display routine.
> MAN..that woman can fly!!! :-))

Mmm, yes, absolutely. I'm pretty sure tha even at 20 and very fit I
would not have cared for that much punishment. i doubt it ver would have
appealed, but then again, I never did any aerobatics in an airplane with
a semi reclined position though and that should be a huge help. I still
can't see how anyone can do 10 Gs regularly even for a short time. in
any case, that's over a 300% increase in stall speed! Yipes!


Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> "Viperdoc" > wrote in
>>> :
>>>> I would be interested in Patty's comments, but my guess is that
>>>> looking at the tight corners she pulls that they're at least 7G,
>>>> particularly when entered with a lot of energy.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Oh my God. I'm getting a headache just reading this! I suppose it;s
>>> not so bad when you're semi reclined, but still. I've rarely been
>>> over five even in square loops.
>>>
>>> Bertie
>> You and I BOTH get a headache :-))
>>
>> I don't think I've ever seen anyone work a routine more aggressively
>> than Wags. She works out physically constantly to stay in shape and I
>> know for certain she uses most of the 10g's she has available in her
>> 300S. I'll tell you this much. I flew acro most of my life and I never
>> even came close to doing with an airplane what Patty does in her Extra
>> display routine.
>> MAN..that woman can fly!!! :-))
>
> Mmm, yes, absolutely. I'm pretty sure tha even at 20 and very fit I
> would not have cared for that much punishment. i doubt it ver would have
> appealed, but then again, I never did any aerobatics in an airplane with
> a semi reclined position though and that should be a huge help. I still
> can't see how anyone can do 10 Gs regularly even for a short time. in
> any case, that's over a 300% increase in stall speed! Yipes!
>
>
> Bertie

I've pulled high g in the Pitts doing multiple snap entries for example
but those, as well as Patty's, are instantaneous with quick release.
Most I ever pulled sustained was 9 in the F14 doing some ACM as a
"guest" of the Navy and I can tell you that actually hurt! :-)
Typical display in the Mustang was 4 or under.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Dudley Henriques > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> "Viperdoc" > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>> I would be interested in Patty's comments, but my guess is that
>>>>> looking at the tight corners she pulls that they're at least 7G,
>>>>> particularly when entered with a lot of energy.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Oh my God. I'm getting a headache just reading this! I suppose it;s
>>>> not so bad when you're semi reclined, but still. I've rarely been
>>>> over five even in square loops.
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>> You and I BOTH get a headache :-))
>>>
>>> I don't think I've ever seen anyone work a routine more aggressively
>>> than Wags. She works out physically constantly to stay in shape and
>>> I know for certain she uses most of the 10g's she has available in
>>> her 300S. I'll tell you this much. I flew acro most of my life and I
>>> never even came close to doing with an airplane what Patty does in
>>> her Extra display routine.
>>> MAN..that woman can fly!!! :-))
>>
>> Mmm, yes, absolutely. I'm pretty sure tha even at 20 and very fit I
>> would not have cared for that much punishment. i doubt it ver would
>> have appealed, but then again, I never did any aerobatics in an
>> airplane with a semi reclined position though and that should be a
>> huge help. I still can't see how anyone can do 10 Gs regularly even
>> for a short time. in any case, that's over a 300% increase in stall
>> speed! Yipes!
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> I've pulled high g in the Pitts doing multiple snap entries for
> example but those, as well as Patty's, are instantaneous with quick
> release. Most I ever pulled sustained was 9 in the F14 doing some ACM
> as a "guest" of the Navy and I can tell you that actually hurt! :-)
> Typical display in the Mustang was 4 or under.
>

I rarely did more than four displaying and I found five in the Decathlon
or Lakes was punishing, but of course neither lasted for long because
the speed evaporatd very quickly from those sorts of Gs anyway. I
couldn't hardly take more than three outside and avoided doing much of
that anyway! Got a good excuse to stay away from them with the new
airpane anyway..



