Lazy Eight's

Ron Wanttaja wrote:
Sixty degrees pitch qualifies as an aerobatic maneuver.

Maybe, but it seems that you're confusing acrobatic flight with parachute
requirements.

Hilton

On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 06:32:10 GMT, "Hilton" wrote:

Ron Wanttaja wrote:
Sixty degrees pitch qualifies as an aerobatic maneuver.

Maybe, but it seems that you're confusing acrobatic flight with parachute
requirements.

It's true, the Part 91 definition of aerobatics makes no mention of bank or
pitch angles. Part 23 lets the manufacturer define the maneuvers the aircraft
is allowed to do...looks to me that they can declare a plane "aerobatic" (by
meeting the structural requirements) even if it's banned from doing loops,
spins, or rolls.

Marketing might be a problem, though. :-)

Ron Wanttaja

after the instructor said it would be within a wingspan, it sure seemed that
way to this old man G.

"vincent norris" wrote in message
...
One item the course taught me was a Modified Wingover which allowed a
blind canyon 180* turn within a wingspan.

Impossible.

vince norris

Dick wrote:
after the instructor said it would be within a wingspan, it sure seemed that
way to this old man G.


I recall, now, an airplane that can change heading by 180 degrees within
one wingspan.

It is a DC-3 that is mounted on a pedestal at Whitehorse, Yukon,
airport. It is on a support that permits it to windcock, and it does,
even in a slight breeze.

And it needs no more space that one wingspan to do a 180 or even a 360!

vince norris

Turns is a wingspan? We could do a Bill Clinton here, depends on what
you mean by 'wingspan'. Or whose wingspan.

Just how tight a non-aerobatic turn can you do in a training airplane
like a 152?


On Jun 26, 12:21 am, vincent norris wrote:
Dick wrote:
after the instructor said it would be within a wingspan, it sure seemed that
way to this old man G.

I recall, now, an airplane that can change heading by 180 degrees within
one wingspan.

It is a DC-3 that is mounted on a pedestal at Whitehorse, Yukon,
airport. It is on a support that permits it to windcock, and it does,
even in a slight breeze.

And it needs no more space that one wingspan to do a 180 or even a 360!

vince norris

Opps -- asked a question that I could have checked on myself.

looks like a 60 degree bank and 60 MPH would result in a turn diameter
a bit under 300 feet (no wind etc)

the plane was a French CAP 10 acrobatic plane
wrote in message
oups.com...
Turns is a wingspan? We could do a Bill Clinton here, depends on what
you mean by 'wingspan'. Or whose wingspan.

Just how tight a non-aerobatic turn can you do in a training airplane
like a 152?


On Jun 26, 12:21 am, vincent norris wrote:
Dick wrote:
after the instructor said it would be within a wingspan, it sure seemed
that
way to this old man G.

I recall, now, an airplane that can change heading by 180 degrees within
one wingspan.

It is a DC-3 that is mounted on a pedestal at Whitehorse, Yukon,
airport. It is on a support that permits it to windcock, and it does,
even in a slight breeze.

And it needs no more space that one wingspan to do a 180 or even a 360!

vince norris

On Jun 26, 8:03 am, wrote:
Opps -- asked a question that I could have checked on myself.

looks like a 60 degree bank and 60 MPH would result in a turn diameter
a bit under 300 feet (no wind etc)

That's for a level (coordinated?) turn.
The original maneuver didn't sound like a level turn.

tbaker27705 wrote

Just how tight a non-aerobatic turn can you do in a training airplane
like a 152?

If it were my butt about to run into a cumulogranite, it would matter not,
what the rating of the aircraft was.
--
Jim in NC

Of course not. But unless you had a reasonable airspeed so that lots
of 'up' was available in the airplane's kinetic energy, it would be
mostly a climbing steeply banked turn, wouldn't it? And having an idea
of what that turn diameter would be would be a useful hint when you
either saw canyon walls closing in on you, or you were making a turn
over the East River in NYC, wouldn't it?

The walls could be concrete with windows in them.

So I think the lesson might be if you're in a cruise configuration be
sure there's nothing solid within a half mile in the direction you're
turning, and pay attention to the wind direction.

The other option is to be some kind of a macho hero, but airplanes
should die of old age, not transitioned from something beautiful and
aloft into a compressed mess containing bodies in a couple of seconds.





On Jun 26, 7:23 pm, "Morgans" wrote:
tbaker27705 wrote

Just how tight a non-aerobatic turn can you do in a training airplane
like a 152?

If it were my butt about to run into a cumulogranite, it would matter not,
what the rating of the aircraft was.
--
Jim in NC