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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
On Topic
"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk @See My Sig.com writes:
I've been in multi million dollar six degree of freedom simulators, but I've never been in one that comes close to simulating reality. They can only translate about a dozen feet from end to end - the resulting motion is just not right. Inner ears don't detect constant motion, they detect acceleration, and they are very easy to fool. Plus they can't come close to simulating the things that really mess up your inner ears during sustained turns. You can mess up your inner ear just by spinning in a chair. It doesn't take much. Ever heard of anyone suffering GLOC in a 6dof simultor? Anyone ever suffered GLOC in a Bonanza or Airbus? |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
On Topic
Mxsmanic wrote:
"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk @See My Sig.com writes: I've been in multi million dollar six degree of freedom simulators, but I've never been in one that comes close to simulating reality. They can only translate about a dozen feet from end to end - the resulting motion is just not right. Inner ears don't detect constant motion, they detect acceleration, and they are very easy to fool. True but irrelevant to the reality of simulators. Plus they can't come close to simulating the things that really mess up your inner ears during sustained turns. You can mess up your inner ear just by spinning in a chair. It doesn't take much. Again, true but irrelevant to the reality of simulators. Ever heard of anyone suffering GLOC in a 6dof simultor? Anyone ever suffered GLOC in a Bonanza or Airbus? Anyone ever suffered GLOC in a real airplane? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
On Topic
"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. . "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk @See My Sig.com wrote: "Peter Dohm" wrote in message ... With the quest for efficiency, in recent years, most of the newer tri-gear designs have featured free castering nose wheels. That has certainly reduced the aerodynamic drag of the nose wheel; Moving it to the back and reducing the size by a factor of 4 would do even more... Vans RV-6, 7, 8, and 9 experimentals can be built with tricycle gear and conventional gear. Without cheating and looking at the advertised performance difference between the two gear choices at identical power settings, what would either of you guess the percentage difference in speed might be? Two or three? Or are you going to tell me that the nosewheel with wheel pants and a fairing is faster than the tailwheel hanging out in the breeze? Sure, go ahead, try to destroy our hopes, our dreams, our pre-concieved misconceptions just for the sake of reality. -- Geoff The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
On Topic
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
On Topic
"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk @See My Sig.com wrote:
"Jim Logajan" wrote in message .. . "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk @See My Sig.com wrote: "Peter Dohm" wrote in message ... With the quest for efficiency, in recent years, most of the newer tri-gear designs have featured free castering nose wheels. That has certainly reduced the aerodynamic drag of the nose wheel; Moving it to the back and reducing the size by a factor of 4 would do even more... Vans RV-6, 7, 8, and 9 experimentals can be built with tricycle gear and conventional gear. Without cheating and looking at the advertised performance difference between the two gear choices at identical power settings, what would either of you guess the percentage difference in speed might be? Two or three? About 1 percent. At most 1.5%. The "A" models have the nosewheel, so here are the performance figures Van's claims (I've read others say that he is pretty honest about the performance numbers he lists): http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv-6per.htm http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv-7per.htm http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv-8per.htm http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv-9per.htm I think the RV-9 compared with the RV-9A at 118 HP, 55% power, and gross weight shows the largest percent difference at about 1.4% faster for conventional gear. Oddly, all the aircraft show about 2 mph difference, regardless of power setting. Or are you going to tell me that the nosewheel with wheel pants and a fairing is faster than the tailwheel hanging out in the breeze? Sure, go ahead, try to destroy our hopes, our dreams, our pre-concieved misconceptions just for the sake of reality. No hopes, dreams, or pre-conceived misconceptions shattered, alas, but perhaps beaten up a bit, eh? :-) |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
On Topic
On May 12, 10:22*pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk @See My Sig.com wrote: "Jim Logajan" wrote in message . .. "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk @See My Sig.com wrote: "Peter Dohm" wrote in message ... With the quest for efficiency, in recent years, most of the newer tri-gear designs have featured free castering nose wheels. *That has certainly reduced the aerodynamic drag of the nose wheel; Moving it to the back and reducing the size by a factor of 4 would do even more... Vans RV-6, 7, 8, and 9 experimentals can be built with tricycle gear and conventional gear. Without cheating and looking at the advertised performance difference between the two gear choices at identical power settings, what would either of you guess the percentage difference in speed might be? Two or three? About 1 percent. At most 1.5%. The "A" models have the nosewheel, so here are the performance figures Van's claims (I've read others say that he is pretty honest about the performance numbers he lists): http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/r...ic/rv-9per.htm I think the RV-9 compared with the RV-9A at 118 HP, 55% power, and gross weight shows the largest percent difference at about 1.4% faster for conventional gear. Oddly, all the aircraft show about 2 mph difference, regardless of power setting. Or are you going to tell me that the nosewheel with wheel pants and a fairing is faster than the tailwheel hanging out in the breeze? Sure, go ahead, try to destroy our hopes, our dreams, our pre-concieved misconceptions just for the sake of reality. No hopes, dreams, or pre-conceived misconceptions shattered, alas, but perhaps beaten up a bit, eh? :-) Well, at least there's always several RV-6s on the market at all times, some very reasonable. Here's one from an estate sale. They're only asking 45. You could offer 39 and take it from there. http://barnstormers.com/listing_images.php?id=345031 --- Mark |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
On Topic
On May 11, 11:05*am, "birdog" wrote:
"Mark" wrote in message ... On May 10, 3:06 pm, "birdog" wrote: Is it possible to get a pilot topic going here? For all the criticism of this guy Max--, the simulation pilot here, at least his posts relate to aviation, however synthetic. How about we try this, just maybe to get some on topic comments. Today, maybe tail-draggers have no legitimate redeeming value, except for bush piloting, since virtually everyone flies from tarmac to tarmac. But still, lack of the skill eliminates some planes from the pilots options.. The Citabra, the 170's, 180's, or the smell of dope and gas in an old Champ.. The principal difficulty is in a tricycle, once all three wheels are down solid, you are done except steering it down the runway. In a tail dragger, relax and it will swap ends, with devistating results. In my formative years, I flew safety valve for any number of licensed pilots trying to transition from try- to tail draggers. A few picked it up with a dozen or so landings, and a very few never got the hang. Most took about 3-6 hours to gain competence. To go from tail dragger to tri-gear normally took about two landings. Compare this to 7-9 hours of dual for the beginning pilot in eithor type. To me, the hardest thing to master before soloing was the rudder work required to land a tail dragger. Does this suggest that training should begin in a tail dragger? Would it be worth the extra effort? Or is the entire topic outdated? I saw one like this yesterday parked out back, except it was blue and white, real sharp. http://www.airliners.net/photo/Van's-RV-6/1577100/M/ --- Mark Beautiful little plane. Looks a lot like a 300. It is stressed for aerobatics? I really can't say, but apparently the RV-8 is according to this fellow: http://www.tailwheel.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=199 They were having a similiar conversation on this topic. --- Mark |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
On Topic
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe wrote:
wrote in message ... Not simulators that actually simulate reality. I've been in multi million dollar six degree of freedom simulators, but I've never been in one that comes close to simulating reality. They can only translate about a dozen feet from end to end - the resulting motion is just not right. Plus they can't come close to simulating the things that really mess up your inner ears during sustained turns. Ever heard of anyone suffering GLOC in a 6dof simultor? The "insider" view is that visuals are the dominant cue, and since the time of TV cameras on gantries over a landscape board, visuals have steadily improved. Sim visuals are not at the Atavar level of visual realism yet - but that took lots of post-processing. 6DOF motions are all well and good, but NASA aside, they provide only onset motion cues. As to multi million dollar sims - the going rate is getting on for $20 million presently for a full house commercial jet. Brian W |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
On Topic
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe wrote:
"Peter Dohm" wrote in message ... With the quest for efficiency, in recent years, most of the newer tri-gear designs have featured free castering nose wheels. That has certainly reduced the aerodynamic drag of the nose wheel; Moving it to the back and reducing the size by a factor of 4 would do even more... Not to mention...even the venerable C150 disengaged the nosewheel in flight to free caster. Brian W |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Off-topic Q | D Ramapriya | Piloting | 17 | July 23rd 09 04:30 AM |
Off-topic, but in need of help | Alan Erskine | Aviation Photos | 20 | January 5th 07 06:21 AM |
Almost on topic... | Richard Lamb | Home Built | 22 | January 30th 06 06:55 PM |
off topic, just a little--maybe? | L.D. | Home Built | 5 | August 27th 05 04:56 PM |
off topic | Randall Robertson | Simulators | 0 | January 2nd 04 01:29 PM |