Bertie



Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Viperdoc wrote:

Snipped for brevity>

It's funny. I just answered Bertie and mentioned the difference between
instantaneous g with release and sustained g for the "pain factor :-).
Instead of the Viper, my 9g was in the F14 at Pax. Man, did that hurt!!

I'll ping you if I hear from Patty.





--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Viperdoc" > wrote in
:

> I agree. Phil would have me pull just to the edge where the stick got
> a little light, just before the airflow separated and got the usual
> high AOA, high speed stall. Same with the pulls from the downlines-
> bump the stick to load the G and then a hard pull just on the edge of
> a stall (which sometimes happened). Nothing like doing a stall going
> around 180k+ straight down with a hard pull! However, with some
> practice I at least imagined I could feel the sweet spot just before
> the burble of the stall.
>
> When it was all said and done, the G meter would typically read max
> 6.7 to around -2.5, and I don't do snaps at more than around 120-130,
> so I think most of the load came from the pulls to a vertical or other
> looping figures.
>
> Of course, my floor is 2,000, and early in the season I start a lot
> higher, and certainly not on the deck. I've seen Patty fly many
> times, at airshows, OSH, and in practice at St. Augustine, but I don't
> ever recall a simple loop, but obviously quarter loops and pulls to a
> 45. I still can't imagine it would ever be as low as 4 G, and would be
> somewhat surprised if less than 6-7, which seems to be the most
> efficient G load to get the direction changed when going 160 (my
> typical entry speed for a loop).
>
> On the other hand, I've experienced some sustained 8G level turns in
> the F-16 with full burner, and had the (not so enjoyable) experience
> of 9G in a centrifuge. The sustained power was much tougher, since the
> aerobatic planes bleed off energy so fast, as compared to a jet in
> afterburner. The computer automatically limited the G load based upon
> what we were carrying, which typically was two big drop tanks.
>
> In the centrifuge the guy two rides before me had his heart slow down
> and then stop. They did a crash halt, and with all of the running
> around and sirens and flashing lights, he woke up and said he had been
> having the most pleasant dream! The guy just before me completely
> forgot about his G strain, and then puked before passing out.
>
> My ride was next (what a smell), but luckily with my limited acro
> experience I knew what to anticipate, and even then it was still hard.
> Anyway, I would like to hear what Patty has to say.
>
>
>

Good God.
The stall is fairly easy to control in your Extra though, right? That is
to say you can keep it right there with a great deal of control at the
edge? I know the leading edge on those things is very blunt and rounded
and that should enable a large range of alpha and a fairly gradual
breakdown of laminar flow.


Bertie

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

>
> I rarely did more than four displaying and I found five in the Decathlon
> or Lakes was punishing, but of course neither lasted for long because
> the speed evaporatd very quickly from those sorts of Gs anyway. I
> couldn't hardly take more than three outside and avoided doing much of
> that anyway! Got a good excuse to stay away from them with the new
> airpane anyway..
>
>
>
> Bertie

I'm with you. Getting WAY too old for that kind of work :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Viperdoc wrote:
Anyway, I would
> like to hear what Patty has to say.
>
>

Just heard from Patty. Here's what she said.

>Hi Dudley
Greetings from Denver.
Well, of course it depends on the speed and what I'm adding to the top
of the loop (and adding that the Extra has such a wide envelope) I
usually use between 6 and 8 Gz.
Hope this is helpful.
>Patty

Looks like you are right there with her although I'm guessing she is
assuming a multiple maneuver sequence (adding at the top) that might
require the extra smash.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...
> Viperdoc wrote:

What a pretentious bunch of nonsense. Haven't you old fools got anything
better to do than run around posing on a message board?

[More_Flaps]

On Jun 5, 5:42*pm, "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote:
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Viperdoc wrote:
>
> What a pretentious bunch of nonsense. Haven't you old fools got anything
> better to do than run around posing on a message board?

Now so bitter and so sad -have all your minor triumphs been reduced to
so little?

