![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have been told over the years two consistent things: when trying to
achieve the fastest possible cross country speeds, 1. Try to minimize circling as much as possible and 2. Fly the true maccready airspeeds between thermals. But these two things contradict. The first couple days I flew at Perry this year, I flew true maccready airspeeds between thermals. The lift was strong, 5-7 kt thermals to 6-7,000 feet. So I flew about 70-80 between thermals. My average speed was then in the upper 40's. Then for the later part of the contest, in the same weather conditions, I delibertly did everything I could to reduce my % circling. I flew 50-70 kts between thermals and drastically reduced my circling. I had one flight with 15% circling and my resulting average speed was 52 mph. So by slowing down I had a faster speed. I understand that thermal density plays a big part in deciding what speed to cruise at. If the thermal density is lower, it may be best to stretch out the inter thermal glides to stay in the altitude power band. I fly faster when the lift sources are obvious, gaggle, clouds, birds, smoke. But when the lift is invisible, I slow it down to stretch out my glide. I also slow waaay down if there's no good landable fields insight....for safety. So is there a balance between % circling and true maccready speed to fly? What are some things that can flex your true maccready speeds up or down? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 4, 8:29*am, Scott Alexander
wrote: I have been told over the years two consistent things: when trying to achieve the fastest possible cross country speeds, *1. Try to minimize circling as much as possible and 2. Fly the true maccready airspeeds between thermals. But these two things contradict. *The first couple days I flew at Perry this year, I flew true maccready airspeeds between thermals. The lift was strong, 5-7 kt thermals to 6-7,000 feet. *So I flew about 70-80 between thermals. *My average speed was then in the upper 40's. Then for the later part of the contest, in the same weather conditions, I delibertly did everything I could to reduce my % circling. *I flew 50-70 kts between thermals and drastically reduced my circling. *I had one flight with 15% circling and my resulting average speed was 52 mph. *So by slowing down I had a faster speed. I understand that thermal density plays a big part in deciding what speed to cruise at. *If the thermal density is lower, it may be best to stretch out the inter thermal glides to stay in the altitude power band. *I fly faster when the lift sources are obvious, gaggle, clouds, birds, smoke. *But when the lift is invisible, I slow it down to stretch out my glide. *I also slow waaay down if there's no good landable fields insight....for safety. So is there a balance between % circling and true maccready speed to fly? *What are some things that can flex your true maccready speeds up or down? Must read classic: http://www.betsybyars.com/guy/soarin...a/72price.html |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 4, 7:56*am, T8 wrote:
On Jul 4, 8:29*am, Scott Alexander wrote: I have been told over the years two consistent things: when trying to achieve the fastest possible cross country speeds, *1. Try to minimize circling as much as possible and 2. Fly the true maccready airspeeds between thermals. But these two things contradict. *The first couple days I flew at Perry this year, I flew true maccready airspeeds between thermals. The lift was strong, 5-7 kt thermals to 6-7,000 feet. *So I flew about 70-80 between thermals. *My average speed was then in the upper 40's. Then for the later part of the contest, in the same weather conditions, I delibertly did everything I could to reduce my % circling. *I flew 50-70 kts between thermals and drastically reduced my circling. *I had one flight with 15% circling and my resulting average speed was 52 mph. *So by slowing down I had a faster speed. I understand that thermal density plays a big part in deciding what speed to cruise at. *If the thermal density is lower, it may be best to stretch out the inter thermal glides to stay in the altitude power band. *I fly faster when the lift sources are obvious, gaggle, clouds, birds, smoke. *But when the lift is invisible, I slow it down to stretch out my glide. *I also slow waaay down if there's no good landable fields insight....for safety. So is there a balance between % circling and true maccready speed to fly? *What are some things that can flex your true maccready speeds up or down? Must read classic: http://www.betsybyars.com/guy/soarin...a/72price.html I recall a talk a few years ago at the convention by Carl Herold titled something like "If you fly MacCready you will lose". Pretty rough title that drew a lot of people to the talk. The main idea was that you have to base your speed to fly on your actual climb rate, not the vario reading or the average of the vario reading but what is actually happening to the glider. Also, by staying higher for longer you take advantage of true airspeed benefits of flying in thinner air. At the time Carl was flying pretty impressive cross countries in his Nimbus while circling something like 10% of the time, or less. Typically in the Cherokee I set the ring at about half of what the Vario is saying and figure that is a good number. I think that % of time circling is more important than speed between thermals. No forward movement is going to kill average speed a lot more than being off by 5 or 10 mph for a little while. I've been working a lot more on minimizing my circling time on recent flights. I noticed that on your second day at Perry your average climb was actually down in the 250 fpm range but your interthermal speeds seemed about the same as the day before when the average climb was over 450. I'm no expert but I'd guess that is why you spent 40% of the time circling on day 2 vs 25% on day 1. Funny, the guy flying probably the slowest glider on RAS trying to talk about how to go fast. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Scott,
