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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Hilton wrote: I don't understand the first part (higher speed and climbing?) and the second part is wrong. If I leave the flaps at 0 degrees in my aircraft, bring the power back to decelerate, and maintain level flight, she will stall at about 53 mph indicated. The relative wind will be essentially horizontal, since that is the direction in which the aircraft is actually traveling. If I leave the flaps at 0 degrees, slow down to 60 mph indicated and raise the nose enough to stall, the aircraft will be climbing just prior to the stall. The relative wind will be "coming from above", since that is the direction in which the aircraft is traveling. George Patterson The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Are you contradicting your previous comment: "Some studies I've seen
have shown that pilots are often oblivious to warning horns and lights, though stick shakers are effective."? No, the discussion has vacillated between AOA indicators and warnings; there is more justification for improved warnings than for indicators which won't be used. BTW, I do agree that AOA indicator would be *useful* in the right hands (precise short field landings, e.g.), but I don't think it will make much of a dent int he stall/spin accidents. I'd like to think it's a solvable problem, or at least reducable. Planes that fly themselves? ;-) |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
The relative wind will be "coming from above", since that is the
direction in which the aircraft is traveling. The relative wind doesn't ever "come from above" while the aircraft has a positive angle of attack..by definition. ;-) Nor will the aircraft stall with the relative wind "essentially horizontal." Sounds like you think there is a zero angle of attack in that situation? Cannot be true. When not pulling a g-load, an aircraft climbs because the *flight path* is inclined relative to the horizon; the AOA depends on the chord line angle with the *flight path*. If your level flight stall speed is 53 and you're stalling at 60, you're probably achieving an accelerated stall. The flight testing guys try to decelerate 1 knot per second; oddly, decelerating at a greater rate produces a *lower* stall speed, which must be normalized during the data processing. (I'm sure this only occurs up to a point.) |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Greg Esres wrote:
The flight testing guys try to decelerate 1 knot per second; oddly, decelerating at a greater rate produces a *lower* stall speed,... Why? Hilton |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
"Greg Esres" wrote in message
... The relative wind doesn't ever "come from above" while the aircraft has a positive angle of attack..by definition. ;-) Nor will the aircraft stall with the relative wind "essentially horizontal." Sounds like you think there is a zero angle of attack in that situation? Cannot be true. I am sure that George means "coming from above relative to the horizon". Which is a fine statement to make, IMHO. I do find it odd that you were apparently unable to make this inference, given your next paragraph: When not pulling a g-load, an aircraft climbs because the *flight path* is inclined relative to the horizon; the AOA depends on the chord line angle with the *flight path*. Yes, the flight path IS inclined relative to the horizon, and this causes the relative wind to also become inclined relative to the horizon. If your level flight stall speed is 53 and you're stalling at 60, you're probably achieving an accelerated stall. Yes, he certainly is, and he said as much. Pete |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
G.R. Patterson III wrote:
Hilton wrote: I don't understand the first part (higher speed and climbing?) and the second part is wrong. If I leave the flaps at 0 degrees in my aircraft, bring the power back to decelerate, and maintain level flight, she will stall at about 53 mph indicated. The relative wind will be essentially horizontal, since that is the direction in which the aircraft is actually traveling. If I leave the flaps at 0 degrees, slow down to 60 mph indicated and raise the nose enough to stall, the aircraft will be climbing just prior to the stall. The relative wind will be "coming from above", since that is the direction in which the aircraft is traveling. George Patterson The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise. I think I see a lot of confusion happening in this thread due to the use of fuzzy and unnecessary concepts like "relative wind", "pitch angle", "from above" and a couple of others. Angle of Attack is simply the angle at which the airflow meets the wing. There is no need to complicate matters by calling the airflow "relative", especially as some posters seem to be confused about what is _relative_ to what. If we must use "relative" then it would be better to say exactly what we mean "relative to the wing/aircraft" or "in relation to the wing/aircraft", but as this is the only relation that makes sense when discussing AOA it shouldn't be necessary to mention it at all. And "wind" is positively misleading as it makes you think of movement of an airmass in relation to the ground. "From above" is similarly meaningless, unless we specify whether we mean it in relation to the wing/aircraft or the horizon. Cheers CV |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
I am sure that George means "coming from above relative to the
horizon". Which is a fine statement to make, IMHO. I do find it odd that you were apparently unable to make this inference, given your next paragraph: That is possibly what he meant, but I think you're trying to interpret what he said in light of your own understanding. That's a common mistake that instructors make and it hides the fact that the student really *doesn't* understand. Odd words or phrases used to explain something can often give a clue that the mental model is wrong. This "relative wind coming from above" sets my detectors going off. Where the relative wind is coming from relative to the horizon is irrelevant. [an accelerated stall.] Yes, he certainly is, and he said as much. Where? |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Why?
I don't know. None of the books explain it. They just descibe methods of correcting for it. (Test pilots seem the practical sort, rather than theoretical.) My suspicion is that it's due to the "dynamic stall" concept. When an aircraft is rotated rapidly to a high AOA, it can generate a much higher lift coefficient than steady state. Apparently it takes some finite amount of time for the adverse pressure gradients to do their magic and cause the airflow to separate. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
If we must use "relative" then it would be better to say exactly
what we mean "relative to the wing/aircraft" or "in relation to the wing/aircraft", but as this is the only relation that makes sense when discussing AOA it shouldn't be necessary to mention it at all. That's why it's almost impossible to discuss a subject meaningfully with someone unless he has the basic vocabulary down. For the CFIs I have taught, my first step is have them read an entry-level aerodynamics book. Much of our discussions after that is making sure they use the correct words and have a clear idea of what they mean. Words like "pitch", "angle of attack", and "climb angle" all have different meanings, but the distinction is so fuzzy in most pilots' minds that it's no wonder that people get confused. Now, "relative wind" is a standard aerodynamics term and is as ordinary to me as the word "chair". Surely all pilots understand what relative wind is? Yes, "wind" probably isn't the ideal word to use; vast numbers of pilots out there still think that the motion of the airmass relative to the ground affects the aerodynamics of the aircraft, and it's very difficult to rid them of that notion. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 at 03:56:41 in message
, G.R. Patterson III wrote: If I leave the flaps at 0 degrees, slow down to 60 mph indicated and raise the nose enough to stall, the aircraft will be climbing just prior to the stall. The relative wind will be "coming from above", since that is the direction in which the aircraft is traveling. I think the question here is "Above What?" If the aircraft is flying then the relative wind will be coming from a direction in which the velocity vector of the aircraft is pointing (assuming we are talking still air). But it will not be coming from "above the aircraft". A normal angle of attack sufficient to satisfy the required lift vector must still exist. The lift required when climbing is normally somewhat less than that required in steady horizontal flight. -- David CL Francis |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
PIREP--CO Experts low level carbon monoxide detector | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 10 | December 3rd 04 11:21 AM |
What's minimum safe O2 level? | PaulH | Piloting | 29 | November 9th 04 07:35 PM |
Altimeter setting != Sea Level Pressure - Why? | JT Wright | Piloting | 5 | April 5th 04 01:04 AM |
The Internet public meeting on National Air Tour Standards begins Feb. 23 at 9 a.m. | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 0 | February 22nd 04 03:58 PM |
flight level in Flight simulator | Robert | Piloting | 3 | August 20th 03 07:37 PM |