AoA keep it going!

But can you instantly recall the exact speeds for all of them, under
pressure, without fail?

Yes. But if I really couldn't and were in the situation you describe, I
just would write them into a little booklet which I could take with me
and consult before getting into the glider. Just as I do with many other
things. (Besides: If you can't remember the exact speeds to fly, why
should you be able to remember the exact AoA to fly?)

Ok, you probably have never flown an aircraft with an actual AOA
system installed. The point is, there is only one AOA you care about,
and that is what a simple AOA gauge shows. Thats it - if you are
below that angle, you are fast. Above that angle, you are slow. No
matter what your gross weight, bank angle, etc.

I've done the booklet route, and it's fine, up to a point.

My personal experience was in giving commercial rides (sightseeing and
aerobatic) in 2-33s, 2-32s, G-103s, and ASK-21s. With a wide variety
of passenger size, in no particular order, often moving to a different
glider immediately after landing.

I shudder at the thought that a pilot would give commercial rides to
passengers without being absolutely sure of the exact speeds to fly!

Have you ever been there? When you fly a lot of different gliders,
every one has a different "exact" speed to fly. This is where
experience comes in - you learn real fast the speed ranges for the
gliders involved, and how they feel. And how to carry some extra
airspeed in the pattern until you can safely get rid of it.

But it would still be nice to have ACCURATE instrumentation. While
airspeed works, it is by design only an approximation of the correct
speed.

It may not be ACCURATE, but it certainly is accurate enough. For me, anyway.

Yes, and for me too. But that doesn't mean we can't have something
better. Otherwise, with that logic, we would be all still flying with
uncompensated pellet varios. Sure they work, but we can do better!

Now, get slow on your turn to final in a
2-32 and you may wish you had an AoA indicator!

The solution is simple: Just don't get slow on your turn to final. This
has been hammered into my head since my very first flight, and it works
for me. I don't see what an AoA instrument could add to this. If you are
distracted enough to get slow with an ASI, then I see no reason why you
wouldn't be distracted enough to get slow with an AoAI.

ARGGG you just do not understand the concept. Oh well, fun discussion
anyway.

Cheers, and Merry Chrismas!

Kirk

On 19 Dec, 21:56, "kirk.stant" wrote:

The solution is simple: Just don't get slow on your turn to final. This
has been hammered into my head since my very first flight, and it works
for me. I don't see what an AoA instrument could add to this. If you are
distracted enough to get slow with an ASI, then I see no reason why you
wouldn't be distracted enough to get slow with an AoAI.

ARGGG you just do not understand the concept. Oh well, fun discussion
anyway.

Could you explain a little more. The situation at the moment seems to
be "every glider (bar a few primaries) has an instrument, which if
given attention, will alert the pilot if s/he is flying too slowly on
approach. Despite this, a few pilots manage to fly too slow and
crash".

If that started off ""every glider (bar a few primaries) has an
instrument, which if given attention, will alert the pilot if s/he is
flying at too high an AoA on approach", can you explain why it would
not end

"Despite this, a few pilots manage to fly at too high an AoA and
crash".

In short, why would pilots who ignore the ASI pay attention for an AoA
meter?

Ian

Could you explain a little more. The situation at the moment seems to
be "every glider (bar a few primaries) has an instrument, which if
given attention, will alert the pilot if s/he is flying too slowly on
approach. Despite this, a few pilots manage to fly too slow and
crash".

If that started off ""every glider (bar a few primaries) has an
instrument, which if given attention, will alert the pilot if s/he is
flying at too high an AoA on approach", can you explain why it would
not end

"Despite this, a few pilots manage to fly at too high an AoA and
crash".

In short, why would pilots who ignore the ASI pay attention for an AoA
meter?

