![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roy Bourgeois wrote:
I think that the difference is that my original post focused on "rudder response" and others are focusing on "yaw stability" - which are different and somewhat opposite. The 1-34 is quite stabile in yaw but as Doug noted in his first post, it's response (time to desired effect) to your stepping on the pedal is pretty bad. It sounds like you are saying it has plenty of rudder power, but the response is slow. So... If you are flying straight and level, then step on the rudder (no ailerons), are you saying it is slower to yaw than most/many gliders (i.e., slow response time)? But if you are patient (wait 2-3 seconds more than you do in most/many gliders) it will have plenty of yaw (i.e., plenty of power)? I flew several 1-34s about 250 hours (and still occasionally). It doesn't have a problem with adverse yaw in a turn. No glider has problem with adverse yaw once it's settled in a turn, because very little aileron is required to hold a turn. It's always during the turn entry/exit that adverse yaw is a problem. But when you step on the pedal (say, to begin a slip) - nothing much happens (compared to other gliders). I was suggesting to Doug (and still believe) that the lack of rudder "response" is a function of the extraordinary fuselage length and that he would need a much bigger rudder to solve that problem. The kind of response you need when entering a turn is force to counteract the adverse yaw, not a rapid change in direction. During the initial turn entry, the fuselage mainly rolls, not yaws. Your concern about the length of the fuselage would be appropriate for aerobatic maneuvers that involve rapid yawing, which is why aerobatic aircraft typically are small. A Pitts is a good example of this. Short wings and tails reduce the moment of inertia and the changes in angle of attack due to motion about the axes, allowing rapid response. A glider turn entry isn't rapid in yaw, so these effects aren't important, but rudder force is, and a long boom makes it more effective. Now - if somebody will show me how to make my Nimbus 3 do ANYTHING responsively - I'll be eternally grateful Can't help you there, but at the convention, it was interesting listening to Dick Butler talk about cutting off the tail of his ASW 22 so he could graft on a longer boom and a new fin (and maybe new rudder - I'm not sure about that) to improve the handling with the longer wing tips he also installed. JJ might be able to help you, as a long time Nimbus 3 owner, and I think he also has replaced a tail or two on them. -- ----- change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Air Bus 300 crash in NY now blamed on co-pilot's improper use of rudder | Corky Scott | Piloting | 30 | October 28th 04 04:10 AM |
B2 Split Rudder | Emilio | Military Aviation | 8 | April 12th 04 10:43 AM |
P-51 Rudder Aerodynamics | Hawkeye Hughes | Home Built | 1 | March 15th 04 09:24 AM |
A lesson learned - Invisible rider with foot on right rudder | Dave Butler | Piloting | 2 | October 16th 03 09:58 PM |
Cessna 150 Price Outlook | Charles Talleyrand | Owning | 80 | October 16th 03 02:18 PM |