Approaching Deep Stall

wrote:

From Danny Deger:
The space shuttle could not be certified by the FAA. It pitches up when
stalled. Due to span wise flow, the outboard portions of the wings stall
first. Because it is a delta wing the outboard wings are also aft, so
the center of lift moves forward.

The dreaded Pitch Divergence!

lol, the Shuttle is flying at 40 degrees angle of attack all through entry.
This is pretty much considered flying and stable in a full stall the entire
time. (except for the last little part at the end, near the runway)

The difference between Ron Paul, and all the other candidates is that Ron
Paul looks at the Market Place to see what works, instead of the FAA.
Regulations inhibited progress in favor of the status quo, or current mode
of operation. Free Markets allow for change as technology (or, our
understanding of it) improves, change that isn't limited by the
understanding or approval of some government regulator.

It has to do with risk vs reward. Yes regulation limits risk, but also
limits reward, to those who pay to have the regulations written in their
favor. Why else would the regulated, contribute to both political parties?

--
Craig Fink
Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @

On Sep 6, 9:31 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:

The main point to make in this discussion is that the stall conditions
you learn for your Cessna 172 in training for your PPL apply to that
general category of airplane. Pilots are well advised to extend their
knowledge WELL beyond that accepted for the certificate and to delve
deeply into the new environment in which they have chosen to operate.
Learning about deep stall is a good start along that path.

I don't think I agree with your statement but I will say that any
pilot transitioning from the C-172 to the F-16 should ensure they get
a complete checkout.

-Robert, CFII

Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Sep 6, 9:31 am, Dudley Henriques wrote:

The main point to make in this discussion is that the stall conditions
you learn for your Cessna 172 in training for your PPL apply to that
general category of airplane. Pilots are well advised to extend their
knowledge WELL beyond that accepted for the certificate and to delve
deeply into the new environment in which they have chosen to operate.
Learning about deep stall is a good start along that path.

I don't think I agree with your statement but I will say that any
pilot transitioning from the C-172 to the F-16 should ensure they get
a complete checkout.

-Robert, CFII

It's helpful if instead of simply saying you disagree with something
that you go on to state exactly WHY you disagree with it. In that way
you maximize any educational value your post might have for a new pilot.

I seriously doubt that we have to worry about anyone transitioning from
a 172 to the Viper. The F16 deep stall scenario was simply used to
emphasize the fact that deep stall is not restricted to T tails which
should have been obvious.


--
Dudley Henriques

On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 20:48:38 -0400, The Visitor
wrote:



wrote:
doesn't have to be a "high tail". ever heard of the Cheyenne II's
stability augmentation system?



I thought it was because of the tip tanks it had to have it.

John

nope, they've all got tip tanks. AFAIK bigger engines led to a steeper
deck angle on climb out and dirty air over the tail.

the I's don't have enuff poop to get the nose high enuff, and the XL
has a different/longer fuselage.

when the nose gets high enuff on a II, an actuator winds up the
elevator downspring so the yoke doesn't "flop". keeps the quivering
protoplasm behind the yoke from crapping him/herself when the air
leaves the elevator.

have had the same sensation in a straight 31 with a Colemill
conversion. i kinda liked it...

TC

Recently, Nomen Nescio posted:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

From: "Neil Gould"

Thanks, Nomen. After Roger's suggestion to read up on it in the
manual, I "discovered" the MPO switch. Coming from Falcon 3, I
apparently didn't read the Falcon 4 manual as thoroughly as I should.

It's kinda academic if you're in the middle of a dogfight. By the
time you recover, you're probably a few seconds away from going up in
a bright
flash if you're flying against someone, with even a moderate level of
competence with F 4.0, who managed not to stall.

I'm sure that's true, if they're on your six. ;-)

I would be interested in trying some online combat, and would need
some guidance to connect up via the internet. Perhaps that's in the
manual, too (although I don't see it in the index)? ;-)

It's actually fairly easy.
One person sets up a "server" within F4 (a couple of button clicks)
and then others connect to the server via an IP number or an address.
I've always been on the "visitor" side of the connection since
running the "server" side can be a little problematic with a 56k
modem that never seems to run faster than 28k. Our area just recently
moved into the 21st century and I now have a 6 mbps cable connection
so I should have no problem being the "server" now unless having a
dynamic IP # screws it up.

I'm sure it would, as one wouldn't know their "server" IP until after
they're on-line, and even then it may not be possible to tell. The most
reliable setup would be a server with a static IP.

You also need to have your firewall not be blocking a couple of
ports, but that shouldn't be too difficult to do with most systems.

Well... it might be with mine. I'd need to know more and research the
implications before opening up my network that way.

But if someone else has the "server" set up, all you need to do is go
to "multiplayer", enter the address, click on "connect", and the F4.0
program pretty much takes care of the rest and guides you through
entering the battle.

There's gotta be a few more people here on R.A.P that enjoy playing
around
with Falcon 4.0 and I believe a "server" can handle up to 16 planes.
An R.A.P Dogfighting Free For All could be quite a "Hoot" if it could
be arranged.

But like I said, when the snow flies around here, so do the F16's. I
should have hosting a connection figured out by then.

Keep me posted!

Neil