Cheers

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Viperdoc" > wrote in message
...
> Actually, if you read the posts, the quote is from gregvk, not me.
>

No, actually it's from me, but he's just trolling anyway.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Viperdoc wrote:
> Actually, if you read the posts, the quote is from gregvk, not me.
>
>
Actually, you're both wrong. This came from the usual source, Maxwell. :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:j1L1k.2527$yi.1807
@newsfe13.lga:

>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Viperdoc wrote:
>
> What a pretentious bunch of nonsense. Haven't you old fools got anything
> better to do than run around posing on a message board?
>
>
>

Well, we haven't got time enough to trail around after half a dozen old
fools posing on a message board. Where is this message board, BTW? you mean
the genital wart board you poast on?



Berite

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Viperdoc" > wrote in
:

> Actually, I'm not all that old, although I admit to a few grey hairs.
> When the high level acro pilots talk about shaving weight in their
> planes, I just say I'll go an a diet and lose 30 lbs.
>
> Regarding the blunt LE of the Extra, I thought the intent was to
> actually separate the air flow more quickly (or perhaps it is the
> squared off TE), in order to get a cleaner snap entry. When it does
> break it kind of shudders, especially at high speed, and just a slight
> release of the back (forward) pressure will get things going again. In
> fact, it's hard to accelerate a spin, especially to the right (at
> least in my plane), without it actually stopping the spin and starting
> to do a wallow-spiral.
>

Yeah, I suppose. i expressed it poorly, but what I was driving at was
control of the seperation so you could detach and reattach at will, as
opposed to say, a clark Y type of seperation where you enter a snap and it
take a ridiculous reduction in alpha to stop it. I understand your type of
airplane will stop the instant you ask it to with a minimal change in
alpha.

> All I know is that it's a lot of fun to fly, a challenge to land, and
> I am very fortunate to be able to own one.

You ae indeed! I thought they were supposed to be fairly easy to land,
though! There's one near me for rent. I really ought to go try it out
someday.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:kMQ1k.1482$js1.63
@newsfe24.lga:

>
> "Viperdoc" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Actually, if you read the posts, the quote is from gregvk, not me.
>>
>
> No, actually it's from me, but he's just trolling anyway.
>
>

Good grief, fjukktard. would you please go and look up the proper
definition of a troll as defined by the only people who count, the trollz
themselves?

It's dificult enough trying to smack you over your pebble filled skull
without you yelping that you're being kicked in the ass because you can't
tell the difference.



Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
>>
>
> Good grief, fjukktard. would you please go and look up the proper
> definition of a troll as defined by the only people who count, the trollz
> themselves?
>
>
> Bertie

No thanks. Just because you consider them to be the "gods" that define the
Usenet, doesn't mean the rest of the world does.

But it clearly defines your "wannabe" attitude, lamer.

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:j1L1k.2527$yi.1807
> @newsfe13.lga:
>
>>
>> What a pretentious bunch of nonsense. Haven't you old fools got anything
>> better to do than run around posing on a message board?
>>
>>
>>
>
> Well, we haven't got time enough to trail around after half a dozen old
> fools posing on a message board. Where is this message board, BTW? you
> mean
> the genital wart board you poast on?
>
>
>
> Berite

Come on lips!!!! Can't you at least refrain from posting unless it's at
least relevant to the conversation.

You post more unrelated **** than anyone I have ever seen. Just because you
can't shut up.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

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

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:j1L1k.2527$yi.1807
>> @newsfe13.lga:
>>
>>>
>>> What a pretentious bunch of nonsense. Haven't you old fools got
>>> anything better to do than run around posing on a message board?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Well, we haven't got time enough to trail around after half a dozen
>> old fools posing on a message board. Where is this message board,
>> BTW? you mean
>> the genital wart board you poast on?
>>
>>
>>
>> Berite
>
> Come on lips!!!! Can't you at least refrain from posting unless it's
> at least relevant to the conversation.


Nope.
>
> You post more unrelated **** than anyone I have ever seen. Just
> because you can't shut up.


