Wind correction / wings level take 2

[Jim_Woodward at beaerospace.com]

Hi All,

I think discussion about 1 single maneuver will address everything I sent 
initially below.  P05, Reverse humpty-bump, 2/4 down, 1/2 roll up: 
Scenario.  The wind is blowing 20 mph 90 degrees out. 

1.  Entry;  the plane is flying a horizontal inverted track at the top of 
the box right to left, the fuselage is yawed 10 degrees  inward to 
compensate for the wind. 
2.  Entry Radius:  Pilot pulls up elevator while simultaneously adding 
aileron and rudder to transition the plane to a vertically tracked 
downline, fuselage is angled into the wind to maintain vertical track.
3.  2/4 is performed maintaining track (still angled in to compensate for 
the wind)
4.  Bottom radius:  The pilot pushes around the bottom adding rudder to 
maintain track, ailerons to level the wings around the bottom, then 
opposite rudder to lean "into" the wind on the upline. (obviously, pilot 
nor judge wants to see banked wings at the bottom this maneuver which 
would result if no aileron was added due to downline cant/angle of 
fuselage to maintain track).
5.  1/2 roll is performed still angled in somewhat.
6.  Pilot switches rudder input to still compensate for the wind on the 
upline.
7.  Exit radius:  Pilot pushes out, using rudder to maintain heading, and 
aileron to create wings level across the top of the box.  Blended in with 
the exit, the plane is now wings level angled "in" to compensate for the 
wind, heading into the reverse double I.

There is a lot of "flying" going on in the 3 different radii of this 
maneuver.  The wings/plane MUST actually roll to achieve the various 
"wings-level" positions of the: downlines, bottom radius, upline, and upon 
exit.  Is this amount of "flying" done in the radii simply addressed in 
the wind correction statements like:  "each maneuver must be 
wind-corrected to preserve the overall geometry"?

My contention again is that the plane MUST perform a blended rolling 
element during the radii to create a cross-wind corrected maneuver.  I 
think the best looking thing to do is move the wings at a rate 
proportional to the arc of the radii - thus, you don't "see" a discreet 
aileron fix.  A discrete aileron fix at the end of the radii would be a 
certain queue to downgrade.  I believe I've learned the correct way to fly 
a cross wind condition, but I have not heard anyone really discuss the 
amount or "flying" going on in the various radii to handle a cross wind 
condition.
Thanks,
Jim W.





----- Forwarded by Jim Woodward/BEA on 08/09/2004 01:05 PM -----


Jim_Woodward at beaerospace.com
Sent by: discussion-request at nsrca.org
08/09/2004 09:12 AM
Please respond to discussion

 
        To:     discussion at nsrca.org
        cc: 
        Subject:        Wind correction / wings level



Hi All, 

I want to bring up a discussion point about wind correction.  This may 
seem obvious to some but I want to ensure I have the right picture in my 
mind (started thinking about this since Don S. posted his comments about 
Q.S. flying wind correction in finals, and confirmed during some practice 
yesterday).   
1.  Wind correction is supposed to be done while maintaining wings level. 
2.  You are supposed to use the yaw angle to correct for the wind.   
Situation:  Pilot is flying a square loop ( at center).  Wind is blowing 
90 degree out 20 mph.  Pilot fly's past center at a some yaw angle in to 
compensate for the wind blowing out.  The pilot pulls a 90 degree radius 
to a vertical upline.  The fuselage is canted in to the wind to compensate 
for the wind blowing out.  *Point of discussion:  If the pilot were to 
pull another 90 degree radius, the wings would become "unlevel" as the 
plane reaches the top leg of the square loop.  *Point of discussion:  So, 
if the pilot is using the correct technique for wind correction (wind 
correcting force being yaw angle), then every time the pilot creates a 
radius, you should definitely "see" the ailerons moving the wings through 
the radius to ensure that as the radius is finished, the wings are level 
for the next line and the fuselage is yawed for wind correction.  Same 
thing next radiu s;  The pilot adds pitch, moves the wings,  and adds the 
correct rudder to transform the top of the box line to the next downline 
(wings level, yawed into the wind), etc.   

*Point of discussion:  We spend a lot of time concentrating on wings level 
for normal pattern flying and usually "any" type of aileron or wing 
movement is a visual key for a downgrade using the 1 pt / 15 degree rule. 
However, this is false to accurately judge flying on a windy day.  In 
order to fly in a crosswind, nearly EVERY radius will have some amount of 
roll induced (and necessary) to ensure that the "lines" can be flown with 
wings level and in order to utilize yaw as the wind-correcting force.   

That said/ when and how much roll should be used?  I would guess that you 
would want to seamlessly input the pitch, aileron, and rudder so that the 
plane just appears to go from one wind corrected line to the other 
magically.  What is the judging criteria for inputting a roll function in 
the radius to ensure the wings stay level & fuselage stays canted (yawed) 
into the wind from one wind corrected line to another?  Should the amount 
of aileron needed to go from one wind corrected line to another line start 
and finish corresponding to the actual duration of the radius?  What if 
the pilot only correct s the wing as the plane is nearing the end of the 
radius, is this some downgrade because the correction was placed near the 
end of the radius instead of "evenly-througout" the radius? 

I'm sure I'm exaggerating this situation and I am purposefully, to 
stimulate some talk on the subject.  Again, my contention is that for some 
wind conditions, in order to maintain the overall geometry of the maneuver 
that there MUST be roll correction during radii to seamlessly move from 
one wind corrected line to another, and this roll correction should not be 
downgraded.   

Any takers? 
Jim W. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20040809/61aff37c/attachment.html