You need to read Johnnie Cochran's article: http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john...search/Papers/ Down at the bottom of the page titled "Just a little faster Please" A very good description of the ideas promoted by many excellent pilots. Mike |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 4, 3:55*pm, SoaringXCellence wrote:
Scott, You need to read Johnnie Cochran's article: http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john...search/Papers/ Down at the bottom of the page titled *"Just a little faster Please" A very good description of the ideas promoted by many excellent pilots. Mike Generally you should not try to minimize your % circling directly by reducing your cruise speed - it will slow you down overall. Unless of course you are flying too fast for the conditions in the first place - and that is the rub. Overall, you need to set your cruise based on McCready for your expected ACTUAL climb rate, including centering time and other considerations such as changes in climb rate at the top or bottom of the climb (Cochrane explains this pretty well in his papers) - different pilots estimate this in different ways, some computers give bottom-to-top averages as well. The net effect is slower climb rates than you might otherwise estimate based on staring at you 30-second averager. Next, you need to adjust your speed to optimize the tradeoff between theoretical cross-country speed (as estimated above) and the odds that you might have to take a weaker than expected thermal because you got low before you found a good one. You might do this for the whole flight (imagine a blue day with a lot of distance between good thermals and a not very tall lift band). This is basically trading off optimal cruise speed for a higher probability of getting a good climb. You will see experienced pilots often "topping up" before heading out into suspected soft areas or pressing low and passing up weaker lift because they know they are likely to hit stronger lift in a few miles. It is a big exercise in estimating odds. The last thing to remember is that the biggest contributor to speed is to find lift lines you can follow. This can be cloud or blue streets, convergence lines, storm shelves, wave, ridge - all allow you to make time without going backwards. You don't make this happen by slowing down, you make it happen by picking your path well. If thermals are hard to center and/or if you can make sustained climbs straight ahead, you may elect to slow down to climb straight in lift, but only under circumstances that are supported by the "adjusted" theory described above (accounting for circling and centering losses, probability of "false positives", etc.) In a modern ship on a day with clouds and some modest streeting you can cruise at 85 knots and have achieved cruise L/Ds in the 50-60 range and % climbing in the low teens. Lastly, keep in mind that your achieved cross country speed has very little to do with the cruise speed you pick - within certain bounds. If you fly 15 knots slower than McCready optimal for the entire flight it costs you 2-3% on cross-country speed. Taking a single 3 knot climb instead of a 6 knot climb for 2500' costs you about the same amount. 9B |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 4, 10:06*pm, Nine Bravo Ground wrote:
Overall, you need to set your cruise based on McCready for your expected ACTUAL climb rate, including centering time and other considerations such as changes in climb rate at the top or bottom of the climb (Cochrane explains this pretty well in his papers) - different pilots estimate this in different ways, some computers give bottom-to-top averages as well. *The net effect is slower climb rates than you might otherwise estimate based on staring at you 30-second averager. 9B Just a quick note on this point. I've been informally checking with pilots for several years after flights on our local DIY contest here to calibrate the actual conditions against my weather forecasts. Often times, I'll hear that it was a "great day - I was hitting 5-6kts". Post flight analysis of several traces reveal that achieved climbs were more like 3-4kts at best. It's very clear that we don't do a great job of accounting for our centering losses and hanging in for too long once the lift tails off. By the way, in the good old days before flight recorders, it seems that lift was a lot stronger. Maybe it's weight of the FRs that's slowing things down :-) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 5, 5:33*am, Papa3 wrote:
On Jul 4, 10:06*pm, Nine Bravo Ground wrote: Overall, you need to set your cruise based on McCready for your expected ACTUAL climb rate, including centering time and other considerations such as changes in climb rate at the top or bottom of the climb (Cochrane explains this pretty well in his papers) - different pilots estimate this in different ways, some computers give bottom-to-top averages as well. *The net effect is slower climb rates than you might otherwise estimate based on staring at you 30-second averager. 9B Just a quick note on this point. *I've been informally checking with pilots for several years after flights on our local DIY contest here to calibrate the actual conditions against my weather forecasts. Often times, I'll hear that it was a "great day - I was hitting 5-6kts". * Post flight analysis of several traces reveal that achieved climbs were more like 3-4kts at best. *It's very clear that we don't do a great job of accounting for our centering losses and hanging in for too long once the lift tails off. By the way, * in the good old days before flight recorders, it seems that lift was a lot stronger. Maybe it's weight of the FRs that's slowing things down :-) I think I know where most of the weight changes in my ship have come from... This has been discussed before, but bears mentioning in this context: It is not really worth spending much attention on the speed director of your vario/computer. It takes a fair amount of attention