Ian

Ian, we appear to be comparing apples and oranges - you are talking
about not stalling on final, while I am talking about being able to
accurately thermal, and incidentally have a better instrument for
flying accurate approaches. You are absolutely correct that anyone
who ignores all the indications of an approaching stall will likely do
the same when an AOA indicator is installed. That is a different
issue altogether. What we AOA proponents are saying is that the
cherished airspeed indicator is really a poor substitute for an AOA
indicator in certain phases of flight - mainly low speed ones such as
thermalling and approaches - where accurate flying is important. The
fact that we do so well with airspeed just proves that gliders are
really easy to fly, and pilots quickly learn the characteristics of
their glider.

Will an AOA guage make you a safer pilot, in a modern glider? Maybe a
little; its funny how all power planes have to have an AOA (not
airspeed) controlled stall warning device to be certified. In my
experience, light power planes not really more susceptible to approach
stalls than gliders, but there are more distractions - including that
noisy thing in the front just waiting to quit! Yet they mandate stall
warnings.

Again, in my perfect glider, I would have a nice unambiguous AOA
indication of Clmax (for thermalling), Approach Cl (say at 1.3 Vstall)
- maybe change to this when the gear is down; and L/D max (flaps up).
I don't need to know the specific stall AOA - there is no reason to be
slower than Cl max so by definition I need to reduce AOA if I'm above
that. But I do want to be able - regardless of my ballast load and
bank angle - to slow to the most efficient AOA when pulling into a
thermal. When faster than L/D max, I'm probably flying a McCready
speed, which is not affected by AOA, and needs to be set using the
airspeed indicator.

Obviously, my opinion is colored by having actually flown airplanes
with excellent AOA systems, and by my wish to optimise my soaring for
XC and racing. I really think that within a few years someone will
come up with a simple, low drag, accurate AOA system that will be
adopted by the same group of pilots who eagerly adopted radios, TE,
audio varios, glide computers, GPS, PDA moving maps, transponders,
ELTs, traffic detection devices - all those "unecessary" gadgets that
clutter up our cockpits but, in my opinion, make soaring safer, more
efficient, and more fun.

Cheers,

Kirk

On Dec 20, 9:42 am, "kirk.stant" wrote:
....snip...
Obviously, my opinion is colored by having actually flown airplanes
with excellent AOA systems, and by my wish to optimise my soaring for
XC and racing.
....snip...

Cheers,

Kirk

Kirk,

Could you summarize for me _how_ you used the AOA indicator in those
aircraft, which aircraft and under what conditions ?

I am curious to the actual use(s).

Thanks
Todd Smith
3S

Kirk,

Could you summarize for me _how_ you used the AOA indicator in those
aircraft, which aircraft and under what conditions ?

I am curious to the actual use(s).

Thanks
Todd Smith
3S

Sure. I used AOA in T-38s (a little - not much flight time in those)
and in F-4s (about 2000 hours in those). In my current job, I fly a
variety of F-15 simulators (the real thing, not PC games) and use AOA
all the time. Have also a few flight in F-16s and a lot of time in
F-16 simulators, which use AOA in the approach and landing
configuration.

In a nutshell, AOA is used anytime optimum performance is required
from the wing - be it turning, flying an approach, flying for max
range, recovering from a dive, etc. Since fighters can vary weight a
lot due to fuel burn and store (weapons) configuration, it's
impractical to try to use airspeed other than as a general guide to
your energy state - your airspeed tells you how much instantaneous
energy you have to maneuver, then you fly at the AOA that matches the
type of turn you want - less AOA is conserves energy, more AOA turns
faster, etc. If you are flying for max range or max endurance, again
there is a recommended AOA to fly at - it will stay the same while
the actual airspeed changes based on gross weight, configuration, and
altitude. Finally, in the pattern, you figure out the approximate
airspeed and AOA based on fuel and stores remaining, then crosscheck
the two - if they agree, it's easier to fly AOA on most jets (F-4
especially, F-15 less so).

Now, compared to gliders, these are all extremely low aspect ratio,
and that will exaggerate AOA effects. But the aerodynamic priciples
are the same.

