A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

poor lateral control on a slow tow?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old January 1st 11, 01:04 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bruce Hoult
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 961
Default poor lateral control on a slow tow?

On Jan 1, 8:07*am, John Cochrane
wrote:
The D2 also has a very low angle of incidence and thus a high nose
attitude on tow. Could this be part of the issue -- it's just darn
uncomfortable to fly with the nose pointed above the towplane? That
would also account for why 15 meter seems easier. We fly with flaps;
they are interconnected to the ailerons so we're not getting great
roll rates on tow. But it does give a nose down attitude so we can see
the towplane.


I had some really horrible feeling tows in a PW5. The thing felt
mushy, nose high, couldn't see the towplane, needed a lot of back
stick, afraid it was going to stall etc.

Then I realized that when you're going up at over 1000 fpm in still
air, keeping ANY part of the tug on the horizon (even wheels) is far
too high a position. I dropped down until I could start to feel the
wash and then came up a little. It felt much better but the tug seemed
WAY UP THERE.

Work it out ... at 65 knots and going up at 10 knots, the other end of
a 50m rope will be 7.7m above you if you're following the same path.
Even guessing 3m to get out of the wake, the tug should still be
nearly 5m above you.

And maybe it's 11 or 12 knots climb (I can't tell because the vario is
pegged), in which case that's another 1 or 1.5 m.

Since then I tow with the Pawnee horizontal stabilizer in the same
position against the forward parts of the tug no matter what glider
I'm in and just ignore the horizon. Even in the DG1000 two-up and
climbing at 700 fpm this still results in the tug's wheels being a
fraction above the horizon (and I've been criticized for this on
biannuals) but I'm still comfortably above the turbulence of the tug's
wake.
  #22  
Old January 1st 11, 06:38 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tony V
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 175
Default poor lateral control on a slow tow?

Bruce Hoult wrote:

....Since then I tow with the Pawnee horizontal stabilizer in the same
position against the forward parts of the tug no matter what glider
I'm in and just ignore the horizon.



Yes, use the tug as a reference. Using the horizon doesn't work on real
hazy days and it doesn't work in the mountains.

Tony V.
  #23  
Old January 1st 11, 07:24 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Anne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default poor lateral control on a slow tow?

On Jan 1, 12:38*am, Tony V wrote:
Bruce Hoult wrote:
....Since then I tow with the Pawnee horizontal stabilizer in the same
position against the forward parts of the tug no matter what glider
I'm in and just ignore the horizon.


Yes, use the tug as a reference. Using the horizon doesn't work on real
hazy days and it doesn't work in the mountains.

Tony V.


John Cochrane has the answer right, at least for standard class ships
like the Discus 2. I can verify that you run out of elevator control
at tow speeds significantly lower than the free-flight stall speed.
The reason is that the tow rope applies a downward thrust at the nose
- I have wing tip-camera video that confirms the tow rope has a
significant downward pull on the nose. I always try to stay away from
tow plane wash, so don't think that's a major component. I've never
experienced as marked a behavior in flapped ships, so I put it down to
AOA.

Mike
  #24  
Old January 1st 11, 11:38 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
John Vella Grech[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default poor lateral control on a slow tow?

At 06:24 01 January 2011, Anne wrote:
On Jan 1, 12:38=A0am, Tony V wrote:
Bruce Hoult wrote:
....Since then I tow with the Pawnee horizontal stabilizer in the

same
position against the forward parts of the tug no matter what glider
I'm in and just ignore the horizon.


Yes, use the tug as a reference. Using the horizon doesn't work on

real
hazy days and it doesn't work in the mountains.

Tony V.


John Cochrane has the answer right, at least for standard class ships
like the Discus 2. I can verify that you run out of elevator control
at tow speeds significantly lower than the free-flight stall speed.
The reason is that the tow rope applies a downward thrust at the nose
- I have wing tip-camera video that confirms the tow rope has a
significant downward pull on the nose. I always try to stay away from
tow plane wash, so don't think that's a major component. I've never
experienced as marked a behavior in flapped ships, so I put it down to
AOA.

