Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:43 AM - Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 (BlueSkyFlier)
2. 05:02 AM - Re: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 ()
3. 08:27 AM - Re: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 (Mark Kettering)
4. 08:36 AM - Re: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 (Mark Kettering)
5. 10:08 AM - Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 (BlueSkyFlier)
6. 10:38 AM - Re: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 ()
7. 11:00 AM - Re: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 (Larry David)
8. 11:01 AM - nose drop question... (Scott Stearns)
9. 12:02 PM - Re: nose drop question... (Larry David)
10. 02:17 PM - Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 (BlueSkyFlier)
11. 02:37 PM - Re: nose drop question... (Randy Ott)
12. 02:52 PM - Re: nose drop question... ()
13. 06:27 PM - Re: nose drop question... (Galin Hernandez)
14. 07:37 PM - AW: Re: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 (Twellmann, Ralf)
15. 08:16 PM - Re: Re: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 (F. Tim Yoder)
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 |
Attached below a short list which compares pertinent characteristics of some of
the 63 series foils (obtained from the same website a where Graham got the profile
attached earlier).
The 63(2)A-015 profile in the table is closest to the TR-1's 63(2)A-215 and differs
from the others in higher L/D ratio and larger trailing edge angle due to
the flat trailing edge profile. The L/D ratio being highest even though the
lift is less than the other airfoils indicates that the drag is quite low in comparison.
With Scott confirming effects of wheel placement, how about sharing figures for
height of CoG? Since I have to work on my plane anyway I can just as well look
at getting the main gear placement improved too.
Knowing that angle of incidence is 3 degrees and taking into account that stall
angle is around 11.5 degrees (as from attached table) and assuming that full
flaps decrease the angle of attack by about 2 or 3 degrees it seems that the aircraft
angle at landing should be about 5.5 to 6.5 degrees maximum.
>From the table attached to earlier message in this thread it then appears that
the wheel location should be even less than 6 inches behind CoG - instead of
the 10 inches it is now. If the main gear can be angled forward by about 10 degrees
it should comes close to the sweet spot (depending on height of CoG).
I know that some builders have angled the gear forward. Does anyone have figures
for that angle and or height of CoG?
Regards,
Alfred
--------
_________________________________________
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336393#336393
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/airfoil_comparison_for_632____series_198.jpg
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 |
4/8/2011
Hello Fellow KIS TR-1 Pilots, Alfred wrote: "Just one more reason to avoid
high angles of attack during landing ..."
I am in complete agreement with the technique of avoiding high angles of
attack during the landing approach and flare while landing this airplane.
However I would like to clarify and emphasize that:
A) The danger / discomfort of having the nose abruptly drop while still
airborne and close to the landing surface, and
B) The nuisance of not being able to hold the nose off after controlled main
landing gear touchdown,
are two very different situations.
While the airplane's design characteristics ( wing airfoil, wing to fuselage
fairing, elevator effectiveness, main landing gear fore and aft placement,
etc.) may or may not play some role in both A and B it is only A that will
cause damage to airplane and injury to occupants.
The worst that is likely to come of B is greater brake pad surface wear as
one can not make optimum use of an aerodynamic braking technique from the
moment of main landing gear touchdown when landing on a surface that is long
enough to make use of aerodynamic braking.
If one needs to make a short field landing the best way to get stopped as
shortly as possible is to get all three gear on the ground as soon as
possible and start wheel braking. Raising the flaps immediately after
touchdown may also help wheel braking effectiveness.**
'OC' Baker Says: "The best investment we can make is the time and effort to
gather and understand knowledge."
**PS: We could start another whole thread on the subject of practicing -
making short field landings, but I am not keen to pursue that in detail. The
KIS TR-1 design is not optimized for short field operations. While some
owners / pilots have a need to and do operate from short fields it is not a
good idea to routinely beat up this airplane practicing short field
operations unless you have a real need for those operations.
============================================================
From: "BlueSkyFlier" <bleuskyfly@teledynamix.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 9:13 PM
Subject: KIS-List: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1
> <bleuskyfly@teledynamix.com>
>
> Earlier in this thread I referred to the tendency of NACA 6-digit wing
> profiles to prefer operation within their laminar flow design ranges. The
> KIS TR-1 uses a modified 6-digit profile which can be described as
> 63(2)A-215.
>
> The 6-series was derived using an improved theoretical method that relied
> mathematics to derive the geometrical shape required to realise the
> desired pressure distribution. The goal of this approach was to design
> airfoils that maximized the region over which the airflow remains laminar.
