[NSRCA-discussion] Airplane angle of attack
J N Hiller
jnhiller at earthlink.net
Thu Oct 4 09:17:13 AKDT 2007
I think how the airplane looks in a vertical role is more important than
horizontal flight.
Jim Hiller
Spokane WA.
-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of White, Chris
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 7:34 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane angle of attack
Do you gentlemen think an airplane presents better in the pattern with a
setup that looks: a) on the step (tail slightly high) faster appearance.
b) level
c) tail slightly low, slower appearance.
If this is a dumb question I apologize in advance for my curiosity:-)
Thanks, Chris
_____
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of John Ferrell
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 8:35 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane angle of attack
It is possible to ruin an otherwise good design with the geometry of the
thrustline/wing/stab placement as well as control surface geometry and
hinging. Top ranked pilots usually can make most anything look good though.
It is not unusual for full scale airplanes to display the same airspeed for
two different angles of attack. The AOA that requires the least power for a
given airspeed is generally referred to as being "on the step". If a
pattern airplane is configured in a manner that these two operating points
are close together the return to level flight presents an increased
workload. I believe the current trend of high volume fuselages makes it
difficult to achieve an "on the step" condition.
Just my opinions of course...
John Ferrell W8CCW
"Life is easier if you learn to plow
around the stumps"
http://DixieNC.US
----- Original Message -----
From: White, Chris <mailto:chris at ssd.fsi.com>
To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane angle of attack
Understanding that a lot of misinterpretation can happen in reading or
talking about things without actually being directed in person on the
subject article, I dismissed the following story. Now after this post it has
me curious again and I would be interested to hear comments from people who
may have been told the same.
The story comes as a result of a couple of local pilots who were working on
a well-known $2K arf from 2005-6 era that had no reference lines on the
fuse, nor measurements in the plans referring to Thrustline or any clue as
to where to start on fuselage angle to engine-wing-stab setups.
Communication with the designer resulted in the customer being told that it
should be done by appearance. (eg: the way you wish to see your fuse angle
in level flight cruise.)
That seems very subject to interpretation and I would think if a person were
a few degrees off it would make a significant difference on aerodynamic
behavior during maneuvering. (mixing etc)
There's probably a post on this somewhere, but Bob's comment led me to think
of that setup dilemma. I've never seen or heard of an airplane kit/arf
without some reference to thrust line, until I heard my local friends told
me about this one.
Is this scenario familiar to anyone out there?
(Gee, do I push send or not...ok I'll send it.)
Chris White
_____
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Bob Richards
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 7:13 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane angle of attack
I never meant to draw any conclusion about the knife edge performance of
airliners or bombers in my original post. I was merely stating that the
reason we PATTERN FLIERS adjust the incidences of the wing and stab (ON OUR
PATTERN PLANES) has to do with aerobatic performance. As far as I know, the
reason the designers of airliners, bombers, and most full-scale airplanes
pick a incidence value has to do mainly with efficiency in cruise.
Bob R.
rcmaster199 at aol.com wrote:
I remember watching a clip of a full size multi engine bomber type in test
flight. The test pilot banked hard to knife edge near the ground (maybe 500
ft) for some unknown reason and swiftly proceeded to put it in. Don't
remember the plane's or test pilot's names.
Full scale fuselages are designed to minimize drag as much as possible (for
max range) so they tend to be pencil thin comparatively speaking. Pencil
thin fuses do not fly knife flight well nor are they intended to do so. And
the higher the weight the worse the problem. At risk of being glib, that
test pilot found the outside of the envelope.
MattK
-----Original Message-----
From: chris moon <cjm767driver at hotmail.com>
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Sent: Tue, Oct 2 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane angle of attack
The optimum AOA on airliners is a function of wing design. It's the
operator's job to try and stay near the optimum AOA for maximum
efficiency. Lighter gross weights require either higher altitudes or
lower true airspeed to be most efficient. Likewise, heavier weights will
have you faster and or lower. I guess what I'm saying is that the
optimum AOA is essentially dictated by wing design and we juggle the
other variables in order operate the wing as efficiently as possible.
I have rolled the 737, 757, 767 and A320 in the simulator and they make
poor pattern planes. I'm sure there is a significant downgrade for a
single roll that loses 5000+ feet of altitude. Don't even ask about
knife edge performance.
Chris
Bob Richards wrote:
> That makes sense to me. The AOA depends on the load. In an extreme
> case, very lightly loaded, I don't think you would want to fly with
> the fuselage in a nose down attitude, that would probably be
> inefficient. Better to have it slightly nose up in cruise with a full
> load. JMHO.
> Of course, the reason WE would trim wing incidence would have more to
> do with overall flight characteristics during aerobatics, particularly
> with pitch coupling in knife edge flight.
> Bob R.
>
>
> */chris moon /* wrote:
>
> Tried to post this before but it did not go through.
>
> The optimum cruise angle of attack for jetliners is somewhere between
> 2.5 and 5 degrees nose up. Usually closer to 2.5 or 3 degrees for an
> econ cruise. As fuel burns off and the gross weight goes down, the
> airplane will need a lower angle of attack to maintain flight which
> will take us away from our optimum angle (lower). So, we will either
> climb to where the air is "thinner" and require a higher aoa
> (angle of
> attack) to get us back to the 2.5 or 3 degrees or, slow down and
> maintain the lower altitude thus requiring us to increase the aoa
> back
> to optimum. The answer to your question is yes, a jetliner flies at a
> nose high aoa in cruise. Lift from the fuselage would probably be
> negligible other than "impact" lift - the force of the relative wind
> against the raised fuselage bottom.
>
> Chris
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
_____
Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble
challenge with star power. Play Now!
<http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_oct>
=
_______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion mailing
list NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
_____
Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail
<http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/index.htm?ncid=A
OLAOF00020000000970> !
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
_____
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20071004/74ba1b32/attachment-0001.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list