Mike
Surely LOW TOW has many handling advantages and I have been very

comfortable with this method gliding in Aus. At least the tow rope has an
upward componenet.
John


  #25  
Old January 1st 11, 12:00 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Doug Greenwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 67
Default poor lateral control on a slow tow?

At 23:25 31 December 2010, Andy wrote:
On Dec 31, 1:47=A0pm, Martin Gregorie
wrote:
On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 12:09:08 -0800, Derek C wrote:
On Dec 31, 6:19=A0pm, bildan wrote:
On Dec 31, 4:40=A0am, "Doug" wrote:


As an aerodynamicist/flight dynamicist recently re-soloed after

25
years off, people keep asking me hard questions. =A0One that has

com=
e
up recently is why a heavy glider on tow feels horrible, but
thermalling in the same glider at lower speeds is fine? (see also
Mike Fox's article on aerotowing in the October issue of S&G).


I did some calculations, and I reckon it's probably due to the

tug
wing wake (tip vortices generating a downwash inboard, upwash
outboard) changing the lift distribution on the glider wing -

with
a=
n
increased angle of attack out at the tips reducing aileron
effectiveness. =A0There's possibly an interesting academic

research
project here, but it's always best to get a reality check first

...

Is poor handling at low speed on tow a common experience? =A0I'd
appreciate any thoughts/comments/war stories ... particularly bad
tug/glider/speed combinations, incidents of wing drop during a

tow
etc etc?


Doug Greenwell


I suspect, but can't know unless I flew with you, that you are
unconsciously trying to "steer" the glider with ailerons.

=A0Overuse
o=
f
ailerons is very common and it makes aero tow 'wobbly'. =A0If you
consciously use rudder to aim the nose at the tug's tail and just

keep
the same bank angle as the tug with ailerons, it might work better.


Wake effects are generally favorable if you stay at the right

height
relative to the tug. =A0Using a slightly higher tow position can
sometimes help a lot.


The tip vortices rotate inward above the propwash which, if allowed

to
do so, will drift the glider to the center position and help keep

it
there. =A0I haven't noticed any tendency for them to yaw a glider

towa=
rds
a tugs wing tip.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


There was a debate on our club forum about why gliders feel
uncomfortable on slow tows that are still well above their normal
stalling speed. We think the answer is that the glider is being

asked
t=
o
climb with the tug providing the thrust via the rope. The glider is
still effectively in free flight and therefore has to fly at a

greater
angle of attack for a given airspeed to produce the extra lift for
climbing. Hence its stalling speed is somewhat increased.


If the tug's downwash field extends back far enough to include the
glider, its AOA will be relative to the downwash streamlines. Add the
downwash angle to the climb angle of the tug-glider combination will

make
the glider look quite nose-high to its pilot. =A0

I know that the downwash angle is roughly 1/3 of the wing AOA at 4-5
chords behind the wing, i.e. about where the tailplane is, but not

what
its angle might be at the end of a tow rope.

--
martin@ =A0 | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org =A0 =A0 =A0 |


I'd be surprised if the flow field from the towplane wake is
significant for gliders in normal high tow position. I do wonder if
the "sluggish controls" effect is to some extent psychological because
flying formation requires much more precision than normal slow flight
off tow. I'm most uncomfortable when I find myself slow and below the
towplane and need to climb up.

Unless the glider is accelerating vertically, I'm pretty sure that
steady climb requires the same amount of lift as steady glide. Steady
climb is not the same as accelerating climb. (F=3DMxA so if the lifting
force exceeds the glider's weight by definition it accelerates
vertically).

The towplane provides thrust to overcome the frictional and lift-
related drag losses, but unless you are well below the towplane the
force on the rope is, for all practical purposes, horizontal. If you
have a cg hook you will get a modest nose-up pitching moment from the
rope, but this is a trim issue more than an AOA issue I believe. The
tension on the rope could also provide some counter-force to rudder
and elevator inputs, but I don't think you'd feel much for small
angular displacements.

9B


It is surprising, but part of the problem is the word 'wake' ... in
order to generate lift a wing has to move a fair amount of air around
(although let's not start the bernoulli argument now!), so its influence
on the surrounding atmosphere extends a surprising distance away from it.
Tip vortices are also a very stable flow structure, so don't begin to
break up or decay for a very very long way downstream.

