barrel roll in 172

Dudley Henriques wrote:

Scotty McCray flew a Schweizer 2-22 EK for his demonstrations. We appeared
at the same shows many many times and I knew him quite well.
The 2-22 wasn't exactly the "cleanest" glider in the world by today's
standards. Scotty was an absolute master at energy control. His technique
for energy management was in my opinion the best I've ever seen done in an
unpowered aircraft. I think I watched Scotty perform hundreds of barrel
rolls in the 2-22 and never once did I see him dish it out of a roll.
Strangely enough, it was the addition of horsepower to his aerobatics that
killed him down in Brazil in 73, when the Decathlon he dished out of a low
altitude roll.
One of the nicest and finest guys I knew in aviation.
Dudley Henriques

What does "dished out" mean?

Matt

In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:

Dudley Henriques wrote:

Scotty McCray flew a Schweizer 2-22 EK for his demonstrations. We appeared
at the same shows many many times and I knew him quite well.
The 2-22 wasn't exactly the "cleanest" glider in the world by today's
standards. Scotty was an absolute master at energy control. His technique
for energy management was in my opinion the best I've ever seen done in an
unpowered aircraft. I think I watched Scotty perform hundreds of barrel
rolls in the 2-22 and never once did I see him dish it out of a roll.
Strangely enough, it was the addition of horsepower to his aerobatics that
killed him down in Brazil in 73, when the Decathlon he dished out of a low
altitude roll.
One of the nicest and finest guys I knew in aviation.
Dudley Henriques

What does "dished out" mean?

Matt, this and your previous post show you do not have a broad knowledge
of the world of aerobatics. Please do not dispute those that do.
Your condescending tone is most inappropriate.

What does "dished out" mean?


Matt, this and your previous post show you do not have a broad knowledge
of the world of aerobatics. Please do not dispute those that do.
Your condescending tone is most inappropriate.

What does "dished out" mean? I've never heard the term. My question is
neutral.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

john smith wrote:
In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:


Dudley Henriques wrote:


Scotty McCray flew a Schweizer 2-22 EK for his demonstrations. We appeared
at the same shows many many times and I knew him quite well.
The 2-22 wasn't exactly the "cleanest" glider in the world by today's
standards. Scotty was an absolute master at energy control. His technique
for energy management was in my opinion the best I've ever seen done in an
unpowered aircraft. I think I watched Scotty perform hundreds of barrel
rolls in the 2-22 and never once did I see him dish it out of a roll.
Strangely enough, it was the addition of horsepower to his aerobatics that
killed him down in Brazil in 73, when the Decathlon he dished out of a low
altitude roll.
One of the nicest and finest guys I knew in aviation.
Dudley Henriques


What does "dished out" mean?


Matt, this and your previous post show you do not have a broad knowledge
of the world of aerobatics. Please do not dispute those that do.
Your condescending tone is most inappropriate.

I've never claimed broad knowledge of aerobatics. I do have a pretty
good grasp of physics though and the comment about the barrel roll
violates physics (as well as published descriptions of the forces
incurred in executing a barrel roll).

Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
john smith wrote:
In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:


Dudley Henriques wrote:


Scotty McCray flew a Schweizer 2-22 EK for his demonstrations. We
appeared at the same shows many many times and I knew him quite well.
The 2-22 wasn't exactly the "cleanest" glider in the world by today's
standards. Scotty was an absolute master at energy control. His
technique for energy management was in my opinion the best I've ever
seen done in an unpowered aircraft. I think I watched Scotty perform
hundreds of barrel rolls in the 2-22 and never once did I see him dish
it out of a roll.
Strangely enough, it was the addition of horsepower to his aerobatics
that killed him down in Brazil in 73, when the Decathlon he dished out
of a low altitude roll.
One of the nicest and finest guys I knew in aviation.
Dudley Henriques


What does "dished out" mean?


Matt, this and your previous post show you do not have a broad knowledge
of the world of aerobatics. Please do not dispute those that do.
Your condescending tone is most inappropriate.

I've never claimed broad knowledge of aerobatics. I do have a pretty good
grasp of physics though and the comment about the barrel roll violates
physics (as well as published descriptions of the forces incurred in
executing a barrel roll).

Matt

Don't mean to rankle anybody here, and I haven't seen any "condescending
tone" as yet, but how does any comment made by me about barrel rolls violate
the laws of physics?
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

john smith wrote:

In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:



Dudley Henriques wrote:



Scotty McCray flew a Schweizer 2-22 EK for his demonstrations. We
appeared at the same shows many many times and I knew him quite well.
The 2-22 wasn't exactly the "cleanest" glider in the world by today's
standards. Scotty was an absolute master at energy control. His
technique for energy management was in my opinion the best I've ever
seen done in an unpowered aircraft. I think I watched Scotty perform
hundreds of barrel rolls in the 2-22 and never once did I see him dish
it out of a roll.
Strangely enough, it was the addition of horsepower to his aerobatics
that killed him down in Brazil in 73, when the Decathlon he dished out
of a low altitude roll.
One of the nicest and finest guys I knew in aviation.
Dudley Henriques


What does "dished out" mean?


Matt, this and your previous post show you do not have a broad knowledge
of the world of aerobatics. Please do not dispute those that do.
Your condescending tone is most inappropriate.

I've never claimed broad knowledge of aerobatics. I do have a pretty good
grasp of physics though and the comment about the barrel roll violates
physics (as well as published descriptions of the forces incurred in
executing a barrel roll).

