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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control
a wrote:
On Aug 1, 12:48Â*pm, wrote: a wrote: On Aug 1, 12:05Â*am, wrote: Mxsmanic wrote: writes: OK, then single pilot in real IMC. That's what wing levelers are for. Not while manuevering, which is when the system would be active. Another would be inadvertent VFR flight into IMC. Though I will admit that since there has to be an autopilot installed which this thing is installed on top of, it does sound a little like having a belt and suspenders. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. The reasonable approach would be to have the autopilot engage in straight and level automatically if the sensors detect an out of control condition. Not sure if a conventional A/P knows how to recover from a spin, but that would be a modest software patch. The article mentions loss of control as a major factor in the accident rate without going into any details of what that means. I can see the utility of something that monitors angle of attack and nudges the nose down when it determines a stall is emminent. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. Jim,with respect, if some device decided I wanted back pressure released when a stall is pending that device and I would have a discussion -- my end of it would be with wire clippers or a hammer! -- because when I'm landing the AoA is in the stall range and I don't want the nose wheel to touch down first, especially on a soft field. Since the system as described is easily overriden with manual inputs, I don't see that as a problem. It would take somewhat better programming than simply AoA. On the other hand, my airplane never sees pitch and bank close to the statutory limits, Those might be worth considering. Wait a minute, maybe not. I would not want something to intervene if I needed big pitch or bank inputs if trying to avoid another airplane or the like. I'm guessing optimal spin recovery would be ok though, optimal being defined as minimal loss of altitude. And maybe something to avoid the JFK Jr kind of pilot auguring into the ocean. JFD Jr augured in in what appears to have been cooridinated flight, so such a system would have made no difference. I would think the system would be somewhat usefull to prevent things like departure stalls and such. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Promises to be a good show this year! | PLMerite | Aviation Photos | 0 | May 3rd 08 12:43 PM |
Stability variation | WingFlaps | Piloting | 2 | April 28th 08 03:45 AM |
Towing stability studies | Dan G | Soaring | 27 | February 21st 08 08:38 PM |
Tow vehicle -- electronic stability control | Greg Arnold | Soaring | 4 | June 8th 06 12:31 PM |
Atmospheric stability and lapse rate | Andrew Sarangan | Piloting | 39 | February 11th 05 05:34 AM |