![]() |
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 |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Has anyone on the list ever worked with or for Cessna who might know
how they generate their performance charts? Experimental measurement -- or calculated "guess"? To answer my own question: in the USA FAR part 23 describes in excruciating detail how these data charts have to be created and I excerpt for GA (a bit wily nily): Sec. 23.45 General. (a) Unless otherwise prescribed, the performance requirements of this part must be met for-- (1) Still air and standard atmosphere; ... (b) Performance data must be determined over not less than the following ranges of conditions-- (1) Airport altitudes from sea level to 10,000 feet; and (2) For reciprocating engine-powered airplanes of 6,000 pounds, or less, maximum weight, temperature from standard to 30° C above standard; ... (f) Unless otherwise prescribed, in determining the takeoff and landing distances, changes in the airplane's configuration, speed, and power must be made in accordance with procedures established by the applicant for operation in service. These procedures must be able to be executed consistently by pilots of average skill in atmospheric conditions reasonably expected to be encountered in service. (g) The following, as applicable, must be determined on a smooth, dry, hard-surfaced runway-- (1) Takeoff distance of Sec. 23.53(b); (2) Accelerate-stop distance of Sec. 23.55; (3) Takeoff distance and takeoff run of Sec. 23.59; and (4) Landing distance of Sec. 23.75. NOTE: The effect on these distances of operation on other types of surfaces (for example, grass, gravel) when dry, may be determined or derived and these surfaces listed in the Airplane Flight Manual in accordance with Sec. 23.1583(p). Note the word "determined", not "calculated" or "derived" for all except the bit about types of surfaces, where "derivation" is allowed. There are a LOT of variables in those rules that don't lend themselves to mathematical expressions. My conclusion is that there is no simple formula available to apply in an Excel spreadsheet that will reliably predict the numbers from the chart, thus your calculations seem to have contradictory results (eg, different performance for same density altitude). Of course, someone with more experience in aircraft certification / performance data generation will probably post something right away showing I don't know a damned thing and my conclusions are completely wrong. ![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Confusion | Jon Woellhaf | Instrument Flight Rules | 85 | December 28th 07 11:45 PM |
Confusion Plus | Kevin Berlyn | Home Built | 1 | March 6th 05 06:40 AM |
Cessna 150 with 150hp engine performance | The Ponderosa | Owning | 0 | September 18th 04 06:14 AM |
confusion | G.A. Seguin | Soaring | 0 | July 14th 04 12:08 AM |
Complex / High Performance / Low Performance | R.T. | Owning | 22 | July 6th 04 08:04 AM |