> In so doing, the drag over a small range of lift coefficients can be
> substantially reduced.
>
> To illustrate that, herewith attached a diagram in which the
> characteristic drag "bucket" associated with laminar flow can be seen - in
> this case for the NACA 64(2)-415 profile. This is from p.238 of
> Torenbeek's "Synthesis of subsonic aircraft design".
>
> As can be seen from the diagram the drag increases rapidly as the lift
> coefficient moves beyond the optimal range, which helps to slow down
> rapidly but also results in high sink rate at non-optimal angle of attack.
> However, these profiles do exhibit docile stall characteristics.
>
> A modification of the standard 6-digit series is the A-series in which the
> curved contours of the trailing edge is replaced with straight contours
> which run from about 80% of chord backwards - as manifested by flat
> surfaces on the TR-1 flap and aileron. The TR-1 wing therefore nominally
> represents a 63(2)A215 profile.
>
> Just one more reason to avoid high angles of attack during landing ...
>
> --------
> _________________________________________
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336377#336377
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/lift_and_drag_of_naca_airfoils_780.jpg
>
>
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 |
According to Stinton the main gear contact angle aft of the CG should be alpha
@ 0.9 of Cl max plus 3 deg. Using this I get about 5.25 deg. Very close to your
5.5 to 6.5 deg.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
>From: BlueSkyFlier <bleuskyfly@teledynamix.com>
>Sent: Apr 8, 2011 5:42 AM
>To: kis-list@matronics.com
>Subject: KIS-List: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1
>
>
>Attached below a short list which compares pertinent characteristics of some of
the 63 series foils (obtained from the same website a where Graham got the profile
attached earlier).
>
>The 63(2)A-015 profile in the table is closest to the TR-1's 63(2)A-215 and differs
from the others in higher L/D ratio and larger trailing edge angle due to
the flat trailing edge profile. The L/D ratio being highest even though the
lift is less than the other airfoils indicates that the drag is quite low in
comparison.
>
>With Scott confirming effects of wheel placement, how about sharing figures for
height of CoG? Since I have to work on my plane anyway I can just as well look
at getting the main gear placement improved too.
>
>Knowing that angle of incidence is 3 degrees and taking into account that stall
angle is around 11.5 degrees (as from attached table) and assuming that full
flaps decrease the angle of attack by about 2 or 3 degrees it seems that the
aircraft angle at landing should be about 5.5 to 6.5 degrees maximum.
>
>>From the table attached to earlier message in this thread it then appears that
the wheel location should be even less than 6 inches behind CoG - instead of
the 10 inches it is now. If the main gear can be angled forward by about 10 degrees
it should comes close to the sweet spot (depending on height of CoG).
>
>I know that some builders have angled the gear forward. Does anyone have figures
for that angle and or height of CoG?
>
>Regards,
> Alfred
>
>--------
>_________________________________________
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336393#336393
>
>
>Attachments:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com//files/airfoil_comparison_for_632____series_198.jpg
>
>
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 |
>However I would like to clarify and emphasize that:
>
>A) The danger / discomfort of having the nose abruptly drop while still
>airborne and close to the landing surface, and
Has this ever happened to anyone? If so was it caused by stalling the wing? If
so was this due to "normal stall" or a ground effect problem? I think that
if this has happened it was due to normal stalling of the wing and the pilot should
expect this and work to prevent it by watching airspeed and AOA.
>B) The nuisance of not being able to hold the nose off after controlled main
>landing gear touchdown,
>
I am not so sure this is just a nuisance. When a nose gear breaks due to repeated
slamming it could get very expensive.
Mark
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 |
In an earlier posting Graham enquired about the actual airfoil profile for the
TR-1. Attached herewith a diagram which can be used for that purpose to a very
close approximation.
It is a comparison between the 63(2)-215 [in red] and 63(2)A-015 profile [in green]
with identical chord length.
For all practical purposes the TR-1 wing profile could be considered to match the
red outline for the left half of the chord and then follow the green outline
for the rear section of the chord.
This diagram can be accessed at: http://www.worldofkrauss.com/foils/show_compare?sform_contains=63%282%29&items_per_page=50&commit=Compare&id[]=1416&id[]=1688
--------
_________________________________________
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336407#336407
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/kis_tr1_airfoil_approximation_196.jpg
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 |
4/8/2011
Hello Mark, You wrote:
1) "Has this ever happened to anyone?"
Absolutely. This is what has generated the majority of the initial postings
on the subject of "how to land the KIS TR-1". Pilots were surprised /
frightened by a sudden nose drop after they had started the landing flare at
what they considered an acceptable approach airspeed.
