Question to Mxmanic

"swag" wrote in
ups.com:

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.

You meant 45 degree bank. A 60 degree steep turn would require a parachute.

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.

Don't you have to descend to catch the wake? Downwash should be moving
downward at a few knots and IIRC the vortices do as well, so after two minutes
at, say, 12 knots, the turbulence would be almost 2500 feet below you, if you
are staying at altitude. I don't see how you could run into it.

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

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).

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

Snowbird writes:

Tip vortices is not the only form of turbulence behind an aircraft. And an
airliner on approach has a different type of wake than a trainer at
altitude.

All of them should be moving downward, though. Which means that if you try to
catch your own wake at constant altitude, you should miss it, as it will have
drifted downward. Or am I missing something?

The best value of a good simulator is that it enables training of situations
that would be unsafe to do in a real aircraft.Flying into wake turbulence is
a good example.

But flying into wake turbulence can flip your aircraft onto the ground. Is
that really worth practicing? You should be avoiding it instead.

Rather like the logic that says that it's better to train at avoiding spins
than to train at recovering from them.

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

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
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.

Don't you have to descend to catch the wake? Downwash should be moving
downward at a few knots and IIRC the vortices do as well, so after two minutes
at, say, 12 knots, the turbulence would be almost 2500 feet below you, if you
are staying at altitude. I don't see how you could run into it.

Real people in real airplanes training to become real pilots do real
45 degree bank, constant altitude turns on a regular basis and run into
their real wake.

It is just another thing you don't understand because you have no
context.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

"Mxsmanic" wrote ..

Tip vortices is not the only form of turbulence behind an aircraft. And
an
airliner on approach has a different type of wake than a trainer at
altitude.

All of them should be moving downward, though.

Do you have a reference saying this is always the case?

Which means that if you try to
catch your own wake at constant altitude, you should miss it, as it will
have
drifted downward. Or am I missing something?

Maybe the propwash?


The best value of a good simulator is that it enables training of
situations
that would be unsafe to do in a real aircraft.Flying into wake turbulence
is
a good example.

But flying into wake turbulence can flip your aircraft onto the ground.
Is
that really worth practicing? You should be avoiding it instead.

Rather like the logic that says that it's better to train at avoiding
spins
than to train at recovering from them.


The opposite logic is quite popular too. In fact this has been debated
almost as long as aviation.
Personally, I'd welcome a simulator accurate enough to practice recovery
from a wake encounter. The same goes for spin recovery.

In rec.aviation.piloting swag wrote:
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.

It is 45 degrees +/- 5 for private, 50 +/- 5 for commercial.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

no it wouldn't

mike


You meant 45 degree bank. A 60 degree steep turn would require a
parachute.

"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.

mike regish writes:

no it wouldn't

If it's exactly 60 degrees, it wouldn't. Beyond 60 degrees, however, a
parachute is required. See FAR 91.307(c)(1).

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