![]() ![]() Therefore, it's best to avoid flying close to the surface when excessive mechanical turbulence is present. Mother Nature, however, is primarily responsible for the loads imposed on commercial survey operations. First, the loads imposed by aerobatic flight, aerial applications and instructional operations are controlled by their respective pilots. This isn't surprising because these folks constantly fly from 50 to 1,500 feet above the surface where mechanical turbulence is greatest. This same study indicated that commercial survey operations (e.g., forest and pipeline patrol airplanes) were most likely to experience turbulence or gust-induced exceedance of the design flight envelope. Fortunately, we were way below the airplane's maneuvering speed, resulting in a relatively small negative load imposed on the airplane. I grabbed a pencil off the roof and made a note to use more adjectives the next time I discuss stall recovery. He lowered it by shoving the control stick full forward. Once, during stall practice, I told my student to lower the nose. Students are no less likely to be rough on the flight controls, which is the primary reason instructional flights experience excessive load factors. Both operations can lead to high load factors as pilots maneuver to remain within these self-imposed zones. Aerial applicators are similarly self-restricted by the size of the field they're dusting. It's no surprise that an aerobatic pilot, confined to a designated cube of airspace, might yank and bank to keep the airplane within that cube. When and where it happens is no real surprise.Ī NASA study on gusts and maneuvering loads indicated that exceedance of an airplane's limit load factor caused by pilot-applied control inputs, was primarily confined to aerobatic flight, aerial applications and instructional operations. How likely is the average airplane to reach or exceed this g-force limit? On a rare occasion, it happens. When stressed to but not beyond this limit, the aircraft structure should experience no damage whatsoever. This is a demonstration of loading an airplane to its limit load factor (+3.8G's for a normal category airplane). When the men depart, the wings should return to their prestressed position (don't try this at home, even if it is a rental). The wings should flex to their elastic limit without damage. Have 57 men, each weighing 170 pounds, stand evenly spaced across the wings. Imagine loading your average Cessna 172 in the positive-g condition by turning it upside down. Here's a mental experiment that may give your comfort. The fact is that airplanes are very strong. But that doesn't keep pilots from imagining that it will. Turbulence isn't likely to hurt the airplane. Yes, some folks get used to it but that doesn't mean they like it. ![]() If they say they do then that's probably the testosterone talking. Now on to the real problem of how turbulence affects the airplane.īelieve me when I say that no one, and I do mean no one likes turbulence. You only have to try this once to realize it's a really bad idea. If you're flying a Cessna, don't even think about earping out the big side window, unless you're wearing a HAZMAT (Hazardous Materials) suit. ![]() The only tell-tale clue will be a rectangular ring around your face that will betray the large smile you wear upon entering the flight school. Place your mug up against it and heave-ho. If you don't have one handy, but are flying a Piper aircraft, open the small rectangular window on the pilot's side. I don't think you should earp on your instructor, even if he deserved it. I'm also afraid I'll throw up on my flight instructor in turbulent conditions. I'm a student pilot whose instructor insists that the turbulence we feel during flight won't hurt the airplane. This is a actual letter I received from a student pilot along with my reply. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |