Brake Chute Bug

[Flagrum]

@effte: the video ... heh, that was slick.

 

@effte & @Corrigan:

The chute leaves the molecules not with 0 kinetic energy. That was just exaggerated, theoretical ideal situation. Of course the molecules go somewhere eventually.

 

But wherever they really go, if it is not about exact the opposite direction of where they came from, the braking effect will be less than the thrust effect of the engine. Additionally, I think, that a lot of the exhaust gases are not caught in the chute. Probably the built up pressure inside the chute deflects a good amount of the exhaust gases around the chute and also produce friction and additional drag because of the resulting turbulences.

 

I think, the drag chute does not brake the aircraft because it negates the effect of the engine's thrust. I think (now), the reverse thrust effect adds to the effectiviness of the chute, but the main braking effect is caused by the transferred impulse of the caught gases inside the chute (wether that stems from the engine or the surrounding air mass) and also by drag caused by turbulences of the gases that pass around the chute. But I don't think, that a fabric made drag chute can actually be used to reverse the direction of motion for any real life situation.

 

edit:

Just another thought on the "blow your own sail":

I think, this was actually the reverse thrust effect. The sail was concave and thus some air was deflected in roughly the opposite direction (yes, similar to a drag chute ...).

But drag chutes often have no pronounced rim so that this effect is even less.

But for the sail example: what if it were not a concave shaped sail, but (made from stiffer material), convex?

 

concave: C <--

C = sail, <-- airflow

some airflow will be deflected in the opposite direction - movement happens.

 

convex: D <--

D = sail, <-- = airflow

will this boat move? I say no - all air will be deflected, but not into the opposite direction of the original airflow.

(well, it probably will move, but not by "blowing the sail" but by just the propeller thrust - into the "correct" direction, i.e. not the direction the Mythbusters showed)

Edited October 5, 2014 by Flagrum

[159th_Viper]

........since turbulence isn't modelled.....

 

I'm sure it is, unless I'm mistaking the ME setting for something else entirely.

[Corrigan]

I'm sure it is, unless I'm mistaking the ME setting for something else entirely.

 

Right, I (obviously) meant turbulence from engine exhausts.

[Buzzles]

After thinking on this topic more, I've actually got another question which is probably more pertinent:

 

Is the strength of the chute's cord or connections to the aircraft correct?

 

My point being that reversing via the chute being possible may be a moot discussion if the chute should get ripped off or rip apart at the higher levels of thrust required to make it reverse.

 

Current functionality has the chute attached at 100% thrust, but getting ripped off at 101% (+AB). I know engaging AB is a big thrust boost in the region of 30kn, but 100% is already putting out ~40kn.

[diditopgun]

:music_whistling:

 

[Snacko]

Yea, after I landed today I had to back up a bit, so I just went afterburners with the chute out. LoL.

 

Is there a key to release the chute?