Bwawhahwhahwhahwhahwhahhwhahwh!


God I love usenet.


Bertie



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

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

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>>>
>>
>> Good grief, fjukktard. would you please go and look up the proper
>> definition of a troll as defined by the only people who count, the
>> trollz themselves?
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> No thanks. Just because you consider them to be the "gods" that define
> the Usenet, doesn't mean the rest of the world does.


Nope, but they are the trollz who define trollz.
>
> But it clearly defines your "wannabe" attitude, lamer.

Moi? I just poast.


Tha's all.


Bertie

[K l e i n[_2_]]

On Jun 5, 5:49*am, "Viperdoc" > wrote:
> Actually, I'm not all that old, although I admit to a few grey hairs. When
> the high level acro pilots talk about shaving weight in their planes, I just
> say I'll go an a diet and lose 30 lbs.
>
> Regarding the blunt LE of the Extra, I thought the intent was to actually
> separate the air flow more quickly (or perhaps it is the squared off TE), in
> order to get a cleaner snap entry. When it does break it kind of shudders,
> especially at high speed, and just a slight release of the back (forward)
> pressure will get things going again. In fact, it's hard to accelerate a
> spin, especially to the right (at least in my plane), without it actually
> stopping the spin and starting to do a wallow-spiral.
>
> All I know is that it's a lot of fun to fly, a challenge to land, and I am
> very fortunate to be able to own one.

Been tryin' to respond but having some trouble posting.

I usually use 5.5/6 g for the initial/final pull in looping figures
for contest flyings. I try to stay away from that burble you mention
because it puts a very noticeable (to the judges) flat spot on the
loop. I also float over the top a bit to make it round for the
judges. I usually get decent scores on them but I've also noticed
from working the judging line that there is an appalling lack of
consistency in judging these things.

Nik T. has been teaching an interesting method of spinning the
Sukhoi. It also works ok in the Extra. The idea is to not wait for
the airplane to drop into the spin but to fly it in. E.g., if you're
spinning to the left, you fly to the point of spinning using 1/3 to
1/2 power, right above stalling speed. To begin the spin you gently
push in left rudder in all the way, while simultaneously using a
little forward and left stick to make the nose go down. You don't
actually stall it! Leaving the throttle where it is at ~1/3, you then
move the stick to the right, rear corner. You are now in a flat
spin. You modulate the rate of rotation with rudder. To stop the
spin on point, throttle to idle, full right rudder, stick towards
right front corner. Draw your down line and recover. The power to
idle is mainly for the judges - they get confused if they never hear
you reduce power. ;-) Takes a lot of practice to get it right, but
when you do, you find you have a lot more control of the position of
the spin, rate of rotation and minimize altitude loss. All standard
disclaimers apply. Please don't try this the first time from below
5k AGL.

It's kinda fun to let it do several turns in the flat spin, but for
competition, you don't need that.

I love Extras. If I had known how nice they are, I might have skipped
my detour into Yaks. I think they are easy to land compared to, say,
the Pitts or the Yak-54. Yak-55 is the easiest of all tail wheel
airplanes to land. Landing roll out tends to be a little long
compared to the Sukhoi which stops very quickly even with no use of
brakes.

K l e i n

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Good grief, fjukktard. would you please go and look up the proper
>>> definition of a troll as defined by the only people who count, the
>>> trollz themselves?
>>>
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>
>> No thanks. Just because you consider them to be the "gods" that define
>> the Usenet, doesn't mean the rest of the world does.
>
>
> Nope, but they are the trollz who define trollz.
>>
>> But it clearly defines your "wannabe" attitude, lamer.
>
> Moi? I just poast.
>
>
> Tha's all.
>
>
> Bertie

Three! Three "make believes" in row. This is real progress.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:vKU1k.3435$QI2.1108
@newsfe23.lga:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Good grief, fjukktard. would you please go and look up the proper
>>>> definition of a troll as defined by the only people who count, the
>>>> trollz themselves?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> No thanks. Just because you consider them to be the "gods" that
define
>>> the Usenet, doesn't mean the rest of the world does.
>>
>>
>> Nope, but they are the trollz who define trollz.
>>>
>>> But it clearly defines your "wannabe" attitude, lamer.
>>
>> Moi? I just poast.
>>
>>
>> Tha's all.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Three! Three "make believes" in row. This is real progress.
>
>
>

OK **** chokula.




Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:j1L1k.2527$yi.1807
>>> @newsfe13.lga:
>>>
>>>>
>>
>> You post more unrelated **** than anyone I have ever seen. Just
>> because you can't shut up.
>
>
> Bwawhahwhahwhahwhahwhahhwhahwh!
>
>
> God I love usenet.
>
>
> Bertie
>
>
>
> Bertie

Aahhhh, back to unrelated. You have relapsed.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:2LU1k.3436$QI2.284
@newsfe23.lga:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:j1L1k.2527$yi.1807
>>>> @newsfe13.lga:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> You post more unrelated **** than anyone I have ever seen. Just
>>> because you can't shut up.
>>
>>
>> Bwawhahwhahwhahwhahwhahhwhahwh!
>>
>>
>> God I love usenet.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Aahhhh, back to unrelated. You have relapsed.
>
>
>

Nope.


In any case, related, unrealted, it matters no one jot once I keep you
poasting, fjukkwit...




Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> OK **** chokula.
>
>
>
>
> Bertie

Unrelated. Still loosing it.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:y%U1k.3452$QI2.74
@newsfe23.lga:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> .. .
>>
>> OK **** chokula.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Unrelated. Still loosing it.
>
>
>

Snort! He thinks h has me on the run!

That's soooo kewt!

God I love usenet.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:K0V1k.3453$QI2.1839
@newsfe23.lga:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> .. .
>>
>>
>> In any case, related, unrealted, it matters no one jot once I keep you
>> poasting, fjukkwit...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Sure it does. If you lack the intelligence to respond, you just showcase
> your ilkness.
>
>


Snort!


Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .
>
>
> In any case, related, unrealted, it matters no one jot once I keep you
> poasting, fjukkwit...
>
>
>
>
> Bertie

Sure it does. If you lack the intelligence to respond, you just showcase
your ilkness.

[Ron Garret]

In article <XoH1k.16394$qP.15098@trnddc03>,
TheSmokingGnu > wrote:

> More_Flaps wrote:
> > How can I tell if my loops are perfect
> > circles?
>
> Ask Dudley for technique, but as for the physics: a perfect loop would
> have a constant acceleration.

Only in zero G.

> Just take an accelerometer with you and
> see how consistent you are (preferably one that can discount the Earth's
> gravity,

Are there such beasts? I know it's theoretically possible, but it would
be very hard (and expensive) to build such a gadget. Do they really
exist?

rg

[Viperdoc]

I agree- his spins and snaps are actually cheats- there is no stall break.
On the other hand, he is so smooth that no one notices- he is the master of
energy conservation.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Ron Garret wrote:
> In article <XoH1k.16394$qP.15098@trnddc03>,
> TheSmokingGnu > wrote:
>
>> More_Flaps wrote:
>>> How can I tell if my loops are perfect
>>> circles?
>> Ask Dudley for technique, but as for the physics: a perfect loop would
>> have a constant acceleration.
>
> Only in zero G.
>
>> Just take an accelerometer with you and
>> see how consistent you are (preferably one that can discount the Earth's
>> gravity,
>
> Are there such beasts? I know it's theoretically possible, but it would
> be very hard (and expensive) to build such a gadget. Do they really
> exist?
>
> rg
Yes. The Naval Test Pilot School uses extremely sensitive accelerometers
on the T38's used for coupling and departure research flights.

--
Dudley Henriques

[More_Flaps]

On Jun 6, 5:55*am, Ron Garret > wrote:
> In article <XoH1k.16394$qP.15098@trnddc03>,
>
> *TheSmokingGnu > wrote:
> > More_Flaps wrote:
> > > How can I tell if my loops are perfect
> > > circles?
>
> > Ask Dudley for technique, but as for the physics: a perfect loop would
> > have a constant acceleration.
>
> Only in zero G.
>
And only if speed is constant.