Finally, someone questioned about whether it's better to thermal
efficiently or in the best part of the themal. The answer, IMHO, is
that you should strive to do both. Right now we have wonderful
instruments to help us find the best lift. But we still use a crude
instrument to fly efficiently. Well, actually, most people probably
thermal more by feel and attitude than by staring at the airspeed
indicator.

End of war story.

Cheers,

Kirk

On Dec 20, 5:17 pm, "kirk.stant" wrote:
Sure. I used AOA in T-38s (a little - not much flight time in those)
and in F-4s (about 2000 hours in those). In my current job, I fly a
variety of F-15 simulators (the real thing, not PC games) and use AOA
all the time. Have also a few flight in F-16s and a lot of time in
F-16 simulators, which use AOA in the approach and landing
configuration.

Excellent post Kirk. I was about to ask if anyone had fighter-jet
experience and you do! I was going to ask as I recall that in an
accident report on a fatal stall/spin after a missed approach to a
carrier by a F-14 one of the key aspects had been the crew's
monitoring of the AoA. IIRC - though I'm not sure I do - the rear-seat
crew member actually calls out the AoA to the front-seat pilot, who
has too many tasks to do to also include checking the AoA in their
scan.

Finally, someone questioned about whether it's better to thermal
efficiently or in the best part of the themal. The answer, IMHO, is
that you should strive to do both. Right now we have wonderful
instruments to help us find the best lift. But we still use a crude
instrument to fly efficiently. Well, actually, most people probably
thermal more by feel and attitude than by staring at the airspeed
indicator.

I was thinking the same thing. I have often wondered about the best
speed to fly at any given moment when thermalling, including using
that online calculator thing to get some guidelines which were a fair
bit faster than I thought they would be. As you say, it's odd that we
have great varios, but nothing very good to get the most from our
wings.

I'd be interested in an AoA indicator for performance reasons, but not
so much for safety, where I personally think a good safety margin on
the ASI does the job (plus not leaving it too late to have to pick a
small field to land in, so ground-roll distance is such a factor).


Dan

On Dec 20, 12:17 pm, "kirk.stant" wrote:
Kirk,

Could you summarize for me _how_ you used the AOA indicator in those
aircraft, which aircraft and under what conditions ?

I am curious to the actual use(s).

Thanks
Todd Smith
3S

Sure. I used AOA in T-38s (a little - not much flight time in those)
and in F-4s (about 2000 hours in those). In my current job, I fly a
variety of F-15 simulators (the real thing, not PC games) and use AOA
all the time. Have also a few flight in F-16s and a lot of time in
F-16 simulators, which use AOA in the approach and landing
configuration.

In a nutshell, AOA is used anytime optimum performance is required
from the wing - be it turning, flying an approach, flying for max
range, recovering from a dive, etc. Since fighters can vary weight a
lot due to fuel burn and store (weapons) configuration, it's
impractical to try to use airspeed other than as a general guide to
your energy state - your airspeed tells you how much instantaneous
energy you have to maneuver, then you fly at the AOA that matches the
type of turn you want - less AOA is conserves energy, more AOA turns
faster, etc. If you are flying for max range or max endurance, again
there is a recommended AOA to fly at - it will stay the same while
the actual airspeed changes based on gross weight, configuration, and
altitude. Finally, in the pattern, you figure out the approximate
airspeed and AOA based on fuel and stores remaining, then crosscheck
the two - if they agree, it's easier to fly AOA on most jets (F-4
especially, F-15 less so).

Now, compared to gliders, these are all extremely low aspect ratio,
and that will exaggerate AOA effects. But the aerodynamic priciples
are the same.

Finally, someone questioned about whether it's better to thermal
efficiently or in the best part of the themal. The answer, IMHO, is
that you should strive to do both. Right now we have wonderful
instruments to help us find the best lift. But we still use a crude
instrument to fly efficiently. Well, actually, most people probably
thermal more by feel and attitude than by staring at the airspeed
indicator.

End of war story.

Cheers,

Kirk

Kirk,

I understand (in theory) how you would fly at an optimal AOA, but I
was hoping for a more procedural idea on how to use an AOA indicator.
Do you use it like a "control instrument", like an attitude indicator,
or a "perfomance instrument", like the airspeed ?

