Question to Mxmanic

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
swag writes:

This is actually a maneuver that's demonstrated and practiced very
early in flight training, so I'm sure all pilots and student pilots
have experienced this. But your calculations are fairly correnct--a 2
minute turn won't cut it. It's usually demonstrated with a 60 degree
bank turn. I'm not sure of the timing, but i'd guess 30 sec or less.

Sorry, I didn't notice the 60-degree part. Sixty degrees would be 2.7 Gs,
which seems high for a GA aircraft. If I'm not mistaken, this would allow
a
360-degree turn in about one minute at 100 kts. Still, the wake would be
a
thousand feet lower or so by then (assuming a 12-kt downwash).


Your calculations are as insane as you are, guess again.
What you are MISSING is well beyond the scope this newsgroup, much less this
topic.
Sixty degrees turns are part of routine PPL training, without a parachute.
Check the regs you so often quote with implied authority.
Finding your own wake turbulence while doing 60/360s happens every day, and
is most often demonstrated by every CFI.
Descending 360 turns are executed routinely by pilots needing to descend
without leaving an area, such as descending to land after crossing high
mountains.

You demonstrate daily that you are incompetent to comprehend the answers to
the questions you pose, and regardless of your motives, based on your own
lack of experience, you serve no more purpose here than a common troll.

Get a life,,, or make time and money for a few measly flight hours.

Maxwell writes:

Sixty degrees turns are part of routine PPL training, without a parachute.

Training is exempt from the parachute requirement.

Check the regs you so often quote with implied authority.

I've already pointed to them, and if you had looked at them yourself, you
would have seen the exemption for training.

Finding your own wake turbulence while doing 60/360s happens every day, and
is most often demonstrated by every CFI.

At constant altitude?

Descending 360 turns are executed routinely by pilots needing to descend
without leaving an area, such as descending to land after crossing high
mountains.

Ah ... descending turns are different, and you might well enounter your own
wake in that case.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Maxwell writes:

Sixty degrees turns are part of routine PPL training, without a
parachute.

Training is exempt from the parachute requirement.

Check the regs you so often quote with implied authority.

I've already pointed to them, and if you had looked at them yourself, you
would have seen the exemption for training.

Finding your own wake turbulence while doing 60/360s happens every day,
and
is most often demonstrated by every CFI.

At constant altitude?

Descending 360 turns are executed routinely by pilots needing to descend
without leaving an area, such as descending to land after crossing high
mountains.

Ah ... descending turns are different, and you might well enounter your
own
wake in that case.


All your answers are either wrong or negligently incomplete. You ZEROed this
one too!

Don't forget that when you are making a steep turn, your vortices are not
sinking straight down. They are sinking perpindicular to your wings. I would
also guess, this IS just a guess though, that vortices sink at the lower end
of the range of sink rates you'll see given.

I've hit the wake in otherwise smooth air without showing any loss of
altitude in the turn. Since it's invisible, I can't say with absolute
certainty that it was my own wake, but it sure was the best explanation I
could come up with.

mike

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

Ah ... descending turns are different, and you might well enounter your
own
wake in that case.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Add "for small aircraft" after "sink rates you'll see given."

mike

"mike regish" wrote in message
. ..

Don't forget that when you are making a steep turn, your vortices are not
sinking straight down. They are sinking perpindicular to your wings. I
would also guess, this IS just a guess though, that vortices sink at the
lower end of the range of sink rates you'll see given.

I've done the same many times as well, both circling as well as in loops. In
an aerobatic plane with the smoke on it is easier to see your flight path of
course, which makes it easier and more fun.

This is just another example of book knowledge versus reality and
experience.

But, mx's assumptions about vortices sinking is essentially correct. He just
doesn't understand that sometimes conditions combine to make hitting your
own wake very possible.

mike

"Viperdoc" wrote in message
...
I've done the same many times as well, both circling as well as in loops.
In an aerobatic plane with the smoke on it is easier to see your flight
path of course, which makes it easier and more fun.

This is just another example of book knowledge versus reality and
experience.