[NSRCA-discussion] Snap Entry

[Del]

How true and why terminology in rules can be wrong, or at least poorly worded. The best pilots have become very proficient at flying their plane to demonstrate what the rules ask for.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <seefo at san.rr.com>
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 9:05 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap Entry


> Just to stir the pot a little further..
> 
> I'm not sure a contemporary pattern plane can generate enough pitch rate to reach critical angle of attack and properly perform a snap roll. I think it's far more likely that we're seeing nothing but a heavily yawed aileron roll, with the pitch break only being shown to judges to convince them there is actually a stall happening, when in fact there is not. 
> 
> If a snap cannot occur using ONLY elevator and rudder, then the wing is not stalling. Aileron inputs into a snap actually inhibit flow separation, as the inboard wing angle of attack is drastically reduced, and the outboard wing AoA is drastically increased. 
> 
> But since there is no way to actually determine what is happening aerodynamically on an F3A airplane, the best a pilot can do is fly the airplane to what the judges expect to see based upon the rules. It really doesn't matter what the control inputs are if the airplane LOOKS like it's doing the right maneuver.
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1526 - Release Date: 6/30/2008 8:43 AM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20080701/01e7a8e2/attachment.html>