![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Snowbird writes:
I guess Mxmanic uses the FAA AIM as his main source in his "research". That is only one of many sources. They all say the same thing. a) "Flight tests have shown that the vortices from larger (transport category) aircraft sink at a rate of several hundred feet per minute, slowing their descent and diminishing in strength with time and distance behind the generating aircraft." Note the explicit reference to large aircraft. In fact, it seems all actual wake turbulence safety studies have involved large aircraft, i.e. B707 and larger. This is in fact quite natural, as there was no real safety issue before the large jetliners appeared. The wakes of smaller aircraft descend as well. b) "Test data have shown that vortices can rise with the air mass in which they are embedded." There you are, official proof to the statements of several of our contributors. Including myself. c) "The greatest vortex strength occurs when the generating aircraft is HEAVY, CLEAN, and SLOW." Yes. Although the downwash itself should be strongest when the aircraft is dirty and slow. The reason clean and slow produces stronger _vortices_ is that it only produces one pair, whereas flaps and other control surfaces can produce multiple vortices of smaller size that tend to interfere with each other and reduce overall turbulence. In contrast, a light aircraft doing a 360 is usually LIGHT, CLEAN and (relatively speaking) FAST. Very different conditions, especially regarding two major sources of wake: the AoA of the wing (which affects the tip vortices) and the power setting (which affects the propwash strength). Which makes it all the more difficult to understand how a pilot could feel his own wake in a level 360-degree turn. The interesting study question here, for the light airplane case, would be the relation between the tip vortices (which presumably sink, as for large aircraft) and the propwash (which is basically horizontal). I think glider pilots can testify that the propwash is the dominant one, at least close behind the tug airplane - any soarers out there who can comment? You're neglecting the downwash, which is present in all aircraft. Downwash tends to pull all turbulence behind the aircraft down with it. But realistically, as the wake behind a light aircraft is no real safety hazard, there is no compelling reason to study this case. So unless someone can produce a reference, let's rely on the observational data from countless pilots. And ignore the factual data from countless resources? What makes pilots more reliable? Most pilots barely understand how lift works to begin with. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mxsmanic wrote in
news ![]() Snowbird writes: I guess Mxmanic uses the FAA AIM as his main source in his "research". That is only one of many sources. They all say the same thing. a) "Flight tests have shown that the vortices from larger (transport category) aircraft sink at a rate of several hundred feet per minute, slowing their descent and diminishing in strength with time and distance behind the generating aircraft." Note the explicit reference to large aircraft. In fact, it seems all actual wake turbulence safety studies have involved large aircraft, i.e. B707 and larger. This is in fact quite natural, as there was no real safety issue before the large jetliners appeared. The wakes of smaller aircraft descend as well. b) "Test data have shown that vortices can rise with the air mass in which they are embedded." There you are, official proof to the statements of several of our contributors. Including myself. c) "The greatest vortex strength occurs when the generating aircraft is HEAVY, CLEAN, and SLOW." Yes. Although the downwash itself should be strongest when the aircraft is dirty and slow. The reason clean and slow produces stronger _vortices_ is that it only produces one pair, whereas flaps and other control surfaces can produce multiple vortices of smaller size that tend to interfere with each other and reduce overall turbulence. In contrast, a light aircraft doing a 360 is usually LIGHT, CLEAN and (relatively speaking) FAST. Very different conditions, especially regarding two major sources of wake: the AoA of the wing (which affects the tip vortices) and the power setting (which affects the propwash strength). Which makes it all the more difficult to understand how a pilot could feel his own wake in a level 360-degree turn. The interesting study question here, for the light airplane case, would be the relation between the tip vortices (which presumably sink, as for large aircraft) and the propwash (which is basically horizontal). I think glider pilots can testify that the propwash is the dominant one, at least close behind the tug airplane - any soarers out there who can comment? You're neglecting the downwash, which is present in all aircraft. Downwash tends to pull all turbulence behind the aircraft down with it. No, it doesn't, fjukkwit. Only most of it. Send me fifty bucks and I'll explain why to you bertie |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I want to ask you the most important question of your life. The question is: Are you saved? It is no | gasman | Soaring | 0 | August 26th 05 06:39 PM |
Good morning or good evening depending upon your location. I want to ask you the most important question of your life. Your joy or sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good | Excelsior | Home Built | 0 | April 22nd 05 01:11 AM |
Question about Question 4488 | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | October 27th 03 01:26 AM |