2) "I think that if this has happened it was due to normal stalling of the
wing ......"
Because these surprised / frightened pilots had started the landing flare
with an acceptable approach airspeed they began to search for explanations
for the sudden nose drop other than, or in addition to, "... normal stalling
of the wing...". In the course of this search there have been many postings
on subjects such as:
A) Inadequate wing-to-fuselage fairing diameter creating a burble as the
nose is raised during the landing flare. This burble flows back to the
horizontal tail surfaces and suddenly reduces those surface's down force.
Julian Bone extensively researched this characteristic by installing yarn
tufts and video taping them. He subsequently significantly modified his
wing-to-fuselage fairings.
B) Inadequate elevator surface area / pitch authority. This characteristic
was recognized early on and several builders subsequently extended the
trailing edges of their airplane's elevator.
C) More recently Alfred has been focusing on KIS TR-1 wing airfoil
characteristics to explain this sudden nose drop phenomena.
3) ".... work to prevent it by watching airspeed and AOA."
I don't know of very many pilots that watch airspeed readings during the
landing flare and then use those readings to control pitch attitude.
I don't know of very many KIS TR-1 airplanes that are equipped with angle of
attack indicators and I don't know of many pilots that would use changing
angle of attack indications during the landing flare to control pitch
attitude.
I think that what most pilots use during the landing flare to adjust their
pitch attitude is what they see by looking out of the canopy and comparing
what they see, both in terms of pitch attitude and distance above the
landing surface, with what they think is acceptable to see.
The consensus that I see arising out of the many postings on the subject of
"how to land the KIS TR-1" is that nose high pitch attitudes close to the
landing surface is not a good idea and can result in unpleasant nose drop
surprises. The KIS TR-1 is not your father's Cessna 172 when it comes to the
landing flare.
4) "I am not so sure this is just a nuisance. When a nose gear breaks due
to repeated slamming it could get very expensive."
That is exactly my clarification issue. A nose gear can contact the landing
surface when the pilot really doesn't want it to under three circumstances:
A) The pilot flys his approach at such an excessive airspeed and low pitch
attitude that the nose gear is the first thing to contact the landing
surface. This has not been an issue in our previous postings.
B) The pilot touches down at an acceptable attitude after an appropriate
approach airspeed and landing flare, but the design of the airplane, main
landing gear placement, inadequate pitch authority, or some factor causes
the nose gear to contact, not slam onto, the landing surface. This falls
into the nuisance or annoyance category because the pilot could not
initially aerodynamically brake as he wished to.
C) The nose gear does indeed slam into the landing surface, either at the
same time as the main landing gear contacts the landing surface or a
fraction of a second after main landing gear contact, because the airplane's
pitch attitude has abruptly changed nose down when the pilot did not expect
it to and too quickly for him to avoid nose gear slam. This is what some
pilots landing the KIS TR-1 have experienced and they then searched for a
reason and a solution in this forum.
My posting was intended to differentiate between B and C and the
significance of those two events regarding safe operations when landing the
KIS TR-1.
'OC' Baker Says: "The best investment we can make is the time and effort to
gather and understand knowledge."
=============================================
From: "Mark Kettering" <mantafs@earthlink.net>
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 11:31 AM
Subject: Re: KIS-List: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1
>
>
>>However I would like to clarify and emphasize that:
>>
>>A) The danger / discomfort of having the nose abruptly drop while still
>>airborne and close to the landing surface, and
>
> Has this ever happened to anyone? If so was it caused by stalling the
> wing? If so was this due to "normal stall" or a ground effect problem? I
> think that if this has happened it was due to normal stalling of the wing
> and the pilot should expect this and work to prevent it by watching
> airspeed and AOA.
>
>>B) The nuisance of not being able to hold the nose off after controlled
>>main
>>landing gear touchdown,
>>
>
> I am not so sure this is just a nuisance. When a nose gear breaks due to
> repeated slamming it could get very expensive.
>
> Mark
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 |
Hi Mark,et al,
I recall in the early days of this list there were a number of bent nose
gears, broken props, and a picture of one nose over in a muddy field.
Maybe Rich can recall more specifics. I recall there was a quasi AD to
strengthen the nose gear. Over the years there were a number of patches
to resolve this common problem (or problems) that the current
discussions suggest is design related. I wish Vance Jaqua were still
with us. He would love this discussion. I almost wish I had a project
to try out these fresh ideas. Larry
On 4/8/2011 8:31 AM, Mark Kettering wrote:
> --> KIS-List message posted by: Mark Kettering<mantafs@earthlink.net>
>
>
>> However I would like to clarify and emphasize that:
>>
>> A) The danger / discomfort of having the nose abruptly drop while still
>> airborne and close to the landing surface, and
> Has this ever happened to anyone? If so was it caused by stalling the wing?
