A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Constant speed or constant attitude?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 19th 03, 11:06 PM
John Galloway
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

At 15:54 19 August 2003, Finbar wrote:

.....'There's a timing difference between the main
wing and the tail.
Entering lift there is a transition region where the
lift is growing
stronger as the glider moves forward. The main wing
will be about 15
feet ahead of the tail. As a result the main wing
will be at a higher
angle of attack than the tail during the transition
into the lift,
creating a pitch-up tendency until the aircraft has
gone through the
transition region. This would tend to offset the pitch-down
tendency
that's been discussed. I've personally flown aircraft
that pitched
down, others that pitched up. Flex-wing hang gliders
tend to pitch up
very strongly on entering lift. However, I used to
fly a rigid-wing
hang glider (flying wing) that pitched down. I never
could explain
the difference.


I can confirm that, at least in the Discus and Duo
Discus flying with mid to aft C of G , if you simply
cruise with a rigidly fixed elevator position - set
for a reasonable median cruise speed of your choice
- then the glider slowly pitches up and slows under
positive acceleration as you enter regions of lift
and pitches down and speeds up under reduced acceleration
as you enter regions of sink. I have often flown this
way in the last few years since reading about the technique
as an aside in Reichmann (seventh edition in English,
pages 64 and 133). He discusses it in connection with
methods of trying to optimize g loading in transitional
phases of flight between lift and sink and refers to
it as 'the near optimal solution of simply flying with
the controls locked'. I have often wondered why it
works when the Yates effect would at first sight tend
to have the opposite effect so thanks to Finbar for
the obsevation above.

Flying fixed elevator results in very nice gentle speed
variation without the divergence you get flying hands
off but it takes a surprising amount of concentration
to keep the elevator fixed. (Perhaps a little 'dead
man's handle' on the stick that temporarily fixed the
elevator control alone would help.) It works best
when the lift and sink are continually changing because
if there is a long period of steady lift or sink without
vertical acceleration from the airmass then the airspeed
tends to settle back at the cruise speed for the elevator
setting chosen. In those circumstances you need to
depart from the fixed elevator.

John Galloway


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PA28: Difference in constant speed prop vs fixed pitch Nathan Young Owning 25 October 10th 04 04:41 AM
Constant speed props GE Piloting 68 July 3rd 04 04:08 AM
Why do constant speed power setting charts limit RPM? Ben Jackson Piloting 6 April 16th 04 03:41 AM
Practicing SFLs with a constant speed prop - how? Ed Piloting 22 April 16th 04 02:42 AM
Constant Speed Prop vs Variable Engine Timing Jay Home Built 44 March 3rd 04 10:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.