Commander-List Digest Archive

Thu 08/25/11


Total Messages Posted: 1



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 07:21 AM - Re: Flying "On the Step" (William J Hamilton)
 
 
 


Message 1


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 07:21:31 AM PST US
    From: "William J Hamilton" <wjrhamilton@optusnet.com.au>
    Subject: Flying "On the Step"
    Folks, Any number of text books on the basics of aerodynamics will explain. My favourite is Mechanics of Flight, A.C.Kermode. It should not be "controversial", being a matter of settled physics of flight. All that varies between aircraft is the shape of the curve --- for "older" aircraft there is a pronounced peak, for jet aircraft the curve is quite flat, as has been previously mentioned, and as I noted, there is another factor at work with a jet --- Mach. No. and boundary layer adhesion ---- but the practical flying techniques are the same ---- descend on the cruise level, or decelerate to the steady speed at the desired power setting. Doing as John V. does is as good as any way of staying on the front side of the lift / drag curve. "On the step" is a bit misleading, hailing from flying boat days, but serves a purpose, but what is really happening, as I mentioned in a previous post, is that there are (except right on the peak of the curve, a speed unstable place to try and stay) two speeds for the same power/thrust ---- either side of the peak --- what John V. describes is the most common way to make certain you are on the "fast" side of the peak. Cheers, Bill Hamilton From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Vormbaum Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 2:33 PM Subject: RE: Commander-List: Flying "On the Step" Andrew, This is purely an empirical observation, but in my 500B I've found that the wing seems to become most efficient at an IAS of ~135kts+. There are huge arguments for & against the 'step', but the benefit I've found is quicker trimming. Those smarter than me might be correct about flying it to the altitude, and trimming from that point being no less efficient than overflying your altitude by a couple hundred feet and dropping back down, but in my 500B it seems to trim up much quicker, and at a higher airspeed sooner, if I fly it a little higher and get on the step. If I DON'T do that, there are numerous power/pitch/trim changes that need to be made before the airplane wants to settle down. Think 15 minutes. If I fly it onto the step, when I'm ~200ft above my target altitude, I can point her downhill, close cowl flaps, pull the props back, set power, and do the first big mixture grab. At that point the airplane is at its target altitude and I only need about 60 seconds to get the trim where I want it. Then I can focus on setting LOP and/or turbo boost, and the airplane will stay rock-steady at the altitude. A slight trim adjustment over the next minute or two is usually all it takes after that, and then I can settle in for my hours of boredom at cruise. Again, just anecdotal, but I sure seem to mess with the trim wheel a lot less this way. /J From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Andrew & Bridget Watson Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 1:03 PM Subject: Commander-List: Flying "On the Step" Hello everybody, I read the earlier emails--some questions on "Flying on the Step". Out on the Internet there appears to be violent disagreement on whether such a thing exists or not. Note: I'm not trying to brew up a storm, just trying to understand. My father taught me there was such a thing. I believed and still believe there is; that flying on the step is not a myth. The way I rationalised it then is as below, I appreciate folks setting me straight, either on-list or off-list. 1. There are 4 forces that act upon an aircraft: 1. Thrust, which is directly forward 2. Drag, which is directly rearward 3. Weight, which is vertical down 4. Lift, which is perpendicular to the aircraft wings, 'upward". 2. As speed increases, so does lift. 3. If the aircraft is in a nose down attitude, speed will increase because: 1. it is in a shallow dive 2. lift, being perpendicular to the wings, will be assisting in drawing the aircraft forward 4. Altitude "lost" in the nose down attitude will be compensated by the increased lift associated with the increased speed. Is this simple logic valid or should I go and hide my head in shame somewhere? <grin> Thanks all in advance for your help in my understanding of this. Andrew http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution




    Other Matronics Email List Services

  • Post A New Message
  •   commander-list@matronics.com
  • UN/SUBSCRIBE
  •   http://www.matronics.com/subscription
  • List FAQ
  •   http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Commander-List.htm
  • Web Forum Interface To Lists
  •   http://forums.matronics.com
  • Matronics List Wiki
  •   http://wiki.matronics.com
  • 7-Day List Browse
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse/commander-list
  • Browse Commander-List Digests
  •   http://www.matronics.com/digest/commander-list
  • Browse Other Lists
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse
  • Live Online Chat!
  •   http://www.matronics.com/chat
  • Archive Downloading
  •   http://www.matronics.com/archives
  • Photo Share
  •   http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
  • Other Email Lists
  •   http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
  • Contributions
  •   http://www.matronics.com/contribution

    These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.

    -- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --