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 » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

B-50(?) + X1



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 2nd 08, 01:12 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Dan Luke[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 713
Default B-50(?) + X1


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote:

A contestant
who spun a B-29 model in this setting would get a very poor score,
indeed.



Don't know why, they would have spun test the original!


No ****?

Never thought about that.

Doubt if the SM judges would go for it, anyway. Especially that many turns
and flat, too.

--
Dan

T182T at 4R4


  #12  
Old July 2nd 08, 02:47 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,969
Default B-50(?) + X1

"Dan Luke" wrote in
m:


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote:

A contestant
who spun a B-29 model in this setting would get a very poor score,
indeed.



Don't know why, they would have spun test the original!


No ****?

Never thought about that.

Doubt if the SM judges would go for it, anyway. Especially that many
turns and flat, too.


Well, if one of the prototypes went flat!

But yeah, they spun tested everything back then. It could either spin and
recover or not be spinnable at all. I can't see why the B 29 woulnd't have
spun and recovered fairly well. Nothing aerodynamically funky about it.
All light aircraft had to be certified for spins or unspinnable up to the
mid fifties. Some airplanes slipped throught the net, though and are
placarded against today. The PA 23, for instance.


Bertie
  #13  
Old July 2nd 08, 03:08 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
romeomike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default B-50(?) + X1

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
romeomike wrote in :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:


Don't know why, they would have spun test the original!

Bertie

For sure? Have all commercial airliners been spun tested?


Well, it's not a commercial airliner, but back then they were. I've been in
a DC 3 in a spin. I wasn't flying, just observing but during a training
flight they lost it during a VMC demo and it did almost a turn. Recovery
was pretty much normal.



Bertie


Yeah, for the record, I know a B-29 wasn't a commercial airliner, but
you saying that they spun them made me wonder if other "large" multi-
engine planes, like airliners are spin tested. I don't know for sure,
but I would assume not.
  #14  
Old July 2nd 08, 03:27 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,969
Default B-50(?) + X1

romeomike wrote in :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
romeomike wrote in :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:


Don't know why, they would have spun test the original!

Bertie
For sure? Have all commercial airliners been spun tested?


Well, it's not a commercial airliner, but back then they were. I've
been in a DC 3 in a spin. I wasn't flying, just observing but during
a training flight they lost it during a VMC demo and it did almost a
turn. Recovery was pretty much normal.



Bertie


Yeah, for the record, I know a B-29 wasn't a commercial airliner, but
you saying that they spun them made me wonder if other "large" multi-
engine planes, like airliners are spin tested. I don't know for sure,
but I would assume not.


Like DC6's and Connies and such? Oh yes, they definitely were. It was a
requirement of the period. The old ATC system was the same regardless of
the aircraft size and was in effect until the late forties. I believe
the last aircraft to be certified under that system was the Fokker F-27.
There has to be some sort of spin testing even now. I've done full stals
in jets after deep maintenance, so they had to have had some exploration
of spin entry tendencies, but the old airplanes were spun, regardless of
size, if they could be spun. I think the only US certified airplanes
exempt were the Ercoupe, the General Skyfarer and the Gwynn Aircar, all
because they couldn't be spun.
I know someone who works at Boeing,or rather did, and I've often
wondered how deeply they went into it with the current crop of
airliners. I'll ask him next time i talk to him.


Bertie



Bertie
  #15  
Old July 2nd 08, 04:40 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
romeomike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default B-50(?) + X1

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:



Like DC6's and Connies and such? Oh yes, they definitely were. It was a
requirement of the period. The old ATC system was the same regardless of
the aircraft size and was in effect until the late forties. I believe
the last aircraft to be certified under that system was the Fokker F-27.
There has to be some sort of spin testing even now. I've done full stals
in jets after deep maintenance, so they had to have had some exploration
of spin entry tendencies, but the old airplanes were spun, regardless of
size, if they could be spun. I think the only US certified airplanes
exempt were the Ercoupe, the General Skyfarer and the Gwynn Aircar, all
because they couldn't be spun.
I know someone who works at Boeing,or rather did, and I've often
wondered how deeply they went into it with the current crop of
airliners. I'll ask him next time i talk to him.


Bertie


Interesting. Now I'm wondering if the spin testing involved fully
developed spins or incipient spin entry.
  #16  
Old July 2nd 08, 01:55 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
john smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,446
Default B-50(?) + X1

In article , romeomike
wrote:

Yeah, for the record, I know a B-29 wasn't a commercial airliner, but
you saying that they spun them made me wonder if other "large" multi-
engine planes, like airliners are spin tested. I don't know for sure,
but I would assume not.


Do you count the Boeing Stratocruiser/C-97?

Isn't it basically a B-29 with "fattened" fuselage.
  #17  
Old July 2nd 08, 04:25 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
romeomike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default B-50(?) + X1

John Smith wrote:


Do you count the Boeing Stratocruiser/C-97?


Yeah, I hadn't thought of that one. I think there were other variants
also, such as one used to haul stuff for space vehicles.


  #18  
Old July 2nd 08, 04:40 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,969
Default B-50(?) + X1

romeomike wrote in :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:



Like DC6's and Connies and such? Oh yes, they definitely were. It was
a requirement of the period. The old ATC system was the same
regardless of the aircraft size and was in effect until the late
forties. I believe the last aircraft to be certified under that
system was the Fokker F-27. There has to be some sort of spin testing
even now. I've done full stals in jets after deep maintenance, so
they had to have had some exploration of spin entry tendencies, but
the old airplanes were spun, regardless of size, if they could be
spun. I think the only US certified airplanes exempt were the
Ercoupe, the General Skyfarer and the Gwynn Aircar, all because they
couldn't be spun. I know someone who works at Boeing,or rather did,
and I've often wondered how deeply they went into it with the current
crop of airliners. I'll ask him next time i talk to him.


Bertie


Interesting. Now I'm wondering if the spin testing involved fully
developed spins or incipient spin entry.


I have the standard for the 1927-1949 Type Certificate lying around
somewhere. Going off memory but it calls for 6 turns both directions
with recovery achieved within one turn, or something similar. If the
airplane was unspinnable then this wasn't required. Looking through my
library for the requirements led me to another airplane eventually
certified without spin certification, the Alexander Bullet. The airplane
had huge difficulties with spins in it's earliest incarnation with four
of them crashing in spin testing. It was eventually drastically
reconfigured and was pronounced unspinnable and safe.
An airplane was an airplane back then and the cirteria was the same for
them all, large or small. On large multi engine airplanes, there was no
single engine performance requirement, for instance. Engine out
performance was more of a commercial selling point than a minimum
requirement, even in airliners.

Bertie
  #19  
Old July 2nd 08, 04:43 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,969
Default B-50(?) + X1

romeomike wrote in :

John Smith wrote:


Do you count the Boeing Stratocruiser/C-97?


Yeah, I hadn't thought of that one. I think there were other variants
also, such as one used to haul stuff for space vehicles.




Somehow I think they didn't bother spin testing guppies!

Bertie
 




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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:37 PM.


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