[SPAM] Re: Judging Snaps

[Chris Moon]

Wow! Thanks David - I thought that I was the only one who believed that 
this whole issue is really much simpler than we are making it out to 
be.  Every plane stalls differently due to wing loading, wing sweep, cg, 
etc etc etc and therefore cannot be expected to look EXACTLY the same as 
every other stall /snap / spin.  We need to get away from expecting 
these maneuvers to be cookie cutter maneuvers. 

Chris

David Flynt wrote:

> I have always judged snaps with a simple rule -- if it is not a barrel 
> role, and if the tail describes a helix or cone, then the plane must 
> be stalled, and therefore it is a snap.  I have never downgraded 
> because the plane is set up with a lot of aileron, so long as the tail 
> wags, and so long as the nose and tail describe opposing helixes.  I 
> don't see any reference to how fast or slow the plane rolls with 
> regard to downgrades.  To me, a pilot is free (and smart) to set up 
> their plane such that it loses as little heading as possible in a snap. 
>  
> Am I completely mistaken on this?  A barrel roll is easy to detect.  
> An axial roll is easy to detect.  If it is not a barrel roll, and not 
> an axial roll, then it must be a valid snap, even if it is subtle and 
> the plane is not buried deeply in a snap.  At least that is my current 
> understanding.
>  
> I'll admit that I don't really understand the degree at which 
> the plane must "break" in the direction of  snap.  Who came up with 
> that idea?  What really does that mean, and how do you measure it?  
> "the nose of the fuselage should show a definite break in the 
> direction of the snap".  Ok, what is definite?  At what point exactly 
> must the aircraft become stalled?  It takes time for the control 
> surfaces to deflect.  It does not happen instantaneously. 
>  
> I think the maneuver is over described and over analyzed.  Its a 
> "rapid autorotation in the pitch, yaw, and roll axes of flight in a 
> stalled wing attitude."  That should be good enough to judge it.  If 
> not, maybe use my definition of judging it.  Until I know what a 
> "definite break" is, that's what I am going to do.
>  
> David 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050805/e351c4dd/attachment.html