Mild Aerobatics

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 16:49:07 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

As another reference point (and a crude way of measuring the negative Gs), I
routinely read about guys doing the "up-down" maneuver to the point where
their engine sputters due to fuel starvation.

I've done that with Cherokees since the 1960s. It doesn't hurt them
at all. And it is a wonderful way to teach the kids about physics.
It's called a parabolic arc and it's not an aerobatic maneuver.

Since that flight I've carefully
inspected the empennage, and there is obviously no visible stress or strain,
or I wouldn't be flying it -- but how can you really know without extensive
metallurgic testing?

Think about it Jay. When you're just flying along, there is a large
load on the the stabilator forcing the tail down to make the plane
stable (hence the term). When you "unload" the stabilator you've
given it a nice little rest.

I knew a pilot with a Commanche that put 50 pounds of lead in the tail
cone. It made it go faster. Really not that much faster, but the
plane flew better. That was also a long time ago! And I loved flying
that Commanche.


If you've ever looked at the stabilator attachment on a Cherokee you will
marvel at the simplicity and apparent fragility of the design, so inducing
excessive negative-G is something we never, ever do.

Don't ever look closely at a helicopter.

Mike Weller

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
I knew a pilot with a Commanche that put 50 pounds of lead in the tail
cone. It made it go faster. Really not that much faster, but the
plane flew better. That was also a long time ago! And I loved flying
that Commanche.

How about spinning it?

moo

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:46:13 -0400, "Happy Dog"
wrote:

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
I knew a pilot with a Commanche that put 50 pounds of lead in the tail
cone. It made it go faster. Really not that much faster, but the
plane flew better. That was also a long time ago! And I loved flying
that Commanche.

How about spinning it?

moo


Not a good idea. Even Cherokees take a lot of altitude to recover
from a spin.

Mike Weller

"Mike Weller"
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:46:13 -0400, "Happy Dog"
wrote:

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
I knew a pilot with a Commanche that put 50 pounds of lead in the tail
cone. It made it go faster. Really not that much faster, but the
plane flew better. That was also a long time ago! And I loved flying
that Commanche.

How about spinning it?

Not a good idea. Even Cherokees take a lot of altitude to recover
from a spin.

I was being facetious. Did he do a W&B on the thing?

moo

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 01:49:13 -0400, "Happy Dog"
wrote:

"Mike Weller"
On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 14:46:13 -0400, "Happy Dog"
wrote:

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
I knew a pilot with a Commanche that put 50 pounds of lead in the tail
cone. It made it go faster. Really not that much faster, but the
plane flew better. That was also a long time ago! And I loved flying
that Commanche.

How about spinning it?

Not a good idea. Even Cherokees take a lot of altitude to recover
from a spin.

I was being facetious. Did he do a W&B on the thing?

moo


I understand that, but it's a true story. Long ago, but not far away.

I've been a passenger on a Shorts Skyvan where to get the weight and
balance right we had to sit in the very back of the airplane.

Mike Weller

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
"Mike Weller" wrote in message
I knew a pilot with a Commanche that put 50 pounds of lead in the tail
cone. It made it go faster. Really not that much faster, but the
plane flew better. That was also a long time ago! And I loved flying
that Commanche.

How about spinning it?

Not a good idea. Even Cherokees take a lot of altitude to recover
from a spin.

I was being facetious. Did he do a W&B on the thing?

I understand that, but it's a true story. Long ago, but not far away.

I've been a passenger on a Shorts Skyvan where to get the weight and
balance right we had to sit in the very back of the airplane.

Point is that putting 50#s in the tail without doing a W&B is insane. I
would be surprised if it could recover from a stall if it was already at the
POH tail-heavy limit.

moo

If you've ever looked at the stabilator attachment on a Cherokee you will
marvel at the simplicity and apparent fragility of the design, so inducing
excessive negative-G is something we never, ever do.

Don't ever look closely at a helicopter.

And for you die-hard Cessna fans, don't EVER look at the wing spar attach
points... You'll never do a steep turn in your 172/182 again!

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:

If you've ever looked at the stabilator attachment on a Cherokee you will
marvel at the simplicity and apparent fragility of the design, so inducing
excessive negative-G is something we never, ever do.

Don't ever look closely at a helicopter.


And for you die-hard Cessna fans, don't EVER look at the wing spar attach
points... You'll never do a steep turn in your 172/182 again!

I have. What is the problem? :-)

Matt

And for you die-hard Cessna fans, don't EVER look at the wing spar attach
points... You'll never do a steep turn in your 172/182 again!

I have. What is the problem? :-)

Well, to my (admittedly un-trained) eye, there doesn't appear to be enough
"there" there...

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote
Well, to my (admittedly un-trained) eye, there doesn't appear to be
enough "there" there...

Each 10,000# engine on the B-707 was attached with three (3)
bolts the size of your small finger! Never lost one.

Bob