"Jim Baker" wrote in message
...

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
link.net...

"Jim Baker" wrote in message
...

"vincent p. norris" wrote in message
...
As for what they're capable of, remember Tex Johnson(sp?)
barrel
rolled
the 707 prototype (the "Dash-80").

Actually, an aileron roll, Paul. I know his book, ghost
written by
another, says barrel roll, but the tape shows it's an aileron
roll.

Among non-fliers, all rolls are "barrel rolls," just as all
loops
are
"loop-de-loops" and among Southerners, all Northerners are
"Damnyankees."

vince norris

Vince...everyone is entitled to their opinion. I've seen that
tape
numerous
times and I've done and taught several hundred aileron rolls (23
continuous
ones once in a T-38) and barrel rolls. The 707 prototype that day
over Lake
Seattle did not do an aileron roll, it was a barrel roll. He
dove, he
climbed and he did a constant "speed" roll about a point which is
close to
the definition of a barrel roll as I can get without a book in
front
of me.
An aileron roll is a roll about the longitudinal axis of the
aircraft.
He
did not do a 360 roll around the longitudinal axis.

Regards,

JB

I almost hate to get into this one again, as the last time was quite
unpleasant! :-)
It was a barrel roll. The -80 needed positive g all the way around
for
the oil scavenger pumps. Tex knew this and I discussed it with him
many
times through the years. Also, the airplane, regardless of how high
the
roll set would have been and regardless of the airspeed at entry for
a
pure aileron roll , would not have had the energy available through
the
roll axis to complete an aileron roll without split S'ing out the
back
side. The result of a pure aileron input would have been a HUGE
split S
with serious airspeed problems on the back side!.
Tex did the roll the only way the airplane could have been rolled.
He
FLEW it all the way around the barrel, keeping positive g on the
airplane throughout the maneuver for the oil pumps and to avoid the
split s.
Tex flew the prototype through a 3 dimensional roll at positive g ,
and
that spells barrel roll.
All the best as usual,
Dudley

I must have missed last years blood bath, :-))

I don't know how anyone looking at that tape, who has done the
manuevers
we're speaking of, could confuse one with the other. As you've said
Dudley,
the -80 (which I had the pleasure of seeing up close on Mothers Day
weekend)
did not have the roll authority to do an aileron roll. Those little
tiny
ailerons couldn't provide enough asymetic energy. Half way through
the crew
would have been looking straight down at Lake WASHINGTON (thanks
Pete!).
Now maybe that would have been more impressive, but it would've taken
one
hell of an altitude to start and the folks on the ground might not
have been
able to even see the entry. I've "aileron" rolled a large aircraft (
250,000 lbs) a few times but it didn't depend on ailerons for the
manuever.
The B-1B used a split stab for primary roll authority and that was one
huge,
split "aileron" that provided enough energy to roll the aircraft
without the
Split S and the problems that would bring to a large airframe.

Have a pleasant weekend fellas!!

Stepping off the battlefied,

Jim

Biggest thing I ever barreled was a twin Beech. The B1 had to be a
handful!!
Watched a buddy of mine in the RAF barrel a Vulcan once. Beautiful!! You
should have seen that bat winged SOB going around. His nose had to be
sixty degrees as he initiated.

Last word I got from the Blues was that the boss had to come out to the
ramp every morning and tell the Fat Albert crew, "You will NOT roll this
airplane today gentlemen. I don't give a **** HOW much money the diamond
has paid you to try it" :-))))
Dudley