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
|
|||
|
|||
It strikes me that an additional benefit of this (assuming you
don't hit anything early on) is that at the point one perhaps inadvertently stalls, one is quite low (2 feet?) The fatal accidents I've read commonly involve either stalls at above 2 feet and/or hitting a wing first (not a wings-level touchdown). In article , CV wrote: Kirk Stant wrote: CV wrote in message ... I see. So if the results as reported here apply to calm conditions it would mean the ground-effect technique wins out whenever there is any significant wind gradient. Actually, no. If I remember correctly, the test concluded that in order to achieve any noticeable benefit from ground effect, the glider had to be flown extremely precisely at VERY low altitude - only a I should have worded that differently. What makes the difference there is less headwind close to the ground. The ground effect would of course not increase on account of the wind gradient. couple of feet above the ground. None of this "half a wingspan" - so unless you are stetching your glide over the Bonneville salt flats, just keeping out of the usual bushes, fences, stray airport dogs, etc would eliminate any ground effect benefit. With bushes and fences it's not on. I was thinking more along the lines of a big plowed field, perhaps with some ditches crossing and maybe just a low fence between the field and the runway. If there is some ground-effect benefit at 2 ft though, it won't be magically "eliminated" at 2,5 ft. The effect will decrease gradually with height. If the wind gradient is that strong, the turbulence at ground level would make any precise low flying sporting and inefficient, anyway. It doesn't have to be very turbulent there. We are assuming flat ground. When the gradient is strong the surface wind is much weaker than winds aloft. That is the meaning of "gradient". I think pilots confuse the distance a glider will "float in ground effect" (with the dive brakes closed) with the simple low drag glide angle as the glider slows down - and if over the runway this may be helped a little by ground effect, The slowing down factor is a valid point. And ground effect may help a little, or more than a little, if it is true that it can doube the L/D as someone mentioned. but remember this "float to the end of the runway" is usually started at a relatively low speed, so the drag penalty of diving down to a high speed is not felt. Try a constant altitude decelleration from Vne to Vstall at altitude some time; it's amazing how long and far you go! (helps when you get above the MSH...yeah I know you're not supposed to do it!) I suspect at altitude I wouldn't be able to appreciate the exact distance covered and fail to be amazed. CV -- ------------+ Mark J. Boyd |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Meredith Effect | Corky Scott | Home Built | 19 | September 4th 04 04:01 PM |
Toronto Area Glider Pilot Ground School Starts Thu. March 25, 2004 | Ulf | Soaring | 0 | March 3rd 04 05:02 PM |
Wing in Ground Effect? | BllFs6 | Home Built | 10 | December 18th 03 05:11 AM |
Why did Britain win the BoB? | Grantland | Military Aviation | 79 | October 15th 03 03:34 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |