Snap or not (since we have nothing better to do)

[Bob Kane]

I'm hoping to get more snaps on tape so we can see
what they look like in slow motion. What I do know, if
the maneuver in the video is a snap, the rulebook
definition is wrong. Autorotation is one element, but
so is the nose and tail transcribing opposite cones
with the CG remaining on the flight path.


--- Ed Alt <ed_alt at hotmail.com> wrote:

> I've seen Dave Lockhart and a handful of others do a
> snap in a similar 
> positively loaded condition?  You see a very well
> defined pitch break a 
> clear indications of an autorotation.  I know,
> planes differ etc, but I'm 
> still not buying that as a snap.
> 
> 
> >From: "Doug Cronkhite" <seefo at san.rr.com>
> >Reply-To: discussion at nsrca.org
> >To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> >Subject: RE: Snap or not (since we have nothing
> better to do)
> >Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 08:42:58 -0700
> >
> >You're not going to get much pitch break since the
> aircraft is already
> >positively loaded, so reaching critical angle of
> attack requires much less
> >abrupt movement to get there.
> >
> >To me.. this is absolutely a snap roll. The rate of
> rotation is not
> >constant. There is a definite autorotation going
> on.
> >
> >-Doug
> >
> >


Bob Kane
getterflash at yahoo.com


		
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs 
 
=================================================
To access the email archives for this list, go to
http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.

List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the list.