The climb angles are too small to make a significant difference to the
lift required from the glider wing (assuming the tow rope is straight),
since the effect on lift goes with the cosine of the angle

On the other hand, if the tow rope is not straight then there could be a
significant lift component from the tension force (going with the sine of
the tow rope angle) ... but you would have to be quite a long way above
the tug to make a big difference.

  #26  
Old January 1st 11, 12:05 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Doug Greenwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 67
Default poor lateral control on a slow tow?

At 21:47 31 December 2010, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 12:09:08 -0800, Derek C wrote:



On Dec 31, 6:19Â*pm, bildan wrote:
On Dec 31, 4:40Â*am, "Doug" wrote:





As an aerodynamicist/flight dynamicist recently re-soloed after 25
years off, people keep asking me hard questions. Â*One that has

come
up recently is why a heavy glider on tow feels horrible, but
thermalling in the same glider at lower speeds is fine? (see also
Mike Fox's article on aerotowing in the October issue of S&G).

I did some calculations, and I reckon it's probably due to the tug
wing wake (tip vortices generating a downwash inboard, upwash
outboard) changing the lift distribution on the glider wing - with

an
increased angle of attack out at the tips reducing aileron
effectiveness. Â*There's possibly an interesting academic research
project here, but it's always best to get a reality check first

...

Is poor handling at low speed on tow a common experience? Â*I'd
appreciate any thoughts/comments/war stories ... particularly bad
tug/glider/speed combinations, incidents of wing drop during a tow
etc etc?

Doug Greenwell

I suspect, but can't know unless I flew with you, that you are
unconsciously trying to "steer" the glider with ailerons. Â*Overuse

of
ailerons is very common and it makes aero tow 'wobbly'. Â*If you
consciously use rudder to aim the nose at the tug's tail and just

keep
the same bank angle as the tug with ailerons, it might work better.

Wake effects are generally favorable if you stay at the right height
relative to the tug. Â*Using a slightly higher tow position can
sometimes help a lot.

The tip vortices rotate inward above the propwash which, if allowed

to
do so, will drift the glider to the center position and help keep it
there. Â*I haven't noticed any tendency for them to yaw a glider

towards
a tugs wing tip.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


There was a debate on our club forum about why gliders feel
uncomfortable on slow tows that are still well above their normal
stalling speed. We think the answer is that the glider is being asked

to
climb with the tug providing the thrust via the rope. The glider is
still effectively in free flight and therefore has to fly at a greater
angle of attack for a given airspeed to produce the extra lift for
climbing. Hence its stalling speed is somewhat increased.

If the tug's downwash field extends back far enough to include the
glider, its AOA will be relative to the downwash streamlines. Add the
downwash angle to the climb angle of the tug-glider combination will make


the glider look quite nose-high to its pilot.

I know that the downwash angle is roughly 1/3 of the wing AOA at 4-5
chords behind the wing, i.e. about where the tailplane is, but not what
its angle might be at the end of a tow rope.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |


The downwash angle doesn't change much past the tail, and a half to a
third of the tug AoA is a good first guess.

My modeling suggest that there does seem to be an overall reduction in the
glider wing lift (downwash over the centre wing having more of an effect
than upwash over the tips), so the glider requires another degree or two
in AoA - so feeling even more nose-up to the pilot!

  #27  
Old January 1st 11, 12:06 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Doug Greenwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 67
Default poor lateral control on a slow tow?

At 21:47 31 December 2010, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 12:09:08 -0800, Derek C wrote:



On Dec 31, 6:19Â*pm, bildan wrote:
On Dec 31, 4:40Â*am, "Doug" wrote:





As an aerodynamicist/flight dynamicist recently re-soloed after 25
years off, people keep asking me hard questions. Â*One that has

come
up recently is why a heavy glider on tow feels horrible, but
thermalling in the same glider at lower speeds is fine? (see also
Mike Fox's article on aerotowing in the October issue of S&G).