Todd
3S

PS. It sounds like you work at some training or simulation
development group for Boeing, St Louis ?

I think this entire thread can be summed up as follows:

If you have had the opportunity to fly with an AOA for an extended period of
time ... you would like to have one in your sailplane.

If you haven't had the opportunity to fly with an AOA ... you don't seen the
need or value.

Beyond that, all this discussion is academic and I am getting tired of the
thread.

Respectfully,

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"
A-3B SkyWarrior / A-6A Intruder Bombardier who has observed 1000+ carrier
landing from the cockpit.

P.S. I would like to have an AOA in my old HP-14.
http://www.soaridaho.com/Schreder


"kirk.stant" wrote in message
...
Kirk,

Could you summarize for me _how_ you used the AOA indicator in those
aircraft, which aircraft and under what conditions ?

I am curious to the actual use(s).

Thanks
Todd Smith
3S

Sure. I used AOA in T-38s (a little - not much flight time in those)
and in F-4s (about 2000 hours in those). In my current job, I fly a
variety of F-15 simulators (the real thing, not PC games) and use AOA
all the time. Have also a few flight in F-16s and a lot of time in
F-16 simulators, which use AOA in the approach and landing
configuration.

In a nutshell, AOA is used anytime optimum performance is required
from the wing - be it turning, flying an approach, flying for max
range, recovering from a dive, etc. Since fighters can vary weight a
lot due to fuel burn and store (weapons) configuration, it's
impractical to try to use airspeed other than as a general guide to
your energy state - your airspeed tells you how much instantaneous
energy you have to maneuver, then you fly at the AOA that matches the
type of turn you want - less AOA is conserves energy, more AOA turns
faster, etc. If you are flying for max range or max endurance, again
there is a recommended AOA to fly at - it will stay the same while
the actual airspeed changes based on gross weight, configuration, and
altitude. Finally, in the pattern, you figure out the approximate
airspeed and AOA based on fuel and stores remaining, then crosscheck
the two - if they agree, it's easier to fly AOA on most jets (F-4
especially, F-15 less so).

Now, compared to gliders, these are all extremely low aspect ratio,
and that will exaggerate AOA effects. But the aerodynamic priciples
are the same.

Finally, someone questioned about whether it's better to thermal
efficiently or in the best part of the themal. The answer, IMHO, is
that you should strive to do both. Right now we have wonderful
instruments to help us find the best lift. But we still use a crude
instrument to fly efficiently. Well, actually, most people probably
thermal more by feel and attitude than by staring at the airspeed
indicator.

End of war story.

Cheers,

Kirk

On 20 Dec, 18:18, "Wayne Paul" wrote:
I think this entire thread can be summed up as follows:

If you have had the opportunity to fly with an AOA for an extended period of
time ... you would like to have one in your sailplane.

Doesn't follow. Just because one person who has flown with an AoA
indicator would like one in his glider does not mean that every who
has would.

Ian

On 20 Dec, 14:42, "kirk.stant" wrote:

Ian, we appear to be comparing apples and oranges - you are talking
about not stalling on final, while I am talking about being able to
accurately thermal, and incidentally have a better instrument for
flying accurate approaches.

I wonder how much "flying at Clmax" matters in good thermalling
compared with "being in the right bit of the thermal"?

Obviously, my opinion is colored by having actually flown airplanes
with excellent AOA systems, and by my wish to optimise my soaring for
XC and racing. I really think that within a few years someone will
come up with a simple, low drag, accurate AOA system that will be
adopted by the same group of pilots who eagerly adopted radios, TE,
audio varios, glide computers, GPS, PDA moving maps, transponders,
ELTs, traffic detection devices - all those "unecessary" gadgets that
clutter up our cockpits but, in my opinion, make soaring safer, more
efficient, and more fun.

If it does these things I'll be all for it. If it costs less than
twenty quid I may even buy one. As a matter of interest, how do you
define "efficient" here?

Ian