![]() |
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 |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Looking at the windsock I'd say there was also a considerable wind gradient.
The aircraft had one wingtip within 1 span of the ground and the other a good 15 to 20 m above that. This little clip really is a classic, so many things wrong in one 10 second period! Ian "ir. K.P. Termaat" wrote in message om... Did some simple calculations to get an idea of what caused the spin of the DG500. If the glider flew initially with an IAS of 100km/h and had a headwind of say 25 km/h then its speed relative to the ground is 75km/h. If after making the 180° turn back to the airfield the glider flew again with an IAS of 100km/h but now with a tailwind of 25km/h, then its speed relative to the ground is 125km/h. This means that during the 180° turn the glider had to be accellerated from 75km/h to 125km/h relative to the ground. For a banking angle of 45° and an IAS of 100km/h one finds from simple mathematics that a 180° turn takes 8.9 secs when properly flown. The forward accellaration of the glider during the 180° turn must then be (125-75)/(3.6)/8.9=1.56m/s2 to come out at the same speed of 100km/h. Suppose the mass of the glider (including the pilot) is 650kg, then the force needed to accelarate the glider with 1.56m/s2 is 650x1.56 = 1014kgm/s2 or 1014N. Where does this force come from. Indeed, from gravity. The glider must pitch down to keep its IAS up. With a glider mass of 650kg, its weight is 650x9.8=6370N. The pitch down angle must then be arc(sin)1014/6370=9.2°. Add to this a normal glide angle of 1.4° (for a glide ratio of 40), then the total pitch down angle during the 180° turn of the DG500 should have been over 10°. If the pilot does not move his stick quite a bit forward to achieve this relative large pitch angle, the glider will loose its IAS, then stall and spin. This looks to me what happened unfortunately with the DG500 at Magdenburg. Karel, NL |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
At 10:00 08 February 2004, Ir. K.P. Termaat wrote:
Did some simple calculations to get an idea of what caused the spin of the DG500. If the glider flew initially with an IAS of 100km/h and had a headwind of say 25 km/h then its speed relative to the ground is 75km/h. If after making the 180° turn back to the airfield the glider flew again with an IAS of 100km/h but now with a tailwind of 25km/h, then its speed relative to the ground is 125km/h. This means that during the 180° turn the glider had to be accellerated from 75km/h to 125km/h relative to the ground. That old red herring again! The glider is flying in an airmass which is moving over the ground at a constant rate. No additional acceleration is required apart from that normally needed in a turn to supply the turning force. There may be some effect caused by descending/putting the lower wing down through any wind gradient but this actually improves the situation as the air is moving 'away' from the path of the glider more slowly and will consequently cause some increase in airspeed. (You can try the opposite of that effect by pulling up from a downwind racing finish through a strong wind gradient; watch the airspeed decay at an alarming rate). The biggest problem is that the apparent speed over the ground in say a 15kt wind jumps by 30kts and results in people trying to reduce the ground rush by raising the nose with no reference to the ASI. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
ir. K.P. Termaat wrote:
Did some simple calculations to get an idea of what caused the spin of the DG500. If the glider flew initially with an IAS of 100km/h and had a headwind of say 25 km/h then its speed relative to the ground is 75km/h. If after making the 180° turn back to the airfield the glider flew again with an IAS of 100km/h but now with a tailwind of 25km/h, then its speed relative to the ground is 125km/h. This means that during the 180° turn the glider had to be accellerated from 75km/h to 125km/h relative to the ground. For a banking angle of 45° and an IAS of 100km/h one finds from simple mathematics that a 180° turn takes 8.9 secs when properly flown. The forward accellaration of the glider during the 180° turn must then be (125-75)/(3.6)/8.9=1.56m/s2 to come out at the same speed of 100km/h. Suppose the mass of the glider (including the pilot) is 650kg, then the force needed to accelarate the glider with 1.56m/s2 is 650x1.56 = 1014kgm/s2 or 1014N. Where does this force come from. Indeed, from gravity. The glider must pitch down to keep its IAS up. With a glider mass of 650kg, its weight is 650x9.8=6370N. The pitch down angle must then be arc(sin)1014/6370=9.2°. Add to this a normal glide angle of 1.4° (for a glide ratio of 40), then the total pitch down angle during the 180° turn of the DG500 should have been over 10°. If the pilot does not move his stick quite a bit forward to achieve this relative large pitch angle, the glider will loose its IAS, then stall and spin. This looks to me what happened unfortunately with the DG500 at Magdenburg. Karel, NL You need to have a good long talk with your instructor. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Janos Bauer
writes: What are the standards altitudes for such incident? Here are the list I learnt: 50 straight landing, 50&100 one 180 degree turn, 180 two turns or small circle. Of course in strong wind I would increase these values. Best rules, and those now taught in the UK are, if you can land safely ahead, then you should do so. Heights are not a good guide as they can mislead you into all sorts of trouble. The higher the wind, the greater the land ahead opportunities up to heights well above those where it is clearly safe to do a reasonably normal short circuit. The tricky situation on a short run is a hot, nil wind day when the margin between landing ahead and adequate height for a short circuit is very narrow. However, the GOLDEN RULE is first fly the aeroplane. i.e if both options are marginal, recover from nose high and get into stable flight at correct speed, then assess your options. there is usually ample time. Barney UK |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
There may be some effect caused by descending/putting
the lower wing down through any wind gradient but this actually improves the situation as the air is moving 'away' from the path of the glider more slowly and will consequently cause some increase in airspeed. (You can try the opposite of that effect by pulling up from a downwind racing finish through a strong wind gradient; watch the airspeed decay at an alarming rate). The biggest problem is that the apparent speed over the ground in say a 15kt wind jumps by 30kts and results in people trying to reduce the ground rush by raising the nose with no reference to the ASI. There is also the potential of poor turn coordination caused by the perceptual changes that occur when maneuvering below pivotal altitude, although that didn't appear to be the case in the video. The suddenness of the departure was a bit surprising, but it seemed to be triggered by the opening of the spoilers rather than by any obvious lack of coordination. - Rich Carr |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi Shawn.