If so was this due to "normal stall" or a ground effect problem? I think that
if this has happened it was due to normal stalling of the wing and the pilot
should expect this and work to prevent it by watching airspeed and AOA.
>
>> B) The nuisance of not being able to hold the nose off after controlled main
>> landing gear touchdown,
>>
> I am not so sure this is just a nuisance. When a nose gear breaks due to repeated
slamming it could get very expensive.
>
> Mark
>
>
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | nose drop question... |
Hello all,
-
I'm trying to fully understand the nosedrop problem.- I had assumed the p
roblem was nose drop after touchdown, but it sounds like it's a nose drop i
n the flare but prior to touchdown.- Is that right?-
-
Thanks,
Scott
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: nose drop question... |
Hi Scott, et al,
I suspect those who experienced this problem are no longer active on the
List. Rich might remember.
Larry
On 4/8/2011 10:59 AM, Scott Stearns wrote:
> Hello all,
> I'm trying to fully understand the nosedrop problem. I had assumed
> the problem was nose drop after touchdown, but it sounds like it's a
> nose drop in the flare but prior to touchdown. Is that right?
> Thanks,
> Scott
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 10
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 |
I think it would be quite unfair to characterize the behaviours we are discussing
here as a design problem/deficiency.
Instead, it should simply be recognized that a laminar flow wing has peculiar drag
characteristics which change abruptly when angle of attack gets outside of
a specific range. With full flaps in ground effect that angle may well be significantly
smaller than one would otherwise expect. (Mark and I independently
arrived at a maximum attitude of about 5 to 6 degrees during landing)
There are no free lunches. The price to be paid for the excellent high speed performance
of the TR-1 is that a conservative angle of attack is advisable during
landing to avoid all the potential pitfalls resulting from the speed-optimised
configuration.
The main gear location could perhaps have been better, but it hasn't caused me
any problems, provided that the wheels touch down gently enough.
Like any other vehicle this one has its particular idiosynchrasies. Now that we
have a fairly good idea what they are, all we need to do is to respect them.
Happy landings,
Alfred.
--------
_________________________________________
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=336419#336419
Message 11
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: nose drop question... |
Vortex generators on the elevator seem to fix mine.
Randy
96BT
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Larry David <lgdavid@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> Hi Scott, et al,
> I suspect those who experienced this problem are no longer active on the
> List. Rich might remember.
> Larry
>
>
> On 4/8/2011 10:59 AM, Scott Stearns wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I'm trying to fully understand the nosedrop problem. I had assumed the
> problem was nose drop after touchdown, but it sounds like it's a nose drop
> in the flare but prior to touchdown. Is that right?
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
>
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
Message 12
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: nose drop question... |
4/8/2011
Hello Scott, You wrote: "I'm trying to fully understand the nosedrop
problem."
There are two nose drop problems in landing the KIS TR-1. They are:
A) Difficulty in holding the nose wheel off the landing surface after a
normal rate of descent main landing gear touchdown. This is not, in my
opinion, a safety problem, but rather one of annoyance to those pilots
who desire to use aerodynamic braking from the instant of main landing
gear touchdown until they want to lower the nose wheel or until the nose
wheel can no longer be held off the landing surface as a result of
slowing speed during landing roll out.
B) A sudden pitch down of the nose during the landing flare while still
airborne that catches the pilot by surprise and can cause a very harsh
touchdown. If the nose wheel does not contact the landing surface at the
same time as the main landing gear in this harsh initial contact it will
slam down a fraction of a second later as a result of nose down rotation
about the main landing gear contact point.
History bears out that this harsh touchdown can indeed result in
aircraft damage and, potentially, injury to occupants depending upon the
distance fallen.
I think that it is important to understand the difference between A and
B as the discussion proceeds.
'OC' Baker Says: "The best investment we can make is the time and effort
to gather and understand knowledge."
====
----- Original Message -----
From: Scott Stearns
To: kis-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 1:59 PM
Subject: KIS-List: nose drop question...
Hello all,
I'm trying to fully understand the nosedrop problem. I had
assumed the problem was nose drop after touchdown, but it sounds like
it's a nose drop in the flare but prior to touchdown. Is that right?
