![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Merlin Dorfman writes: Peter Stickney ) wrote: ... : You can certainly fly a transonic or supersonic airplane without using : a slab, but what happens is that your pitch authority (Ability to : raise or lower the nose) decreases, and, depending on the : configuration, teh airplane may not be able to be trimmed at all. : (The pitchup of the F-84s, for example.) Is this the "control reversal" at transonic speed mentioned in the British film, "Breaking the Sound Barrier?" (I know that opinions vary as to whether or not control reversal is real.) Well, the movie's a movie, and then, well, there's reality. In the early days of flight into the transonic reagion, airplanes would display all manner of behavior. Some would pitch down, (Meteor) SOme would pitch up (F-84) Some would pitch down & then pitch up (Canberra, IIRC), some would porpoise divergently, eventually risking breaking up (Vampire), and soem would just keep right on going with the pilot more passenger than director. (Venom). I suppose it would be possible for an airplane to pitch up and then pitch down, but usually the pitchup was so severe that it bled off a lot of speed, and bent the airplane. This was due to the various shifts of the Center of Moment of the airfoil as shockwaves began to form and move along the wing and tail surfaces. What gets felt in the cockpit is the change in trim force as this happens, and the perceived feel of what's going on. For ecample, you're hauling back in the stick, with nothing happening, and then the airplane pitches up to the extent that holding the stick in place feels like you're pushing it. Elevators don't work backwards, or anything like that. It was possible to get situations where aileron deflection at high speeds would bend the wing in the opposite direction, reducing and eventually reversing roll control. B-47s were quite prone to this, which led to the redline limit of 425 kts IAS. F-86s were somewhat subject to it, and some of the thinner winged transonic fighters like the FJ-4 Fury and F3H Demon could, it hey had a tendency to roll a bit be "fixed" by slamming the stick hard over at high IAS, bending the wings into rig. (Sort of like warping the wingtip of a balsa glider to make it fly straight) This concern about bending the wings is what led to the inboard ailerons of the F-100 and F-8 Crusader. Nowadays, (Post 1955 or so), we seem to have a handle on it, and passing through the transonic range is a bit dull. All you notice is a bit of change in the trim feel on some airplanes, the ASI jumps, and the fuel goes away fast. If you get a chance, go check out the NACA Technical Reports Server, for teh period between 1943 and 1953. There's a lot of stuff in there on the transonic behavior of a lot of airplanes, ranging from dive tests of a glider P-51 to the pitchup tendencies of various swept-wing jets. Most of it is, well, technical, (saves changing the name), but the abstracts can be rather clear. -- Pete Stickney A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures. -- Daniel Webster |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|