![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi there,
Whoa! It's been a couple of years since I've posted on here. In fact, looking through some of my previous threads, I was quite the confused boy back then....and, in a moment of reflection, I've managed to come up with a topically-similar inquiry. I read through all my old posts and I couldn't quite get my hands on a definitive answer. So here it is... Suppose you're flying trimmed at 100 knots in your Cessna 172, straight and level, on the front side of the power curve. You enter a 60 deg. bank that doubles your load factor. Your lift requirement doubles. Further suppose your goal is to maintain altitude in this turn. To meet achieve twice the lift, you pull back on the stick to augment the angle of attack, maintaining airspeed. Everything's good so far? The up/down forces are balanced. Let's look at drag now. Banking at 60 deg. and thus pulling 2 g's has shifted every point on the power required vs. airspeed to the right and up. Recall that in this scenario, the airspeed has NOT changed. We've only increased the angle of attack as required, to get twice the lift. 1st question: Is the problem setup flawed? If so, please tell me. I haven't flown in years ![]() 2nd question: In the turn, my (L/D)max airspeed has increased by 41% (sqrt 2) as the (L/D)max airspeed point for the 1g condition has shifted to a higher airspeed for the 2g condition. Given this scenario, the airplane in question, and the fact that my airspeed has NOT changed, am I likely to find myself flying on the FRONT or BACK side of the power curve in this constant-airspeed turn? What is your rationale? 3rd question: Given this scenario and the airplane in question, is it likely that at that same airspeed, the drag and power required at 2g are HIGHER than at the 1g condition? Why? 4th question: If the answer to (3) is yes, is throttling up the only way of maintaining altitude in this turn? 5th question: Further to question 4, suppose that I am already at full throttle, unable to increase thrust, and wish to maintain altitude. The only remaining variable that I can change is airspeed via yoke position, by pulling or pushing. Would you agree that I would have to push on the yoke to maintain altitude if I was on the backside of the 2g power curve and pull on the yoke to maintain altitude if I was on the front side of 2g power curve? Does it seem counterintuitive to push on the yoke to maintain altitude in a turn? Something sounds fishy. Thanks for any insight. Alex |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Air Force One Had to Intercept Some Inadvertent Flyers / How? | Rick Umali | Piloting | 29 | February 15th 06 04:40 AM |
Change in AIM wording concerning procedure turn | Kris Kortokrax | Instrument Flight Rules | 208 | October 14th 05 12:58 AM |
Nearly had my life terminated today | Michelle P | Piloting | 11 | September 3rd 05 02:37 AM |
Procedure Turn | Bravo8500 | Instrument Flight Rules | 65 | April 22nd 04 03:27 AM |
Rate of turn indicator on commercial jets (Boeing / Airbus) | Mark | Simulators | 1 | November 1st 03 10:35 AM |