Thanks,
Scott
Message 13
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: nose drop question... |
Same with the TR-4. Much better elevator authority and landings at low
air speeds with my VG's.
On Friday, April 8, 2011, Randy Ott <randy.ott@gmail.com> wrote:
> Vortex generators on the elevator seem to fix mine.
> Randy
> 96BT
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:57 AM, Larry David <lgdavid@roadrunner.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Scott, et al,
> I suspect those who experienced this problem are no longer active on
> the List. Rich might remember.
>
> Larry
>
> On 4/8/2011 10:59 AM, Scott Stearns wrote:
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> I'm trying to fully understand the nosedrop problem.
> I had assumed the problem was nose drop after touchdown,
> but it sounds like it's a nose drop in the flare but
> prior to touchdown. Is that right?
>
> Thanks,
> Scott
>
>
> et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List
> tp://forums.matronics.com
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
Message 14
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 |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 15
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Landing the KIS TR-1 |
All Ya All,(Texas speak)
I land my TR-1 with full flaps and 1100 to 1300 RPM. Touch down is about
75 MPH and I can always hold the nose gear off, if my timing is good. If
I am tardy, the nose gear will hit but not hard. I have the elevator
extension also. Sometimes my AOA is high enough that I loose the runway
in the flair and have to look out the door window, the nose gear is
still easy to hold off at main gear touchdown.
----- Original Message -----
From: Twellmann, Ralf
To: kis-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 7:35 PM
Subject: AW: Re: KIS-List: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1
Hello all,
i am flying the KIS Taildragger and always try to land in a 3-point
attitude and most of the time i need only half of the runway which is
600 meters long. So i come down with a high aoa and slow.
i never experienced a nose drop during the 250+ landings i made so
far. I land with full flaps which means approx. 30 degrees with my plane
and i have a 2" elevator extention.
Regards from Germany,
Ralf Twellmann
--------------------------
Zur Verf=C3=BCgung gestellt von my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Von: owner-kis-list-server@matronics.com
An: kis-list@matronics.com
Gesendet: Fri Apr 08 06:23:18 2011
Betreff: Re: KIS-List: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1
I'm pretty sure the pitch down issue on landing is due to the
main wheels being a bit too far aft and the elevator being a bit too
small. It doesn't take much of an error in wheel placement to make a
big difference in rotation speed and pitch down after touchdown.
When I was an engineer working on the proof of concept airplane
for the Adam A500 we ended up with the main wheels a few inches aft of
where they should have been (long story, not my fault!). The airplane
hit about 100 KIAS before it could be rotated for takeoff and there was
no holding the nose off after landing. Proteus is another good example.
The main wheels are well aft due to the design and the nose comes
crashing down right after touchdown.
Scott
--- On Thu, 4/7/11, Mark Kettering <mantafs@earthlink.net>
wrote:
From: Mark Kettering <mantafs@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: KIS-List: Re: Landing the KIS TR-1
To: kis-list@matronics.com
Date: Thursday, April 7, 2011, 3:10 PM
<mantafs@earthlink.net>
>Fully agreed with Mark that, if the resultant vertical
momentum is too high at touchdown, the weight of the engine will take
the upper hand in forcing the nose down.
Actually even if there is no (or almost no) vertical momentum
on touchdown the nose can still slam down due to the upward force that
was being generated by the wing now being generated by the main gear
farther aft.
>
>I was merely looking for potential causal factors of such
undesirable end result which could catch one unawares even when
apparently doing nothing overtly wrong. In that sense the equation did
point out that - as rear end of flaps get closer to the ground - flow
velocity becomes restricted and probability of flow reversal increases;
all of which reduces lift of the inner wing area. Empirical or not, it
seems to make intuitive sense and I shall at least keep that effect in
mind when I have full flaps deployed in approach. Also good to hear from
Mark that TR-1 will not easily get into the CL > 2 region.
I agree with looking for any potential causal factors. I also
agree that with big flaps near the ground there could be flow
restriction and maybe reversal. But I am not so sure this will produce
less lift. Not that I am at all a fan of wings in ground effect craft
but they do work and tend to have very low aspect ratios and very low
trailing edge ground clearance. Most do not have flaps but have lots of
camber.
>Must admit that I have not personally experienced nose
dropping - perhaps because I don't hold off, but instead fly the gear
into touch with conservative angle of attack as I was instructed to do
at hot and high fields. I seems to work everywhere else too.
>
Do you know if your main gear are at the stock location or at
some other location?
Mark
<->
=EF=BD~=EF=BD=03
Other Matronics Email List Services
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! --
|