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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
A friend has a 182 and we have rolled that many times. Another buddy
has a Baron and we have rolled that many times. Yet another friend has a Super Cub and I have gotten fairly proficient at rolling and looping that. In my plane I frequently take it up and go power at idle, full back stick and hold a 45 degree bank. I have VG's so the plane will not roll over into the raised wing, just sits there and falls at about 1500 fpm. This helps to keep my ass current in flying the plane. I try and make about half my landings from about a mile or mile and a half final at a few mph above stall without looking at the airspeed indicator. Jay Honeck wrote: During primary training, many moons ago, I was growing frustrated with the sedate nature of our flying, so I asked my flight instructor (Bob -- a guy with 20K hours in every known flying machine) when we were going to get to the "fun stuff"? He didn't know what I was talking about, so I told him I wanted to see what these things could actually *do*... At which point he smiled that crooked smile of his, and proceeded to do a wing-over with a recovery out the bottom, going the opposite direction! I was whooping and hollering for more, but he just went back to our lesson for the day.... Nowadays, Mary and I are very cautious in our Pathfinder, rarely exceeding 45 degree banks, and never pulling more than mild G turns. Mary hates steep banks (except in a Super Decathlon -- then all bets are off!), and the most rambunctious thing we ever do are "Up-Downs" (as the kids call them), which is a firm pull up with a steady push-over at the top that induces negative Gs in the back seat. Just curious -- what do you guys do with your spam cans? I've seen video from inside a Cessna that shows a guy doing some pretty radical maneuvers, but in real life what's the most you push your aircraft? |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Jay,
Sounds like it's time for you to get your Commercial ticket. Not that you need it for the type of flying you do, but at least you can learn and become proficient with some new maneuvers like Chandelles, Lazy eights, turns on pylons, accuracy landings, etc without hurting Atlas. Also, you are certainly receptive to learning more about flying, so why not study for the Commercial written in your spare time and expand you "database"? I think you'll find it very enjoyable since you can do it on your own time. You'll find the commercial ticket is fun and "relative" easy to achive. And heck, your insurance rates might come down as a result too?? Best, Bryan Jay Honeck wrote: During primary training, many moons ago, I was growing frustrated with the sedate nature of our flying, so I asked my flight instructor (Bob -- a guy with 20K hours in every known flying machine) when we were going to get to the "fun stuff"? He didn't know what I was talking about, so I told him I wanted to see what these things could actually *do*... At which point he smiled that crooked smile of his, and proceeded to do a wing-over with a recovery out the bottom, going the opposite direction! I was whooping and hollering for more, but he just went back to our lesson for the day.... Nowadays, Mary and I are very cautious in our Pathfinder, rarely exceeding 45 degree banks, and never pulling more than mild G turns. Mary hates steep banks (except in a Super Decathlon -- then all bets are off!), and the most rambunctious thing we ever do are "Up-Downs" (as the kids call them), which is a firm pull up with a steady push-over at the top that induces negative Gs in the back seat. Just curious -- what do you guys do with your spam cans? I've seen video from inside a Cessna that shows a guy doing some pretty radical maneuvers, but in real life what's the most you push your aircraft? |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"Newps" wrote in message ... A friend has a 182 and we have rolled that many times. Another buddy has a Baron and we have rolled that many times. Yet another friend has a Super Cub and I have gotten fairly proficient at rolling and looping that. "In nomine Patris et fillii et Spiritus Sancti........" :-) Dudley Henriques |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"In nomine Patris et fillii et Spiritus Sancti........"
