A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Harder to stall in a steep turn?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 29th 03, 09:03 AM
Dave Martin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The danger here is that we are talking theory where
we may start to confuse pilots. It is harder to stall
with 60 degrees of bank. Gliders like the K13, by
design run out of elevator in straight and level flight.
They are difficult when flown with heavy pilots to
develop more than a mushing stall in sraight and level
flight.

Put light -- bottom weigh pilots in and they become
a different glider.

The Puchacz on the other hand has plenty of rear elevator
even when banked, quite steeply.

There can be some dangerous assumptions that gliders
will not spin.

The pilot must know the limitations and characteristics
of the glider he/she is flying. This can only be achieved
by carefully experimenting with different configurations
and different flight situations.

Gliders with reputations that they will not spin, can
catch pilots out who load them wrongly, fly them badly
or worse combine both.

Dave Martin

Get some empirical experience. Hop in a G-103, circle
at 60deg bank and
bring the stick back to the stop. If properly rigged,
it will not stall.
Do the same in straight and level flight. It will
stall, in a mushy sort of
way depending on loading. Also, in a G-103, you will
get more elevator
authority in tight turns by moving the trim forward.

This is not true of all gliders, but clearly in a 60deg
bank, the G-103 is
stall proof by design.

Frank Whiteley






  #2  
Old July 29th 03, 10:26 AM
Bert Willing
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I fully agree, and I might add that entering a spin from a 60 deg bank -
when it happens - is a totally different story than spinning out of a
shallow bank. The difference in behaviour increases as wing span increases.
Spinning a 25m glider out of a 60 deg bank is something I experienced once
and I don't want to experience it another time.

Whether or not a specific glider will spin out of a steep bank is nothing to
learn from books. When you're low on a ridge, or centering a strong core at
600ft agl in flat country, there is more to flight dynamics that elevator
authority - a strongs gust or wind shear in such a situation makes any
sailplane stall.

--
Bert Willing

ASW20 "TW"
"Dave Martin" a écrit dans le message
de ...
The danger here is that we are talking theory where
we may start to confuse pilots. It is harder to stall
with 60 degrees of bank. Gliders like the K13, by
design run out of elevator in straight and level flight.
They are difficult when flown with heavy pilots to
develop more than a mushing stall in sraight and level
flight.

Put light -- bottom weigh pilots in and they become
a different glider.

The Puchacz on the other hand has plenty of rear elevator
even when banked, quite steeply.

There can be some dangerous assumptions that gliders
will not spin.

The pilot must know the limitations and characteristics
of the glider he/she is flying. This can only be achieved
by carefully experimenting with different configurations
and different flight situations.

Gliders with reputations that they will not spin, can
catch pilots out who load them wrongly, fly them badly
or worse combine both.

Dave Martin

Get some empirical experience. Hop in a G-103, circle
at 60deg bank and
bring the stick back to the stop. If properly rigged,
it will not stall.
Do the same in straight and level flight. It will
stall, in a mushy sort of
way depending on loading. Also, in a G-103, you will
get more elevator
authority in tight turns by moving the trim forward.

This is not true of all gliders, but clearly in a 60deg
bank, the G-103 is
stall proof by design.

Frank Whiteley








  #3  
Old July 29th 03, 02:20 PM
F.L. Whiteley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

That's why I gave a very specific example and also mentioned proper rigging,
which includes that the elevator actually moves within the design
deflections at annual time. There's also no accounting for pilots that
can't coordinate a 60deg bank or think a 45deg bank is 60degs. Of course
there are gliders that will flick into a spin with little or no warning from
this attitude, so try it at altitude, away from the crowd, and with your
instructor if necessary.

Frank

"Dave Martin" wrote in message
...
The danger here is that we are talking theory where
we may start to confuse pilots. It is harder to stall
with 60 degrees of bank. Gliders like the K13, by
design run out of elevator in straight and level flight.
They are difficult when flown with heavy pilots to
develop more than a mushing stall in sraight and level
flight.

Put light -- bottom weigh pilots in and they become
a different glider.

The Puchacz on the other hand has plenty of rear elevator
even when banked, quite steeply.

There can be some dangerous assumptions that gliders
will not spin.

The pilot must know the limitations and characteristics
of the glider he/she is flying. This can only be achieved
by carefully experimenting with different configurations
and different flight situations.

Gliders with reputations that they will not spin, can
catch pilots out who load them wrongly, fly them badly
or worse combine both.

Dave Martin

Get some empirical experience. Hop in a G-103, circle
at 60deg bank and
bring the stick back to the stop. If properly rigged,
it will not stall.
Do the same in straight and level flight. It will
stall, in a mushy sort of
way depending on loading. Also, in a G-103, you will
get more elevator
authority in tight turns by moving the trim forward.

