Directional control after touchdown...

Could it be the ground effect differences between low wing and high wing
aircraft that are contributing to this issue?


"Dan" wrote in message
oups.com...
On May 20, 6:34 am, john smith wrote:
Dan wrote:
What are the proper control inputs to correct the situation?

Yoke full aft, full right aileron, left rudder as necessary to maintain
directional control, flaps up.

OK, so you're saying that based on the situation, I should trust the
ATIS, not the fact that the plane is drifting right? Should the
ailerons _always_ be into the wind regardless of actual aircraft
drift?

How much rudder in one direction or the other can a tricycle gear
light plane take without groundlooping?

I am working on a checkout in this C182 after about 400 hours in
Pipers. Compared to what I am used to, the Cessna ground handling
(especially after touchdown) seems very squirrley. I've had the same
experience with the couple hours I have in 152s and 172s as well.

--Dan

"Bill Denton" wrote in message


Could it be the ground effect differences between low wing and high
wing aircraft that are contributing to this issue?

"Dan" wrote in message
oups.com...

I am working on a checkout in this C182 after about 400 hours in
Pipers. Compared to what I am used to, the Cessna ground handling
(especially after touchdown) seems very squirrley. I've had the same
experience with the couple hours I have in 152s and 172s as well.

My guess is the difference in nose gear steering. Skylanes use a bungee to
"persuade" the nose gear to turn in a given direction while the typical
Piper nosegear is much more authoritative.

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://openspf.org
____________________

Bill Denton wrote:
Could it be the ground effect differences between low wing and high wing
aircraft that are contributing to this issue?


No, I noticed that right away after I bought my Bonanza. With my 182 it
was second nature to manipulate the aileron for the wind while taxiing.
In the Bo I don't bother as there's no reason to. I simply hold the
yoke so the controls don't get slammed around in the wind. With a high
wing the wing is out there on a longer lever plus the wheel track is a
little narrower.

"Newps" wrote in message
. ..


Bill Denton wrote:
Could it be the ground effect differences between low wing and high wing
aircraft that are contributing to this issue?


No, I noticed that right away after I bought my Bonanza. With my 182 it
was second nature to manipulate the aileron for the wind while taxiing.
In the Bo I don't bother as there's no reason to. I simply hold the
yoke so the controls don't get slammed around in the wind. With a high
wing the wing is out there on a longer lever plus the wheel track is a
little narrower.

I am pretty sure that there is also more wind six feet from the graound than
there is three feet from the ground.

Presumably there are plenty of statistics on the subject, although I have no
idea where to look or would would make a good search argument for and
internet search.

Peter

Peter Dohm wrote:




I am pretty sure that there is also more wind six feet from the graound than
there is three feet from the ground.

You're kidding.




Presumably there are plenty of statistics on the subject,


You'll never find that as it isn't true.

Newps wrote:


Peter Dohm wrote:




I am pretty sure that there is also more wind six feet from the
graound than
there is three feet from the ground.

You're kidding.




Presumably there are plenty of statistics on the subject,


You'll never find that as it isn't true.

It absolutely is true. Wind velocity drops dramatically as it
approaches a surface.

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:

Newps wrote:



Peter Dohm wrote:




I am pretty sure that there is also more wind six feet from the
graound than
there is three feet from the ground.


You're kidding.




Presumably there are plenty of statistics on the subject,



You'll never find that as it isn't true.


It absolutely is true. Wind velocity drops dramatically as it
approaches a surface.

I better get my digital handheld windmeter recalibrated becxause at 4
feet, the top of the wing on my Bo and six feet, the top of the wing on
a typical Cessna the wind is the same.

"Newps" wrote in message
. ..


Matt Whiting wrote:


You'll never find that as it isn't true.


It absolutely is true. Wind velocity drops dramatically as it approaches
a surface.

I better get my digital handheld windmeter recalibrated becxause at 4
feet, the top of the wing on my Bo and six feet, the top of the wing on a
typical Cessna the wind is the same.

I'm sure Whiting will come back that there's 0.05 MPH difference and that
difference should be taken into account.

Newps wrote:


Matt Whiting wrote:

Newps wrote:



Peter Dohm wrote:




I am pretty sure that there is also more wind six feet from the
graound than
there is three feet from the ground.


You're kidding.




Presumably there are plenty of statistics on the subject,



You'll never find that as it isn't true.


It absolutely is true. Wind velocity drops dramatically as it
approaches a surface.

I better get my digital handheld windmeter recalibrated becxause at 4
feet, the top of the wing on my Bo and six feet, the top of the wing on
a typical Cessna the wind is the same.

I would say so. The following article has a graph shows the
relationship on average between wind speed and height. The difference
between the wind at 1m (about the average height of your Bo wing) and at
2m (about the average height of a 182 wing) is about 10%.

http://www.rpc.com.au/products/windt.../wind_faq.html

Not a huge difference, but not no difference either.

Matt