:-) Another guy who was forced to attend Catholic church for many years a child, I see? :-) Or, as we used to say, "Oh feeley me boney, dominos nabisco..." ;-) -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Jay:
One one of your trips eastward stop by Waukesha. I can arrange a ride in a Stearman or Yak owned by my friends (might even be able to arrange a ride in a mustang). You are always welcome to go up with me in the Extra. Send me an email offline and let me know about your schedule. JN |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
We were climbing out, so our airspeed was relatively low -- probably
around 80 knots. The entire maneuver lasted less than 5 seconds, and nothing floated in the cockpit -- but in an old airplane, how much is too much? If nothing floated you didn't even reach zero g, let alone negative g's. You had a long way to go before risking overstressing anything. Rod |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:7kLKe.239817$x96.9166@attbi_s72... snip After a few more seconds of debate, I ended the discussion by pushing my yoke firmly forward, inducing negative G and allowing us to pass harmlessly beneath the traffic. We cleared the plane with room to spare. snip However, I did (and still) wonder about putting that much negative-G on our 34 year old airframe. Without a G meter it's impossible to know how much G was induced, but I'd say it was 50% more than I've ever done before. (The only negative G maneuver I ever do is the push-over at the top of a steep pull-up, known by my kids as an "Up-Down".) Was 50% more too much? We were climbing out, so our airspeed was relatively low -- probably around 80 knots. The entire maneuver lasted less than 5 seconds, and nothing floated in the cockpit -- but in an old airplane, how much is too much? As another reference point (and a crude way of measuring the negative Gs), I routinely read about guys doing the "up-down" maneuver to the point where their engine sputters due to fuel starvation. I've *never* done the maneuver to that degree, even in this situation (although that may be due to the short duration of the maneuver) -- so I'm assuming that I didn't push the airframe beyond structural limits. Since that flight I've carefully inspected the empennage, and there is obviously no visible stress or strain, or I wouldn't be flying it -- but how can you really know without extensive metallurgic testing? snip Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" Is the engine on the pathfinder carburated? If so, the engine will stumble anywhere near zero g. In addition, since you didn't see anything "flying" inside the cockpit, my guess is that you merely approached zero g, which isn't a problem at all. KB |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:9rRKe.18168$084.15176@attbi_s22... "In nomine Patris et fillii et Spiritus Sancti........" :-) Another guy who was forced to attend Catholic church for many years a child, I see? :-) A Parochial live in military academy for boys no less; run by the Sisters of the Immaculate Heart. With a name like Dudley Arthur Henriques the Third, by the time I made the fifth grade I had to either be the toughest or the fastest kid in school. Fortunately for me, I was a little of both :-)) D |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Jay Honeck wrote: However, I did (and still) wonder about putting that much negative-G on our 34 year old airframe. Without a G meter it's impossible to know how much G was induced, but I'd say it was 50% more than I've ever done before. (The only negative G maneuver I ever do is the push-over at the top of a steep pull-up, known by my kids as an "Up-Down".) Was 50% more too much? Jay, As others have pointed out, you alomst certainly didn't hit much negative g or you'd really know it. A full negative 1 g would result in you hitting the straps firmly, loose objects flying all around inside of the airplane, and a dust storm you can't imagine from the carpet in a 'clean' airplane (trust me on that one). Negative 2 takes work. Negative 3 *hurts*. Think about it this way: when you unloaded the wing the airplane's primary structure was actually under less stress than it had been while cruising along straight-n-level... it was no longer carrying any weight! I don't know what the loads on the tail are when you push over, but I'm betting that they're not that much, either. No fears.... Atlas remains trustworthy. -Dave Russell N2S-3 |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
In article 7kLKe.239817$x96.9166@attbi_s72,
"Jay Honeck" wrote: However, I did (and still) wonder about putting that much negative-G on our 34 year old airframe. Without a G meter it's impossible to know how much G was induced, but I'd say it was 50% more than I've ever done before. (The only negative G maneuver I ever do is the push-over at the top of a steep pull-up, known by my kids as an "Up-Down".) Was 50% more too much? I doubt you had the negative G's you thought you had... Trained military pilots start 'redding out' at negative 2 to 2.5 Gs and anything more than negative 1.5 is quite uncomfortable -- Chris Schmelzer, MD Capt, 110th Fighter Michigan ANG University of Michigan Hospitals Ann Arbor, MI |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | August 1st 05 08:31 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | January 1st 05 07:29 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | September 1st 04 07:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | February 1st 04 07:27 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | January 1st 04 06:27 AM |