[NSRCA-discussion] Height of manuevers

[Ron Van Putte]

Yeah.  Ground speed too in knots and MPH, please.  Also, please don't  
forget the apparent Coriolis acceleration.

Ron

On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:02 PM, Earl Haury wrote:

> Hey Ron
>
> You airspeed to go with that?
>
> Earl
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Van Putte" <vanputte at cox.net>
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 7:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Height of manuevers
>
>
>> Leave it to Earl.  Derek asks a simple question and .....  It's  
>> like  the guy who asks another what time it is and the other guy  
>> proceeds  to describe how to make a watch!  Just kidding.  :-)
>> Ron
>> On Sep 8, 2010, at 6:47 PM, Earl Haury wrote:
>>> Found a couple of the Aresti with for P11-F11 from last fall when  
>>> I  was sorting out the sequences. Looks like the max altitude for  
>>> the  M was 960ft., stall turn 875 as the tallest for P, the Top  
>>> Hat 920,  stall turn 1200 (oops), humpty 930, for F - everything  
>>> else tops  out closer to 800 max.
>>>
>>> Earl
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Derek Koopowitz
>>> To: General pattern discussion
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 6:09 PM
>>> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Height of manuevers
>>>
>>> Has anyone done any testing using a altimeter of sorts such as   
>>> Eagletree's altimeter option to figure out exactly how high some  
>>> of  our maneuvers end up?  In using basic Trigonometry I can  
>>> estimate  that if a plane is flown at 150 meters at a 60 degree  
>>> angle then  the plane should be around 260m (around 800') high...  
>>> do we fly  higher than this?  Obviously the further out one flies  
>>> then the  higher one gets if at 60 degrees.
>>>
>>> Are there any true measurements that one could relay to me... or  
>>> if  someone has an altimeter, could you test it out and let me  
>>> know  please?  I'm particularly interested in current sequences/  
>>> maneuvers... especially F3A or Masters.  I don't think the lower   
>>> classes get to an altitude that is of any significance  
>>> (generally  speaking of course).
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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