Good to be back

[bogusheadbox]

I have posted a track of balanced climbing and descending flight and level balanced turning flight.

 

Please note that due to bursts of sunlight my trackIR was jumping around a bit. But you should be able to follow it ok, just bear with the jumpy bits

 

I have changed the ABRIS to display degrees magnetic to keep in line with compass.

 

You will see that i have highlighted that the compass agrees with the abris direction and we cross reference against track to find the difference between heading (where the nose is pointing) and track (where the aircraft will go)

 

In the climb at the example speed we were only 3-4 degrees off between heading and track

 

In the descent we were only about 2-3 degrees.

_LastMissionTrack.trk

[Frederf]

I am sorry frederf, i think you have misread some of my post and possibly not understand what is meant by a rated turn.

 

I know what a standard rate turn is. The maneuver has little to do with the instrument itself. The rated turn I never talked about so how could you know if I understand it or not?

 

Forward velocity will have an impact on the bank angle needed to attain a rate 1 turn. That is why my previous statement was 100% correct.

You are 50% correct. Corrections need to be made for misalignment of the instrument with respect to the horizontal (bank) in a turn and g-loading because of a secondary precession effect. Airspeed is only causally related because it suggests typical banks and g-loads for level turns.

 

Just to prove to you that I was correct, i will qoute directly from commercial pilot study material.

 

Listed under errors for turn indicators

 

"...the indicators are calibrated to show rates of turn correctly in balanced turns for Rate 1, 2 and 3 turns at specific angles of bank and TAS. Although the indicated rate of turn will be incorrect at speeds away from these datums..."

That quoted paragraph is only sort of true for practical means. From a physics point of view it is not strictly correct. A gyroscopic instrument cannot depend on the speed of the body, only accelerations.

 

The only thing the gyro can measure is the precession force. Turning this information into a reliable indication of heading rate change requires compensation for axial misalignment and the various ancillary accelerations happening to the instrument.

 

Nowhere in the JAR ATPL theory is the term inclinometer used (well not when i studied for it anyway). however, through a little research, i now know you are referencing the slip ball. If you obtained the term inclinometer from wikipedia

Wrong. FAA Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge. Edited December 3, 2010 by Frederf

[bogusheadbox]

The maneuver has little to do with the instrument itself.

 

Ridiculous statement.

 

I am sorry mate, but you are totally incorrect now. Turn co-ordinator and turn indicator are used PRIMARILY FOR RATED TURN PURPOSES !!!!!

 

For simplicity sake, this is what the little marks on the face describe. RATED TURNS !!!!

 

You are 50% correct. Corrections need to be made for misalignment of the instrument with respect to the horizontal (bank) in a turn and g-loading because of a secondary precession effect. Airspeed is only causally related because it suggests typical banks and g-loads for level turns.

Seriously mate, you boggle me sometimes.

 

There are two small equations to work out radius of turn and angle of bank.

 

Radius of turn = TAS/rateX60pie

TAS in knots and Rate as Rate1, 2, 3 etc. gives you radius in nautical miles.

 

Alternatively

= TAS2 ÷ (g x Tanφ)

or

Tanφ = TAS2 ÷ (g x Radius)

SI units must be used and "g" is the force of gravity (9.81m/s2)

From this we can see that TAS has a direct correlation to radius of a turn.

 

Angle of bank (approximation) for rate 1 turns only.

= TAS/10+7

 

If you know anything about flying, angle of bank will mean a reduction in lift, to compensate we need to increase lift therefore increasing load factor. As load factor is respective of G and G is referenced to gravity then anyone who is not a retard will know that a turn will increase G.

 

Its pretty common stuff. For you not to be able to correlate that into my previous arguments shows me you either do not understand or you are deliberately not seeing what i am writing.

 

for added benefit see attached for a table of bank angles and corresponding load factors

 

 

 

 

Again we can see that angle of bank has a direct relation to G loading. Therefore when we are doing a RATE 1 TURN whose angle of bank will be dependant on TAS, we can show that TAS has a direct correlation to a rated turn.

 

I am trying to keep it simple for others to follow, but if you want to bang on about precession trying to discount me then go ahead. I have passed my ATPL's and i can carry anything you want to say regarding gyroscopes. Lets see, the fact that precession works 90 degrees in the direction of rotation.