Cheers

[K l e i n[_2_]]

On Jun 5, 1:35 pm, More_Flaps > wrote:
> On Jun 6, 5:55 am, Ron Garret > wrote:> In article <XoH1k.16394$qP.15098@trnddc03>,
>
> > TheSmokingGnu > wrote:
> > > More_Flaps wrote:
> > > > How can I tell if my loops are perfect
> > > > circles?
>
> > > Ask Dudley for technique, but as for the physics: a perfect loop would
> > > have a constant acceleration.
>
> > Only in zero G.
>
> And only if speed is constant.
>
> Cheers

It's very simple to do this. Simply incline the loop 90 degrees from
the axis you were thinking of. This has another name - a 360 degree
turn. ;-)

K l e i n

[Ron Garret]

In article >,
Dudley Henriques > wrote:

> Ron Garret wrote:
> > In article <XoH1k.16394$qP.15098@trnddc03>,
> > TheSmokingGnu > wrote:
> >
> >> More_Flaps wrote:
> >>> How can I tell if my loops are perfect
> >>> circles?
> >> Ask Dudley for technique, but as for the physics: a perfect loop would
> >> have a constant acceleration.
> >
> > Only in zero G.
> >
> >> Just take an accelerometer with you and
> >> see how consistent you are (preferably one that can discount the Earth's
> >> gravity,
> >
> > Are there such beasts? I know it's theoretically possible, but it would
> > be very hard (and expensive) to build such a gadget. Do they really
> > exist?
> >
> > rg
> Yes. The Naval Test Pilot School uses extremely sensitive accelerometers
> on the T38's used for coupling and departure research flights.

It's not so much that they have to be sensitive as that they would have
to incorporate an AHRS (or something equivalent) in order to figure out
which way is down.

And what is a coupling and departure research flight? And why would you
need an accelerometer that compensated for gravity to conduct one?

rg

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Ron Garret wrote:
> In article >,
> Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>
>> Ron Garret wrote:
>>> In article <XoH1k.16394$qP.15098@trnddc03>,
>>> TheSmokingGnu > wrote:
>>>
>>>> More_Flaps wrote:
>>>>> How can I tell if my loops are perfect
>>>>> circles?
>>>> Ask Dudley for technique, but as for the physics: a perfect loop would
>>>> have a constant acceleration.
>>> Only in zero G.
>>>
>>>> Just take an accelerometer with you and
>>>> see how consistent you are (preferably one that can discount the Earth's
>>>> gravity,
>>> Are there such beasts? I know it's theoretically possible, but it would
>>> be very hard (and expensive) to build such a gadget. Do they really
>>> exist?
>>>
>>> rg
>> Yes. The Naval Test Pilot School uses extremely sensitive accelerometers
>> on the T38's used for coupling and departure research flights.
>
> It's not so much that they have to be sensitive as that they would have
> to incorporate an AHRS (or something equivalent) in order to figure out
> which way is down.
>
> And what is a coupling and departure research flight? And why would you
> need an accelerometer that compensated for gravity to conduct one?
>
> rg
No offense intended, but I think I've had just about all of this thread
I can handle for one day. Please ask someone else.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...
>> rg
> No offense intended, but I think I've had just about all of this thread I
> can handle for one day. Please ask someone else.
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques

Where ya goin' Dudley? I thought you wanted discuss aviation?

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Maxwell wrote:
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>>> rg
>> No offense intended, but I think I've had just about all of this thread I
>> can handle for one day. Please ask someone else.
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques
>
> Where ya goin' Dudley? I thought you wanted discuss aviation?
>
>
My offer stands as stated to you personally. If you have something to
say aviation wise, comment, statement, or question, I'll deal with it
just as I would anyone else here; with a respectful and non hostile answer.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...
> Maxwell wrote:
>> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>> rg
>>> No offense intended, but I think I've had just about all of this thread
>>> I can handle for one day. Please ask someone else.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dudley Henriques
>>
>> Where ya goin' Dudley? I thought you wanted discuss aviation?
> My offer stands as stated to you personally. If you have something to say
> aviation wise, comment, statement, or question, I'll deal with it just as
> I would anyone else here; with a respectful and non hostile answer.
>

Fine. But would you not extend the same offer to Ron. He seems to have a
very interesting question.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

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

>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Maxwell wrote:
>>> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>> rg
>>>> No offense intended, but I think I've had just about all of this
>>>> thread I can handle for one day. Please ask someone else.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dudley Henriques
>>>
>>> Where ya goin' Dudley? I thought you wanted discuss aviation?
>> My offer stands as stated to you personally. If you have something to
>> say aviation wise, comment, statement, or question, I'll deal with it
>> just as I would anyone else here; with a respectful and non hostile
>> answer.
>>
>
> Fine. But would you not extend the same offer to Ron. He seems to have
> a very interesting question.
>
>
>

Stil can't do it, can you?


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:g6f2k.3825$t07.2237
@newsfe22.lga:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
>>>
>>> Fine. But would you not extend the same offer to Ron. He seems to have
>>> a very interesting question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Stil can't do it, can you?
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> And what's it to you, Squirty.


Entertainment, as always..


Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Maxwell" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
>>
>> Fine. But would you not extend the same offer to Ron. He seems to have
>> a very interesting question.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Stil can't do it, can you?
>
>
> Bertie

And what's it to you, Squirty.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Maxwell wrote:
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Maxwell wrote:
>>> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>> rg
>>>> No offense intended, but I think I've had just about all of this thread
>>>> I can handle for one day. Please ask someone else.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dudley Henriques
>>> Where ya goin' Dudley? I thought you wanted discuss aviation?
>> My offer stands as stated to you personally. If you have something to say
>> aviation wise, comment, statement, or question, I'll deal with it just as
>> I would anyone else here; with a respectful and non hostile answer.
>>
>
> Fine. But would you not extend the same offer to Ron. He seems to have a
> very interesting question.
>
>

From past history, answering Ron's question (which is perfectly
acceptable and would normally be no issue at all for me, just isn't
worth the attempted personal abuse and sheer nonsense that almost
certainly would be the result of that answer from specific posters on
the thread as you are well aware.
Last night, we had an owner of an Extra discussing acro with a fairly
well known aerobatic instructor and pilot actually involving an input
from a 3 time world champion competition and display aerobatic pilot
being referred to as a "load of crap" from a buch of "old timers with
nothing to add to the forum", so why bother? :-)

Ping Ron, if you wish to discuss these or any other aviation issues with
me, please feel free to email me back channel, as your question is not
out of line at all.
Thank you.


--
Dudley Henriques

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...
>
> From past history, answering Ron's question (which is perfectly acceptable
> and would normally be no issue at all for me, just isn't worth the
> attempted personal abuse and sheer nonsense that almost certainly would be
> the result of that answer from specific posters on the thread as you are
> well aware.
> Last night, we had an owner of an Extra discussing acro with a fairly well
> known aerobatic instructor and pilot actually involving an input from a 3
> time world champion competition and display aerobatic pilot being referred
> to as a "load of crap" from a buch of "old timers with nothing to add to
> the forum", so why bother? :-)
>
> Ping Ron, if you wish to discuss these or any other aviation issues with
> me, please feel free to email me back channel, as your question is not out
> of line at all.
> Thank you.
>
>

Just did a search on "load of crap" and didn't pull up anything but your
email.

Could you be more specific?

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
>
> Entertainment, as always..
>
>
> Bertie

So you are happy to put your entertainment before the harmony of this group?