that is far better spent on race strategy and tactics. This applies both to setting the McCready for general speed to fly and chasing the speed director for localized lift/sink. I tend to fly three speeds - 80-85 knots for "normal" conditions, 90-95 knots if it is super strong and consistent with clouds and streeting and 70-75 knots if it is weak, I need a long glide or I am low (this is all dry - add 5-10 knots for water). This is pretty consistent for most racing pilots I know. Best L/D for my ship is 60 knots so there is no point in ever flying less than 70 (McCready 1). There just isn't that much difference in glide angle (L/D of 45 instead of 47 on the factory polar) so slowing down by the additional 15% is just giving speed away. Similarly, the knee in the polar is somewhere around 85 knots, so it has to be really strong to motivate me give away altitude at a higher rate. 9B |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Andy, you're a Western USA pilot with an ASW-28, aren't you? The OP is
an Eastern USA pilot - he might be better off using 10 kts less for each condition than you do (adjusting downwards for his ship, too, if needed). Also, I fly best L/D in the East in my LS8 when things get desperate, as quite often we're in 0 sink conditions. Flying at MacCready 1 at 70 kts like you would be a great way to outland, here. -John On Jul 5, 12:31 pm, Andy wrote: I tend to fly three speeds - 80-85 knots for "normal" conditions, 90-95 knots if it is super strong and consistent with clouds and streeting and 70-75 knots if it is weak, I need a long glide or I am low (this is all dry - add 5-10 knots for water). This is pretty consistent for most racing pilots I know. Best L/D for my ship is 60 knots so there is no point in ever flying less than 70 (McCready 1). There just isn't that much difference in glide angle (L/D of 45 instead of 47 on the factory polar) so slowing down by the additional 15% is just giving speed away. Similarly, the knee in the polar is somewhere around 85 knots, so it has to be really strong to motivate me give away altitude at a higher rate. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 5, 1:09*pm, jcarlyle wrote:
Andy, you're a Western USA pilot with an ASW-28, aren't you? The OP is an Eastern USA pilot - he might be better off using 10 kts less for each condition than you do (adjusting downwards for his ship, too, if needed). Also, I fly best L/D in the East in my LS8 when things get desperate, as quite often we're in 0 sink conditions. Flying at MacCready 1 at 70 kts like you would be a great way to outland, here. -John On Jul 5, 12:31 pm, Andy wrote: I tend to fly three speeds - 80-85 knots for "normal" conditions, 90-95 knots if it is super strong and consistent with clouds and streeting and 70-75 knots if it is weak, I need a long glide or I am low (this is all dry - add 5-10 knots for water). This is pretty consistent for most racing pilots I know. Best L/D for my ship is 60 knots so there is no point in ever flying less than 70 (McCready 1). There just isn't that much difference in glide angle (L/D of 45 instead of 47 on the factory polar) so slowing down by the additional 15% is just giving speed away. Similarly, the knee in the polar is somewhere around 85 knots, so it has to be really strong to motivate me give away altitude at a higher rate. Fair point. I fly an ASW-27B in the west today, but much of my early career (1974-85) was flying in the mid-atlantic and northeast. I agree that if you are flying in 1-2 knot lift in the east you will cruise slower than for 4-5 knots in the west - for a whole bunch of reasons. That said, I don't think you gain much flying best L/D (in my ship at least) versus Mc=1.0. Two points on L/D just isn't worth the speed loss. And if I'm not mistaken, part of the question was about flying even slower than best L/D (50 kts was mentioned). I've come to believe that how you handle "survival mode" is key to doing well on sketchy days. Part of that is not giving up - keep making forward progress while you search for the best available lift. 9B |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I agree with you that 50 kts is too slow (the OP said he went that
slow sometimes between thermals, and slowed "waaay down" if there were no landable fields). I also agree that one shouldn't give up, and keep on making forward progress while searching for lift (I learned that lesson the hard way, on several occasions). I fly with a friend who has an ASW-27B, and he does tend to go faster than I when we're in trouble. He explains it as "the ship just doesn't like to go slow". It may be that I'm being too conservative - and since you (and he) have a whole lot more experience than I, perhaps this is another lesson I should take to heart... -John On Jul 5, 8:12 pm, Andy wrote: Fair point. I fly an ASW-27B in the west today, but much of my early career (1974-85) was flying in the mid-atlantic and northeast. I agree that if you are flying in 1-2 knot lift in the east you will cruise slower than for 4-5 knots in the west - for a whole bunch of reasons. That said, I don't think you gain much flying best L/D (in my ship at least) versus Mc=1.0. Two points on L/D just isn't worth the speed loss. And if I'm not mistaken, part of the question was about flying even slower than best L/D (50 kts was mentioned). I've come to believe that how you handle "survival mode" is key to doing well on sketchy days. Part of that is not giving up - keep making forward progress while you search for the best available lift. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"VideO Madness" ( Soldiers...) "GoD Hates FAGS!!! (He sO righteOusly DoES)" | Colonel Jake | Naval Aviation | 0 | March 1st 10 12:14 AM |
"Imagine the impossible and do it." Dr. Paul MacCready Dies In His Sleep August 28, 2007 | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 1 | August 31st 07 07:54 PM |
"Imagine the impossible and do it." Dr. Paul MacCready Dies In His Sleep August 28, 2007 | Larry Dighera | Soaring | 1 | August 31st 07 07:54 PM |