 

The turn indicator is a rate gyro, with two planes of freedom and one gimbal. It may be air driven or electrically driven. The axis of rotation is in the horizontal plane; the direction of rotation has the top of the gyro moving away from the pilot. When the aircraft is turned the change of direction appears as a yaw rate. This is precessed to act on the top or bottom of the gyro, which rotates in its single gimbal, pivoted on the aircraft fore and aft axis and compresses or extends a spring. When the spring force balances the precessed force the gyro remains tilted away from the aircraft vertical as the instrument yaws with the aircraft. The gimbal moves a needle that indicates the rate of turn

 

I can bang on and bang on about it ...... BUT MATE, YOU REALLY SHOULD KNOW THE OBVIOUS !

 

That quoted paragraph is only sort of true for practical means. From a physics point of view it is not strictly correct. A gyroscopic instrument cannot depend on the speed of the body, only accelerations.

The only thing the gyro can measure is the precession force. Turning this information into a reliable indication of heading rate change requires compensation for axial misalignment and the various ancillary accelerations happening to the instrument.

Again to bang on about it. You know how a gyro works but you fail to see how it works with respect to an aircraft.

 

I have already proven that TAS in a rated turn will dictate angle of bank and that in turn will dictate load factor and that matey is all the bits you mentioned above that affect the turn indicator as we mentioned above.

 

Wrong. FAA Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge.

How can i be wrong. I said and here it is for emphasis "Nowhere in the JAR ATPL theory is the term inclinometer used"

 

JAR ATPL is European and FAA is American. So i was right that it is not mentioned in the european syllabus. The fact you are referencing a slip ball, then i will say slip ball again for simplicity as others can follow.

Edited December 4, 2010 by bogusheadbox

[Bucic]

bogusheadbox,

 

you confuse mechanics of flight with dynamics of flight and dynamics behind the working of a certain instrument. And before you carry on with 'bang on and bang on about it' I'd suggest you refresh your ability to distinguish between force and acceleration ("and "g" is the force of gravity (9.81m/s2)".

 

If I don't reply to your next post it means that it does not comply with the maximum number of words limit for a logical post :)

[bogusheadbox]

bogusheadbox,

 

you confuse mechanics of flight with dynamics of flight and dynamics behind the working of a certain instrument. And before you carry on with 'bang on and bang on about it' I'd suggest you refresh your ability to distinguish between force and acceleration ("and "g" is the force of gravity (9.81m/s2)".

 

If I don't reply to your next post it means that it does not comply with the maximum number of words limit for a logical post :)

 

The confusion is all yours Bucic. I have described load factor and Tas and bank angle and the correlation between them all. All equations are correct.

 

If you have a problem with what i have written, then please point it out.

 

As for personal attacks at the lenghts of my posts, that is unwarranted. I am forced to make long posts to help those like yourself that do not understand.

 

As for not understanding mechanics with flight dynamics well i am afriad, my credentials say otherwise... do yours ?

 

I hope this post is short enough for you.

Edited December 4, 2010 by bogusheadbox

[Bucic]

The confusion is all yours Bucic. I have described load factor and Tas and bank angle and the correlation between them all. All equations are correct.

 

If you have a problem with what i have written, then please point it out.

 

As for personal attacks at the lenghts of my posts, that is unwarranted. I am forced to make long posts to help those like yourself that do not understand.

 

As for not understanding mechanics with flight dynamics well i am afriad, my credentials say otherwise... do yours ?

I think my credentials are fine :D (see my profile) but from my experience rubbing one's credentials in people's faces usually backfires nicely ;)

[bogusheadbox]

I think my credentials are fine :D (see my profile) but from my experience rubbing one's credentials in people's faces usually backfires nicely ;)

 

Well Bucic. Lets break it down.

 

You said. "you confuse mechanics of flight with dynamics of flight and dynamics behind the working of a certain instrument".

 

I know how they work, and i corrected you. Now you think i am confused, and i mentioned my credentials to show you that i am not.

 

You said, "I'd suggest you refresh your ability to distinguish between force and acceleration ("and "g" is the force of gravity (9.81m/s2)".

If you read my post correctly and bothered to understand it you would have known that i do not need refreshing. But seeing as you still want to come after me (probably because you are not happy that i rightly corrected you), i mentioned my credentials to show you that i know what i am talking about.

 

I have no problem with being wrong and i have been (Frederf kindly corrected me on an item and i agreed with it). And i am more than happy to discuss and exchange knowledge. But if all you can do is get peeved that you are wrong and just throw insults then perhaps an adult discussion is not for you.

 

You said, "rubbing one's credentials in people's faces usually backfires nicely"

 

I am not rubbing in your face. I am just showing you that i do know what I a talking about - - - sometimes.