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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
FAA PTS "Slips to Landing" requirement vs No-spoiler landings
bildan wrote:
On Sep 11, 12:01 am, Bruce wrote: vaughn wrote: "Mike the Strike" wrote in message ... I do know of one where the spoiler handle on a Grob 103 broke after they had been deployed and jammed full open, resulting in an off-field landing. And I know of a case where just one spoiler deployed on a glider. Causes a nasty uncommanded roll. The only solution (once you figure out what is going on) is to close the spoilers and proceed without them. Vaughn Single spoiler deployment has caused at least one fatal accident. If a linkage fails resulting in asymmetric airbrake deployment it is possible to run out of options very quickly. My thoughts are that you need to open the brakes to balance the drag and lift asymmetry. Then you can fly the aircraft through the resulting descending roll and recover. Depending on your height and speed it may be quite pressing to land, it may also be quite pressing to reduce speed... However - if this happens in a high energy state (where else?) you may already have a lot of yaw and roll inertia by the time you get the other airbrake open. Especially on a long winged open class ship there may just not be enough control authority left, and if you are very fast and/or very close to the ground the options are limited. To overcome the differential lift caused by the yaw you may need full rudder. To limit the speed and avoid terrain you may need large elevator deflection. To reverse the roll and return to level flight you almost certainly will need full aileron. You are unlikely to find such a high G, rolling pull up close to , or over Vne with airbrakes deployed in the manual. There is a reason for that "max manoeuvre speed" entry... A little math says that at 250km/h and 300m (~1000")AGL a 30 degree descent angle will give you less than 8 seconds to avoid terrain. 40 years ago I was involved in building and testing a glider with spoilers for roll control instead of ailerons. Preliminary flight tests were done on normal gliders rigged to permit one spoiler to be deployed at a time. The first thing we learned is that spoilers don't do what they are generally thought to do. The results of asymmetrical spoiler deployment vary dramatically with airspeed since drag increases with the square of airspeed but lift which is 'spoiled' pretty much remains constant with airspeed. (Any lift reduction is transient since the glider quickly re-establishes equilibrium at one G flight where lift =weight.) The bottom line was that below some airspeed like 50kts, weak roll (~10% of aileron authority) was the dominate result and above that powerful yaw was the dominate result. We found it best to regard differential spoilers as yaw control devices. Thus the concept of roll spoilers was a failure. In one iteration, spoilers were rigged to the pedals with the normal rudder fixed in neutral. With yaw spoilers, ailerons and elevator, we had a remarkably agile glider - albeit not a particularly efficient one. So, the accidental deployment of one spoiler will result in powerful yaw not roll which leads me to the subject of using one in a slip. Al relatively low speed I would expect this to be reasonably controllable. It would be interesting to test this at high speed - the yaw will be severe at full open, the secondary effect of that yaw will be a roll in the direction of the open spoiler. The uncoordinated flight is going to increase drag significantly, and the glider will start to descend. In the case of an open class/long winged glider the roll may exceed aileron authority if this happens at high speed. Even with 15m wingspan you are going to need significant control input on the ailerons. a glider one quickly finds the limit is available rudder authority. With full rudder one can use only about 15 degrees of bank while maintain a straight track. However, with one spoiler deployed, the pilot has far more 'rudder' authority in the direction of the open spoiler and a far steeper bank can be used. This results in an incredibly steep approach. This situation is 'dangerous' only to the extent the pilot doesn't understand how to control his partially disabled aircraft. Full control input on an already stressed airframe at speeds above max manoeuvring speed is not advisable - but may be the only option available. The only incident I know of the glider ended up in tiny pieces of carbon. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
FAA PTS "Slips to Landing" requirement vs No-spoiler landings
On Sep 13, 1:21*am, Bruce wrote:
bildan wrote: On Sep 11, 12:01 am, Bruce wrote: vaughn wrote: "Mike the Strike" wrote in message .... I do know of one where the spoiler handle on a Grob 103 broke after they had been deployed and jammed full open, resulting in an off-field landing. And I know of a case where just one spoiler deployed on a glider. *Causes a nasty uncommanded roll. *The only solution (once you figure out what is going on) is to close the spoilers and proceed without them. Vaughn Single spoiler deployment has caused at least one fatal accident. If a linkage fails resulting in asymmetric airbrake deployment it is possible to run out of options very quickly. My thoughts are that you need to open the brakes to balance the drag and lift asymmetry. Then you can fly the aircraft through the resulting descending roll and recover. Depending on your height and speed it may be quite pressing to land, it may also be quite pressing to reduce speed... However - if this happens in a high energy state (where else?) you may already have a lot of yaw and roll inertia by the time you get the other airbrake open. Especially on a long winged open class ship there may just not be enough control authority left, and if you are very fast and/or very close to the ground the options are limited. To overcome the differential lift caused by the yaw you may need full rudder. To limit the speed and avoid terrain you may need large elevator deflection. To reverse the roll and return to level flight you almost certainly will need full aileron. You are unlikely to find such a high G, rolling pull up close to , or over Vne with airbrakes deployed in the manual. There is a reason for that "max manoeuvre speed" entry... A little math says that at 250km/h and 300m (~1000")AGL a 30 degree descent angle will give you less than 8 seconds to avoid terrain. 40 years ago I was involved in building *and testing a glider with spoilers for roll control instead of ailerons. *Preliminary flight tests were done on normal gliders rigged to permit one spoiler to be deployed at a time. The first thing we learned is that spoilers don't do what they are generally thought to do. The results of asymmetrical spoiler deployment vary dramatically with airspeed since drag increases with the square of airspeed but lift which is 'spoiled' pretty much remains constant with airspeed. *(Any lift reduction is transient since the glider quickly re-establishes equilibrium at one G flight where lift =weight.) The bottom line was that below some airspeed like 50kts, weak roll (~10% of aileron authority) was the dominate result and above that powerful yaw was the dominate result. *We found it best to regard differential spoilers as yaw control devices. *Thus the concept of roll spoilers was a failure. In one iteration, spoilers were rigged to the pedals with the normal rudder fixed in neutral. *With yaw spoilers, ailerons and elevator, we had a remarkably agile glider - albeit not a particularly efficient one. So, the accidental deployment of one spoiler will result in powerful yaw not roll which leads me to the subject of using one in a slip. Al relatively low speed I would expect this to be reasonably controllable.. It would be interesting to test this at high speed - the yaw will be severe at full open, the secondary effect of that yaw will be a roll in the direction of the open spoiler. The uncoordinated flight is going to increase drag significantly, and the glider will start to descend. In the case of an open class/long winged glider the roll may exceed aileron authority if this happens at high speed. Even with 15m wingspan you are going to need significant control input on the ailerons. * a glider one quickly finds the limit is available rudder authority. *With full rudder one can use only about 15 degrees of bank while maintain a straight track. *However, with one spoiler deployed, the pilot has far more 'rudder' authority in the direction of the open spoiler and a far steeper bank can be used. *This results in an incredibly steep approach. This situation is 'dangerous' only to the extent the pilot doesn't understand how to control his partially disabled aircraft. Full control input on an already stressed airframe at speeds above max manoeuvring speed is not advisable - but may be the only option available.. The only incident I know of the glider ended up in tiny pieces of carbon. A little fuzzy. We did try full deployment of one spoiler at high speed and the results were not pretty. The roll 'effect' produced by asymmetric spoilers is fairly constant with changing airspeed but aileron authority increases with increasing speed. At no time is the roll effect of an open spoiler greater than the aileron roll effect. However, and this is the big one, the yaw effect produced by asymmetric spoilers increases with the square of airspeed and will quickly overwhelm rudder authority at higher speeds. Further, if the pilot applies aileron to oppose 'spoiler roll', adverse yaw will add to that produced by the open spoiler making matters worse. The situation is not unlike dealing with a engine out in a light twin airplane where the open spoiler is analogous to the dead engine. It's difficult but doable. Banking away from the open spoiler makes maintaining control easier just as banking away from a dead engine does. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
FAA PTS "Slips to Landing" requirement vs No-spoiler landings
bildan wrote:
A little fuzzy. We did try full deployment of one spoiler at high speed and the results were not pretty. The roll 'effect' produced by asymmetric spoilers is fairly constant with changing airspeed but aileron authority increases with increasing speed. At no time is the roll effect of an open spoiler greater than the aileron roll effect. However, and this is the big one, the yaw effect produced by asymmetric spoilers increases with the square of airspeed and will quickly overwhelm rudder authority at higher speeds. Is this what you experienced? I'd expect the rudder authority to also increase with the square of the airspeed, just as lift does for the same angle of attack. -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly * "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4 * Sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more * "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
FAA PTS "Slips to Landing" requirement vs No-spoiler landings
On Sep 13, 4:47*pm, Eric Greenwell wrote:
bildan wrote: A little fuzzy. *We did try full deployment of one spoiler at high speed and the results were not pretty. The roll 'effect' produced by asymmetric spoilers is fairly constant with changing airspeed but aileron authority increases with increasing speed. *At no time is the roll effect of an open spoiler greater than the aileron roll effect. However, and this is the big one, the yaw effect produced by asymmetric spoilers increases with the square of airspeed and will quickly overwhelm rudder authority at higher speeds. Is this what you experienced? I'd expect the rudder authority to also increase with the square of the airspeed, just as lift does for the same angle of attack. -- Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA * Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly * "Transponders in Sailplanes"http://tinyurl.com/y739x4 * * * Sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more * "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" atwww.motorglider.org Yep, to the point of flying sideways. Bill D |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
FAA PTS "Slips to Landing" requirement vs No-spoiler landings
The Practical Test Standard was clarified regarding "Slips to Landing"
that an actual slip to landing was not required. I have not instructed in a few years and maybe this had been clarified in the PTS but in the "Designee Update" of Jan.2000 this was clarified after an instructor in MN brought up the question to the FAA. I quote it below: AFS-600 Regulatory Support Division, Designee Update Vol.12, No.1 January 2000 “GLIDER SLIPS” For you folks who operate in the glider community, the April 1999 Private and Commercial Pilot-Glider Practical Test Standards include a landing TASK entitled “Slips to Landing.” In the objective, the applicant is required to “establish a slip without the use of drag devices” and then complete a landing. We have had questions on whether the applicant should complete the landing, with or without the use of drag devices. There was never any intent to require an applicant to complete the landing without the use of drag devices. The applicant is only required to demonstrate a slip (forward or side) without using drag devices, to position the glider for a safe landing. Element 6 of the TASK states; “make smooth, proper, and positive control applications during recovery from the slip.” Once this has been accomplished, the maneuver being evaluated is over. The applicant then lands the glider within the designated landing area, using drag devices as appropriate. Most important for examiner standardization, the examiner should not add or decrease elements to this task, or any other task, by asking the applicant to do more or less than is required. On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 10:16:07 -0700 (PDT), John Cochrane wrote: I think it's a useful maneuver in the same way that boxing the wake is -- it tells the examiner you're really in charge of the aircraft and pattern planning. We don't really do it for broken spoilers, that's a once in a gazillion event. That's why the new PTS does not require an actual landing with spoilers, only demonstration of glide path control using spoilers alone. The PTS should also require slips WITH spoilers not slips INSTEAD of spoilers. That's the maneuver you will use, when too high, to get in to a field, etc. Many pilots have no idea how steeply you can in fact come down. We'll just have to train that on our own. I've been having fun with students -- the challenge is, set up a landing so that you will use full slip and full spoiler on final. If you have to back off, you buy the beer (after flying) John Cochrane |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
5 minutes 5 airports 5 landings - video with "cleared to land" ATCCOMS | A Lieberma[_2_] | Owning | 0 | June 15th 09 03:01 AM |
5 minutes 5 airports 5 landings - video with "cleared to land" ATCCOMS | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | June 15th 09 03:01 AM |
The "darker side" of flying (Night Landings) with ATC COMS - Video | A Lieberma[_2_] | Owning | 2 | November 21st 08 10:43 PM |
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land" | Robert M. Gary | Piloting | 168 | February 5th 08 05:32 PM |
Phrase "landing runway" vs. "cleared to land" | Robert M. Gary | Instrument Flight Rules | 137 | February 5th 08 05:32 PM |