Since 1978 I am an instructor myself and teach aerodynamics to new pilots as well as new instructors since then. Next month we will have a discussion in our instructor's team on the matter of spinning and especially on how to avoid this killing phenomenon when happening at low altitude. If you don't understand my wordings please let me know; I am quite willing to elucidate on what I sayd. If you think my interpretation of the Magdenburg crash with the DG500 is wrong please explain, I am quite willing to listen to better theories about this. Something like "you need .... " doesn't help much Shawn. Karel, NL Shawn Curry wrote in message hlink.net... ir. K.P. Termaat wrote: Did some simple calculations to get an idea of what caused the spin of the DG500. If the glider flew initially with an IAS of 100km/h and had a headwind of say 25 km/h then its speed relative to the ground is 75km/h. If after making the 180° turn back to the airfield the glider flew again with an IAS of 100km/h but now with a tailwind of 25km/h, then its speed relative to the ground is 125km/h. This means that during the 180° turn the glider had to be accellerated from 75km/h to 125km/h relative to the ground. For a banking angle of 45° and an IAS of 100km/h one finds from simple mathematics that a 180° turn takes 8.9 secs when properly flown. The forward accellaration of the glider during the 180° turn must then be (125-75)/(3.6)/8.9=1.56m/s2 to come out at the same speed of 100km/h. Suppose the mass of the glider (including the pilot) is 650kg, then the force needed to accelarate the glider with 1.56m/s2 is 650x1.56 = 1014kgm/s2 or 1014N. Where does this force come from. Indeed, from gravity. The glider must pitch down to keep its IAS up. With a glider mass of 650kg, its weight is 650x9.8=6370N. The pitch down angle must then be arc(sin)1014/6370=9.2°. Add to this a normal glide angle of 1.4° (for a glide ratio of 40), then the total pitch down angle during the 180° turn of the DG500 should have been over 10°. If the pilot does not move his stick quite a bit forward to achieve this relative large pitch angle, the glider will loose its IAS, then stall and spin. This looks to me what happened unfortunately with the DG500 at Magdenburg. Karel, NL You need to have a good long talk with your instructor. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi Karel,
I do not follow your explanation. If I carry out the same 180 degree manouver at 5000 feet, even in a 50kt wind, both I and the glider are quite unaware of groundspeed. No change in attitude is required or made. The only difference in doing it at 100 feet is surely the close view of the ground and the APPEARANCE of changing speed which may cause me to lower or raise the nose when I should not. Regards Robert At 19:06 09 February 2004, Ir. K.P. Termaat wrote: Hi Shawn. Since 1978 I am an instructor myself and teach aerodynamics to new pilots as well as new instructors since then. Next month we will have a discussion in our instructor's team on the matter of spinning and especially on how to avoid this killing phenomenon when happening at low altitude. If you don't understand my wordings please let me know; I am quite willing to elucidate on what I sayd. If you think my interpretation of the Magdenburg crash with the DG500 is wrong please explain, I am quite willing to listen to better theories about this. Something like 'you need .... ' doesn't help much Shawn. Karel, NL Shawn Curry wrote in message news:... ir. K.P. Termaat wrote: Did some simple calculations to get an idea of what caused the spin of the DG500. If the glider flew initially with an IAS of 100km/h and had a headwind of say 25 km/h then its speed relative to the ground is 75km/h. If after making the 180° turn back to the airfield the glider flew again with an IAS of 100km/h but now with a tailwind of 25km/h, then its speed relative to the ground is 125km/h. This means that during the 180° turn the glider had to be accellerated from 75km/h to 125km/h relative to the ground. For a banking angle of 45° and an IAS of 100km/h one finds from simple mathematics that a 180° turn takes 8.9 secs when properly flown. The forward accellaration of the glider during the 180° turn must then be (125-75)/(3.6)/8.9=1.56m/s2 to come out at the same speed of 100km/h. Suppose the mass of the glider (including the pilot) is 650kg, then the force needed to accelarate the glider with 1.56m/s2 is 650x1.56 = 1014kgm/s2 or 1014N. Where does this force come from. Indeed, from gravity. The glider must pitch down to keep its IAS up. With a glider mass of 650kg, its weight is 650x9.8=6370N. The pitch down angle must then be arc(sin)1014/6370=9.2°. Add to this a normal glide angle of 1.4° (for a glide ratio of 40), then the total pitch down angle during the 180° turn of the DG500 should have been over 10°. If the pilot does not move his stick quite a bit forward to achieve this relative large pitch angle, the glider will loose its IAS, then stall and spin. This looks to me what happened unfortunately with the DG500 at Magdenburg. Karel, NL You need to have a good long talk with your instructor. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
