![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hello:
I'm not a pilot. Saw a show on the first 707 on the WINGS TV channel regarding the barrel roll the test pilot did (unexpectedly) on the first test flight of the dash- They said that he was able to maintain a constant 1g during the maneuver. Here's where i'ma bit confused. Seems to me that at the top of the roll, he would have had to be rolling at a rate sufficient to have centripital force equal to 2 g; such that when you subtract the normal downward 1 g, there's a resultant 1 g left acting in the conventional direction (tending to pull the engines away from the wings-the same as if in a normal level flight) If so. what happens to the 2g when the plane is at the 3 and 9 o'clock positions? The resultant there would be over 1g, wouldn't it ? What am I misssing, or mis-interpreting ? If someone could walk me thru the maneuver, and the resultant g's at the various positions, would be most appreciative. Also, could exactly the same result(s) be obtained via an aileron roll ? Thanks, Bob |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Robert11" wrote in message ... Hello: I'm not a pilot. Saw a show on the first 707 on the WINGS TV channel regarding the barrel roll the test pilot did (unexpectedly) on the first test flight of the dash- They said that he was able to maintain a constant 1g during the maneuver. Here's where i'ma bit confused. Seems to me that at the top of the roll, he would have had to be rolling at a rate sufficient to have centripital force equal to 2 g; such that when you subtract the normal downward 1 g, there's a resultant 1 g left acting in the conventional direction (tending to pull the engines away from the wings-the same as if in a normal level flight) If so. what happens to the 2g when the plane is at the 3 and 9 o'clock positions? The resultant there would be over 1g, wouldn't it ? What am I misssing, or mis-interpreting ? If someone could walk me thru the maneuver, and the resultant g's at the various positions, would be most appreciative. Also, could exactly the same result(s) be obtained via an aileron roll ? Thanks, Bob Several answers and a correction... The roll wasn't on the first test flight. It occurred sometime later in the program. If you listen to acro folks, what the -80 did wasn't a barrel roll. A barrel roll is more or less a skewed loop. The -80 did a modified aileron roll, which began with the aircraft in a climb, so the nose didn't drop too far by the time the roll was complete. The pilot simply pitched up, held the elevator in it's normal (cruise) position, and held the yoke over to command a roll. The airplane flew at 1 g or so except for the pitch up and the (probable) pull-out at the end of the roll when the nose was probably slightly below the horizon. As to your 1 G vs 2 G at the top of the roll question, aerodynamically, the airplane was at more or less 1 g the whole time. However, coming over the top, it accelerated downwards at roughly 2 g's - one from gravitational forces and one from aerodynamic forces. Hope this makes things clear... KB |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thare are four differing rolls, aerodynamically.
The aileron roll is primarily around the longitudinal access, there being a little pitch before the roll. The barrell roll is a blend of pitch and poll, in other words using two axes. The slow roll is a roll whereby the lift vector is moves from the wings to the fuselage to the wings. The above three are all flying, and not stalled. The snap roll is a a spin from an accelerated stall. There are not four points to consider in a barrel or aileron roll, there are an infinite number of points. Since pitch is involved there will be some G forces above 1 on the entry and rollout, however small that difference from 1g may be. With sufficient power and slowness of roll, it is possible to approach 1G throughout the entire meneuver. Hope that helps. Simon |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Robert11" wrote
Saw a show on the first 707 on the WINGS TV channel regarding the barrel roll the test pilot did (unexpectedly) on the first test flight of the dash- Boeing 367-80, prototype for the KC-135 and B-707. No, it wasn't a barrell roll despite what the test pilot, Tex Johnston said in the interview. The following is quoted from an aerobatic web site. From: http://acro.harvard.edu The Barrel Roll is a not competition maneuver. The barrel roll is a combination between a loop and a roll. You complete one loop while completing one roll at the same time. The flight path during a barrel roll has the shape of a horizontal cork screw. Imagine a big barrel, with the airplanes wheels rolling along the inside of the barrel in a cork screw path. During a barrel roll, the pilot experiences always positive G's. The maximum is about 2.5 to 3 G, the minimum about 0.5 G. Bob Moore ATP B-707, B-727 CFI ASE-IA PanAm (retired) US Naval Aviator 1958-1967 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Kyle Boatright and Bob Moore are correct, and it shouldn't be
necessary for anyone else to support their responses, but there seems to be so much confusion about this topic that I add my voice to theirs. vince norris |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Two days ago, I thought I posted a response but it hasn't shown up, so
here goes again: I just want to add my support, for what it's worth, to Kyle Boatwright and Bob Moore, who are quite right about the barrel roll. For some reason beyond my ken, misunderstanding about the barrel roll seems to have nine times nine lives. Or perhaps nine to the ninth power lives. As I said a couple of years ago in a discussion similar to this one, I suspect the root of the problem is that "barrel-roll" has become one word, like "nose-dive" so that the general public believes that there is no other kind of roll. vince norris |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
vincent p. norris wrote: As I said a couple of years ago in a discussion similar to this one, I suspect the root of the problem is that "barrel-roll" has become one word, like "nose-dive" so that the general public believes that there is no other kind of roll. Barrel roll, nose dive, tailspin, Learjet (or Leer Jet, as I've seen it on a local news program), and Piper Cub. -- Larry Fransson Aviation software for Mac OS X! http://www.subcritical.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | June 1st 04 08:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | May 1st 04 08:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | April 1st 04 08:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | March 1st 04 07:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | February 1st 04 07:27 AM |