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Maxwell wrote:
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>> From past history, answering Ron's question (which is perfectly acceptable
>> and would normally be no issue at all for me, just isn't worth the
>> attempted personal abuse and sheer nonsense that almost certainly would be
>> the result of that answer from specific posters on the thread as you are
>> well aware.
>> Last night, we had an owner of an Extra discussing acro with a fairly well
>> known aerobatic instructor and pilot actually involving an input from a 3
>> time world champion competition and display aerobatic pilot being referred
>> to as a "load of crap" from a buch of "old timers with nothing to add to
>> the forum", so why bother? :-)
>>
>> Ping Ron, if you wish to discuss these or any other aviation issues with
>> me, please feel free to email me back channel, as your question is not out
>> of line at all.
>> Thank you.
>>
>>
>
> Just did a search on "load of crap" and didn't pull up anything but your
> email.
>
> Could you be more specific?
>
>
You win.

Enjoy.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

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

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Entertainment, as always..
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> So you are happy to put your entertainment before the harmony of this
> group?
>

If youre happy to put your idiocy ahead of it, always.

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

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

>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> From past history, answering Ron's question (which is perfectly
>> acceptable and would normally be no issue at all for me, just isn't
>> worth the attempted personal abuse and sheer nonsense that almost
>> certainly would be the result of that answer from specific posters on
>> the thread as you are well aware.
>> Last night, we had an owner of an Extra discussing acro with a fairly
>> well known aerobatic instructor and pilot actually involving an input
>> from a 3 time world champion competition and display aerobatic pilot
>> being referred to as a "load of crap" from a buch of "old timers with
>> nothing to add to the forum", so why bother? :-)
>>
>> Ping Ron, if you wish to discuss these or any other aviation issues
>> with me, please feel free to email me back channel, as your question
>> is not out of line at all.
>> Thank you.
>>
>>
>
> Just did a search on "load of crap" and didn't pull up anything but
> your email.
>
> Could you be more specific?


Take a dump, look in the toilet. Look in a mirror, back to the toilet, in
the mirror in the toilet in the mirror...

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
>
> If youre happy to put your idiocy ahead of it, always.
>
> Bertie

You jumped in to a conversation that had nothing to do with you, added
nothing to the situation but aggravation, and said you did it for your own
entertainment only.

That has nothing to do with me. I'm not hear for entertainment.

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
>
> Take a dump, look in the toilet. Look in a mirror, back to the toilet, in
> the mirror in the toilet in the mirror...

Is that how you do it? Does that work for you????

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...
>>
> You win.
>
> Enjoy.
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques

Don't forget to take your stroken partner Squirty with ya.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

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

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> If youre happy to put your idiocy ahead of it, always.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> You jumped in to a conversation that had nothing to do with you, added
> nothing to the situation but aggravation, and said you did it for your
> own entertainment only.
>
> That has nothing to do with me. I'm not hear for entertainment.

Oh but you are. Mine


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

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

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Take a dump, look in the toilet. Look in a mirror, back to the
>> toilet, in the mirror in the toilet in the mirror...
>
> Is that how you do it? Does that work for you????
>


Oh no! he's doing another IKYABWAI lame! Someone heeeelp me!


Bertie
>
>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

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

>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>>>
>> You win.
>>
>> Enjoy.
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques
>
> Don't forget to take your stroken partner Squirty with ya.
>
>

Oh I'm staying here.

Forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever!



Bertie

[Maxwell[_2_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> Don't forget to take your stroken partner Squirty with ya.
>>
>>
>
> Oh I'm staying here.
>
> Forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
> ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
> ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
> ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
> ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
> ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
> ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
> ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever!
>
>
>
> Bertie

Interesting, and why are you so insistent in destroying this group?

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

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

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>>>
>>> Don't forget to take your stroken partner Squirty with ya.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Oh I'm staying here.
>>
>> Forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
>> ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever
>> and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
>> ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever
>> and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
>> ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever
>> and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and
>> ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever
>> and ever and ever and ever!
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Interesting, and why are you so insistent in destroying this group?
>

I'm not. It's a really useful and interesting group.


I just post.


Period.


Bertie