ir. K.P. Termaat wrote:
Shawn Curry wrote in message hlink.net... ir. K.P. Termaat wrote: Did some simple calculations to get an idea of what caused the spin of the DG500. If the glider flew initially with an IAS of 100km/h and had a headwind of say 25 km/h then its speed relative to the ground is 75km/h. If after making the 180° turn back to the airfield the glider flew again with an IAS of 100km/h but now with a tailwind of 25km/h, then its speed relative to the ground is 125km/h. This means that during the 180° turn the glider had to be accellerated from 75km/h to 125km/h relative to the ground. For a banking angle of 45° and an IAS of 100km/h one finds from simple mathematics that a 180° turn takes 8.9 secs when properly flown. The forward accellaration of the glider during the 180° turn must then be (125-75)/(3.6)/8.9=1.56m/s2 to come out at the same speed of 100km/h. Suppose the mass of the glider (including the pilot) is 650kg, then the force needed to accelarate the glider with 1.56m/s2 is 650x1.56 = 1014kgm/s2 or 1014N. Where does this force come from. Indeed, from gravity. The glider must pitch down to keep its IAS up. With a glider mass of 650kg, its weight is 650x9.8=6370N. The pitch down angle must then be arc(sin)1014/6370=9.2°. Add to this a normal glide angle of 1.4° (for a glide ratio of 40), then the total pitch down angle during the 180° turn of the DG500 should have been over 10°. If the pilot does not move his stick quite a bit forward to achieve this relative large pitch angle, the glider will loose its IAS, then stall and spin. This looks to me what happened unfortunately with the DG500 at Magdenburg. Karel, NL You need to have a good long talk with your instructor. Hi Shawn. Since 1978 I am an instructor myself and teach aerodynamics to new pilots as well as new instructors since then. Next month we will have a discussion in our instructor's team on the matter of spinning and especially on how to avoid this killing phenomenon when happening at low altitude. If you don't understand my wordings please let me know; I am quite willing to elucidate on what I sayd. If you think my interpretation of the Magdenburg crash with the DG500 is wrong please explain, I am quite willing to listen to better theories about this. Something like "you need .... " doesn't help much Shawn. Karel, NL Your description of the situation sounded naive. If you were considering wind shear (decreasing wind velocity with altitude) you didn't note that. As Robert noted in another response a turn is a turn, as far as the aircraft is concerned, whether at 80 meters or 2000 unless the wind changes during the turn. I assumed you did not understand this, and figured a "usenet education" is a poor (perhaps deadly) substitute for time spent with an instructor. Thus my response. Shawn |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Robert John wrote in message ...
Hi Karel, I do not follow your explanation. If I carry out the same 180 degree manouver at 5000 feet, even in a 50kt wind, both I and the glider are quite unaware of groundspeed. No change in attitude is required or made. The only difference in doing it at 100 feet is surely the close view of the ground and the APPEARANCE of changing speed which may cause me to lower or raise the nose when I should not. Regards Robert Hi Robert, You are right Robert. The glider is unaware of groundspeed. Looked several times at the short film of the crash where it is obvious that the DG500 is flying to slow relative to the fast moving air rather then to slow relative to the ground while having a lot of tailwind (which is not very fast either). During standard circling no accelleration forces in the longitudinal direction of the glider are required to keep the IAS constant when the glider makes perfect circles relative to the moving layer of air. From the ground this looks quite different of course. But that is indeed irrelevant. Regards and thanks for your comment, Karel |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
SR22 Spin Recovery | gwengler | Piloting | 9 | September 24th 04 07:31 AM |
Spin Training | Captain Wubba | Piloting | 25 | April 12th 04 02:11 PM |
Cessna 150 Price Outlook | Charles Talleyrand | Owning | 80 | October 16th 03 02:18 PM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Piloting | 25 | September 11th 03 01:27 PM |