I did some calculations, and I reckon it's probably due to the tug
wing wake (tip vortices generating a downwash inboard, upwash
outboard) changing the lift distribution on the glider wing - with

an
increased angle of attack out at the tips reducing aileron
effectiveness. Â*There's possibly an interesting academic research
project here, but it's always best to get a reality check first

...

Is poor handling at low speed on tow a common experience? Â*I'd
appreciate any thoughts/comments/war stories ... particularly bad
tug/glider/speed combinations, incidents of wing drop during a tow
etc etc?

Doug Greenwell

I suspect, but can't know unless I flew with you, that you are
unconsciously trying to "steer" the glider with ailerons. Â*Overuse

of
ailerons is very common and it makes aero tow 'wobbly'. Â*If you
consciously use rudder to aim the nose at the tug's tail and just

keep
the same bank angle as the tug with ailerons, it might work better.

Wake effects are generally favorable if you stay at the right height
relative to the tug. Â*Using a slightly higher tow position can
sometimes help a lot.

The tip vortices rotate inward above the propwash which, if allowed

to
do so, will drift the glider to the center position and help keep it
there. Â*I haven't noticed any tendency for them to yaw a glider

towards
a tugs wing tip.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


There was a debate on our club forum about why gliders feel
uncomfortable on slow tows that are still well above their normal
stalling speed. We think the answer is that the glider is being asked

to
climb with the tug providing the thrust via the rope. The glider is
still effectively in free flight and therefore has to fly at a greater
angle of attack for a given airspeed to produce the extra lift for
climbing. Hence its stalling speed is somewhat increased.

If the tug's downwash field extends back far enough to include the
glider, its AOA will be relative to the downwash streamlines. Add the
downwash angle to the climb angle of the tug-glider combination will make


the glider look quite nose-high to its pilot.

I know that the downwash angle is roughly 1/3 of the wing AOA at 4-5
chords behind the wing, i.e. about where the tailplane is, but not what
its angle might be at the end of a tow rope.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |


The downwash angle doesn't change much past the tail, and a half to a
third of the tug AoA is a good first guess.

My modeling suggest that there does seem to be an overall reduction in the
glider wing lift (downwash over the centre wing having more of an effect
than upwash over the tips), so the glider requires another degree or two
in AoA - so feeling even more nose-up to the pilot!

  #28  
Old January 1st 11, 12:15 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Doug Greenwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 67
Default poor lateral control on a slow tow?

At 20:23 31 December 2010, bildan wrote:
On Dec 31, 1:06=A0pm, Todd wrote:
I too agree with the real or perceived tow handling characteristics.

Looking at things =A0from and aerodynamics standpoint (and I am about

as
far from and aerodynamicist as you can get) it should seem that part
of the empirical data would suggest an experiment where you fly a
glider equipped with and Angel of Attack meter at your typical tow
speeds and record the AoA at various speeds. =A0Then fly that glider

on
tow at those same speeds and record the results.


Done that - and as nearly as I can see, there's no difference in AoA.

I've flown some pretty heavy high performance gliders behind some
pretty bad tow pilots - one of them stalled the tug with me on tow.
If I'm careful not to over-control the ailerons, there's no problem at
all.

Heavily ballasted gliders respond sluggishly in roll just due to the
extra roll inertia. A pilot trying to hold a precise position behind
a tug needs and expects crisp aileron response. When he doesn't get
it, he increases the amount and frequency of aileron with a
corresponding increase in adverse yaw. If he's less than equally
crisp with rudder to oppose the adverse yaw, it gets wobbly.


Where did you mount the AoA meter?

It's not the angle of attack that's the problem, but the change in local
incidence along the wing. The overall lift may not change by very much
when near to the tug wake, but its distribution along the wing does, with
increased lift at the tips and reduced lift at the root - putting the
aileron region close to the stall and hence reducing control
effectiveness.

I agree that increased roll inertia due to ballast is a factor, but since
the same factor applies to maintaining bank angle in a thermalling turn I
don't see how it can account for a significant difference in handling
between tow and thermalling?

  #29  
Old January 1st 11, 12:21 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Doug Greenwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 67
Default poor lateral control on a slow tow?

At 06:24 01 January 2011, Anne wrote:
On Jan 1, 12:38=A0am, Tony V wrote:
Bruce Hoult wrote:
....Since then I tow with the Pawnee horizontal stabilizer in the

same
position against the forward parts of the tug no matter what glider
I'm in and just ignore the horizon.


Yes, use the tug as a reference. Using the horizon doesn't work on

real
hazy days and it doesn't work in the mountains.

Tony V.


John Cochrane has the answer right, at least for standard class ships
like the Discus 2. I can verify that you run out of elevator control
at tow speeds significantly lower than the free-flight stall speed.
The reason is that the tow rope applies a downward thrust at the nose
- I have wing tip-camera video that confirms the tow rope has a
significant downward pull on the nose. I always try to stay away from
tow plane wash, so don't think that's a major component. I've never
experienced as marked a behavior in flapped ships, so I put it down to
AOA.

Mike


Possibly two (or more) different handling problems on tow then ...

1) Running out of nose-up elevator authority when in a 'high' high tow
position due to a combination of increased AoA required due to tug
downwash and downward force component from the rope + a nose down pitching
from the rope

2) degradation of lateral control due to changes in spanwise lift
distribution

I've certainly sparked some interest here - considering it's New Year
:-)

  #30  
Old January 1st 11, 12:40 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Doug Greenwell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 67
Default poor lateral control on a slow tow?

At 23:35 31 December 2010, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 12/31/2010 3:40 AM, Doug wrote:
As an aerodynamicist/flight dynamicist recently re-soloed after 25

years
off, people keep asking me hard questions. One that has come up

recently is
why a heavy glider on tow feels horrible, but thermalling in the same

glider
at lower speeds is fine? (see also Mike Fox's article on aerotowing

in
the
October issue of S&G).

I did some calculations, and I reckon it's probably due to the tug

wing
wake
(tip vortices generating a downwash inboard, upwash outboard) changing

the
lift distribution on the glider wing - with an increased angle of

attack
out
at the tips reducing aileron effectiveness. There's possibly an

interesting
academic research project here, but it's always best to get a reality

check
first ...


The wake behind a climbing towplane should be well below a glider in the


high tow position. How can it lift it's weight and the glider, if the
wake isn't descending? Recall one of the exercises a student does while


learning to tow is to start in the high tow position, then move straight


down until the wake turbulence is felt. With the usual 150' to 200'
rope, it's way below the high tow position. So, I don't think it's

wake
turbulence, IF the glider is in the high tow position.

I think a big part of the answer is the pilot's perception of
"attitude": the glider has an additional attitude (relative to the
horizon) over it's normal angle of attack because the glider and tug are


ascending at about a 6 degree angle. T His is perceived by the pilot as
a very nose high attitude, and makes him feel uncomfortable; that, along


with reduced control response, makes him feel it's worse than it really


is. Usually, this happens close to the ground, making the perception
even worse.

The unusually nose-high attitude can keep the glider pilot from using
enough up elevator, with the consequence that he does sink down into the


wake. That will make the situation actually worse, not just perceptually


worse. But, it's because he is far from the high tow position, not just


because the speed is slower than normal.

This analysis obviously assumes a high tow as the normal situation, and
may not apply to the situation where low tow is the norm.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)


The wake does descend, although this is not necessary for a wing to
generate lift (otherwise wind tunnels would not work!) ... actually, the
downwash is a consequence of a reduction in lift and increase in (induced)
drag for a three-dimensional wing.

However, the turbulent prop wash also descends with it, so setting a tow
position on the basis of a reasonable distance above the prop wash would
automatically position you close to the tip vortices.

PS I've only ever come one other Greenwell outside the North East of
England ... any relation?

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
another poor man's car engine conversion jan olieslagers[_2_] Home Built 19 February 22nd 09 04:49 PM
Poor readability Kees Mies Owning 2 August 14th 04 04:22 AM
Poor Guy Bob Chilcoat Owning 6 July 17th 04 06:45 PM
I'm grateful for poor people who are willing to murder & die Krztalizer Military Aviation 0 April 20th 04 11:11 PM
Concorde in FS2002: No lateral views A. Bomanns Simulators 3 July 19th 03 11:33 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.