This is not true of all gliders, but clearly in a 60deg
bank, the G-103 is
stall proof by design.

Frank Whiteley








  #4  
Old July 29th 03, 03:05 PM
Bill Daniels
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Dave Martin" wrote in message
...
The danger here is that we are talking theory where
we may start to confuse pilots. It is harder to stall
with 60 degrees of bank. Gliders like the K13, by
design run out of elevator in straight and level flight.
They are difficult when flown with heavy pilots to
develop more than a mushing stall in sraight and level
flight.

Put light -- bottom weigh pilots in and they become
a different glider.

The Puchacz on the other hand has plenty of rear elevator
even when banked, quite steeply.

There can be some dangerous assumptions that gliders
will not spin.

The pilot must know the limitations and characteristics
of the glider he/she is flying. This can only be achieved
by carefully experimenting with different configurations
and different flight situations.

Gliders with reputations that they will not spin, can
catch pilots out who load them wrongly, fly them badly
or worse combine both.

Dave Martin

You make a good point. Some gliders are very resistant to stalls and others
will stall readily - especially with light pilots. It seems that trainers
made in Eastern Europe come equipped with large, effective elevators that
can stall the wing in any attitude. On the other hand, many German single
place glass gliders often have small elevators with limited up authority.

For example the Blanik L-23, IS28 b2 Lark and, as another poster pointed out
the Puchacz, can be stalled from a steep bank easily. For this reason, they
make good trainers since the student must learn to be constantly aware of
pre-stall buffet.

However, the point the Derek was making is that it is more difficult, but
not impossible, to stall in a steep turn. I've had this discussion with
pilots who feared steep banks. I suggest that thermalling is steep banks is
easier in that the glider is more difficult to stall and fewer corrections
are needed to stay in the thermal since the turn diameter is smaller.

Bill Daniels

  #5  
Old July 29th 03, 04:39 PM
Jim
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 08:05:21 -0600, "Bill Daniels"
wrote:


"Dave Martin" wrote in message
...
The danger here is that we are talking theory where
we may start to confuse pilots. It is harder to stall
with 60 degrees of bank. Gliders like the K13, by
design run out of elevator in straight and level flight.
They are difficult when flown with heavy pilots to
develop more than a mushing stall in sraight and level
flight.

Put light -- bottom weigh pilots in and they become
a different glider.

The Puchacz on the other hand has plenty of rear elevator
even when banked, quite steeply.

There can be some dangerous assumptions that gliders
will not spin.

The pilot must know the limitations and characteristics
of the glider he/she is flying. This can only be achieved
by carefully experimenting with different configurations
and different flight situations.

Gliders with reputations that they will not spin, can
catch pilots out who load them wrongly, fly them badly
or worse combine both.

Dave Martin

You make a good point. Some gliders are very resistant to stalls and others
will stall readily - especially with light pilots. It seems that trainers
made in Eastern Europe come equipped with large, effective elevators that
can stall the wing in any attitude. On the other hand, many German single
place glass gliders often have small elevators with limited up authority.

For example the Blanik L-23, IS28 b2 Lark and, as another poster pointed out
the Puchacz, can be stalled from a steep bank easily. For this reason, they
make good trainers since the student must learn to be constantly aware of
pre-stall buffet.

However, the point the Derek was making is that it is more difficult, but
not impossible, to stall in a steep turn. I've had this discussion with
pilots who feared steep banks. I suggest that thermalling is steep banks is
easier in that the glider is more difficult to stall and fewer corrections
are needed to stay in the thermal since the turn diameter is smaller.

Bill Daniels


This is an extremely important caution. Gliders do not all have the
same behavior. Along this line, I have been cautioned that in a turn,
the inside wing, even in a coordinated turn, is flying at a higher
angle of attack than the outside wing. The degree of difference would
vary with the bank angle. Thus, some gliders may not only stall in a
steep turn, they can flick into a spin "out the bottom" in the blink
of an eye. This may not be the case with many (most?) "modern"
ships, but none-the-less is worth keeping in mind I guess.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Aerobatics 28 January 2nd 09 02:26 PM
Parachute fails to save SR-22 Capt.Doug Piloting 72 February 10th 05 05:14 AM
Procedure Turn Bravo8500 Instrument Flight Rules 65 April 22nd 04 03:27 AM
Calculating vertical time and distance in a stall turn (US Hammerhead) Dave Aerobatics 3 November 20th 03 10:48 AM
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) Rich Stowell Piloting 25 September 11th 03 01:27 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.