Matt


Don't mean to rankle anybody here, and I haven't seen any "condescending
tone" as yet, but how does any comment made by me about barrel rolls violate
the laws of physics?

I don't think I understood all of your descriptions of the variations of
a barrel roll well enough to make an assessment. Some of them didn't
sound like the traditional barrel roll description. For example, do you
end up at the starting altitude in all of the cases you discussed
related to fighter evasive techniques? If you lose a lot of altitude
during the roll, then I can see being able to hold less than 1g through
most of the maneuver. I don't see how this is possible for any roll
that could be superimposed on a cylinder (the barrel) with the ending
point being at the same radial location as the starting point - that is
if you start at the bottom of the barrel you end at the bottom of the
barrel. I couldn't visualize all of your permutations on the roll to
know if this was the case or not.


Matt

See inserts;


"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Dudley Henriques wrote:


Don't mean to rankle anybody here, and I haven't seen any "condescending
tone" as yet, but how does any comment made by me about barrel rolls
violate the laws of physics?

I don't think I understood all of your descriptions of the variations of a
barrel roll well enough to make an assessment. Some of them didn't sound
like the traditional barrel roll description.

You were right. Some of them are not from the classic description. This is
what confuses this issue so often when discussing it. The "classic" barrel
roll description is absolutely correct. Its just possible to perform the
maneuver to tighter specifications that's all.

For example, do you
end up at the starting altitude in all of the cases you discussed related
to fighter evasive techniques?

In the classic BR, used for training purposes, you want to end up at the
starting altitude and the entry airspeed after meeting specific parameters
at different points through the roll. You do this by playing the g and the
various control pressures through the roll.
In the fighter role however, you are maneuvering the airplane in a 3
dimensional arena in relation to the true motion of another aircraft in that
arena. Your altitude and airspeed, and even the arc of a barrel roll is
referenced only to what you need in the way of positioning in relationship
to that other aircraft. These rolls are usually done quite fast and very
tightly as a corkscrew roll.


If you lose a lot of altitude
during the roll, then I can see being able to hold less than 1g through
most of the maneuver. I don't see how this is possible for any roll that
could be superimposed on a cylinder (the barrel) with the ending point
being at the same radial location as the starting point - that is if you
start at the bottom of the barrel you end at the bottom of the barrel. I
couldn't visualize all of your permutations on the roll to know if this
was the case or not.

If you didn't vary the g through the roll, you are right; you couldn't
maintain a steady position on the cylinder. The only way to do it is to ease
off the g on the way up to inverted, then re-apply the g on the back side.
If you held the same g through the roll, you would cork screw through the
roll. It would still be a barrel roll however. The cork screw shape of the
roll dosen't change the fact that the airplane is still traveling through 3
dimensions using a 3 dimensional maneuver. It just dosen't look as nice as
the big wide classic training barrel roll :-))

Dudley Henriques wrote:

Don't mean to rankle anybody here, and I haven't seen any "condescending
tone" as yet, but how does any comment made by me about barrel rolls violate
the laws of physics?

Yes, I thought I was simply challenging a statement, not being
condescending. However, some folks take any challenge as being
condescending by definition.


Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Dudley Henriques wrote:

Don't mean to rankle anybody here, and I haven't seen any "condescending
tone" as yet, but how does any comment made by me about barrel rolls
violate the laws of physics?

Yes, I thought I was simply challenging a statement, not being
condescending. However, some folks take any challenge as being
condescending by definition.


Matt

Well, as long as I'm not one of them, I think we have the makings of a
dialog going here :-))
DH

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Dudley Henriques wrote:

Scotty McCray flew a Schweizer 2-22 EK for his demonstrations. We
appeared at the same shows many many times and I knew him quite well.
The 2-22 wasn't exactly the "cleanest" glider in the world by today's
standards. Scotty was an absolute master at energy control. His technique
for energy management was in my opinion the best I've ever seen done in
an unpowered aircraft. I think I watched Scotty perform hundreds of
barrel rolls in the 2-22 and never once did I see him dish it out of a
roll.
Strangely enough, it was the addition of horsepower to his aerobatics
that killed him down in Brazil in 73, when the Decathlon he dished out of
a low altitude roll.
One of the nicest and finest guys I knew in aviation.
Dudley Henriques

What does "dished out" mean?

Matt

When you do a roll, the second half of the roll requires changing rudder and
blending stick in elevator and aileron. If you are late on the rudder
change, or late on the elevator blending out from forward elevator to back
elevator, its possible to allow the airplane to change from rolling on its
longitudinal axis to an arc through the back side recovery. Basically what
happens is that you "slide" off the roll axis and widen the roll nose low
through the arc. In effect, you are changing the aircraft's roll axis from a
controlled slow roll to an aileron roll format, which is primarily aileron
and allows the nose to arc naturally during the roll unlike the slow roll
format where the airplane is "flown" through the entire roll from the roll
initiation at the apex of the pull on the airplane's longitudinal axis.
We call this coming in late and allowing this to happen on the back side
"dishing out" of the roll. Allowing this to happen is one of the major
killers, if not THE major killer of pilots doing low altitude roll
maneuvers.
Not allowing dishout on a roll is so critical in low altitude demonstration
work that when I practiced slow rolls for demonstration purposes, I would
set the airplane on the roll apex at it's inverted nose attitude while right
side up after a pull to the set point from a point where the altimeter
needle was covering the 0 on the altimeter, then roll the airplane from the
initiation point returning the needle to recover the 0 again as level flight
was achieved again on recovery. Any deviation from that standard was
considered a blown roll, and the entire practice session would have to be
re-flown.
Dudley Henriques