F-100 Super Sabre flying tips..?

[jmig]

Ok, that's funny (sorry Mud!) :d



On adverse yaw. Did some “Googling”. Evidently the phenomenon is not limited to swept wing fighters of the 1960s. All airplanes experience it, as an effect of rolling, when the up wing, generating more lift, also produces more induced drag, than the down wing, which causes the nose to yaw in the direction of the up wing. But if you were using the rudder to coordinate your turn, wouldn’t the rudder input, “towards” the down wing, compensate for this? I’ve read that one method airplane designers use to eliminate adverse yaw is to couple the rudder to the aileron, a feature that was built into the Wright Flyer, for this very reason!
<o></o>
I’m wondering why the effect would be worse at high AOA. Perhaps because at high AOA, the aileron pushing the wing up is at more or a right angle to the wind than it would be at low AOA, which would create more of a drag offset?

OK Paul, let me see if I can remember correctly. At very high AOA the wing is basically stalled. If I remember correctly, the wing stalls from the fuselage outward. So only the wing tips are holding the airplane up. Now, introduce additional drag by moving the aileron up into the wind and you can imagine what happens.

Modern fighters, i.e., F-16, F-18 have automatic flaps, leading and trailing edge that will deploy in high AOA conditions to provide better performance. that is why the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds can come by at 130 kts with the nose so high. That and ample excess thrust

 

[tigisfat]

Urban myth...

No sir, I can personally vouch for this. It's not a myth. I do it in warriors all the time when doing shallow turns.

What country are you from, if you don't mind my asking?

 

[fliger747]

Alaska.... The only thing I can figure is that the slight AOA increase might cause a slight blanketing of the Stabilator form the propwash which would decrease the downforce on the tail. At low AOA, bank conditions, extranious factors can creep in. Certainly the lift geometry of the wings does not support such a contention. The second law of thermodynamics creeps in.... A certian amount of energy is required to produce the lift, and a certain amount of energy to produce the turn. If the turn remains level, either power must be added or airspeed will decrease, reaquiring an increased AOA... an on and on.

The first law is summarized as: "ya can't get somth'n for nutt'n".

The second law is: "Ya cann'a break even"....

Still hold pretty true outside of fusion....

Do a vector anaylis on the two wings at any desired bank angle and you will see that they combine to make the combined lift vector acting through the center of lift. Taking the ultimate dihedral of 45 deg... an interesting case applies as the rudder comes in to add some AOA to the down wing to maintain altitude as the up wing provides a turning lift.... All points to the increased energy requirements in a turn to maintain level undeccelerated flight.

In the 747-400 I add about 2 knobs of thrust in a level steep turn (we do those like everyone else). Our wings are flexible and dihedral varieds with fuel loading, so ya never know what ya got exactly.... Adding any thrust? Next trime you go out put on your test pilot hat and figure out what exactly is happening. Something is going on that does not violate the free lunch theorum. I am curious.

Best wishes: t

 

[tigisfat]

Sure, but the dihedral/anhedral accounts for losses and gains of lift as well, not just AOA. Imagine with me two wings with the same wing area, AOA and dihedral that produce drastically different lift at drastically different speeds. What's the answer? Please humor me.

A certian amount of energy is required to produce the lift, and a certain amount of energy to produce the turn.

You're joking, right? The second law of thermodynamics is summed up most commonly as: "the entropy of the universe tends to a maximum" and refers to work obtained from non-equilibrium differences by a heat engine. Going further, you can break even. Opposite forces tend to equalize. You're talking about lift and turning tendencies as if they're something different. Are you just messing with me? You are a 747 pilot, right?

The horizontal component of lift turns an aircraft, bar none. The amount of vertical lift lost when it turns horizontal determines the amount (if at all) of vertical lift needed. This lift can be obtained many ways, not just through increases in backpressure and all that backpressure encompasses.


We also never spoke of increased thrust, we only spoke of a requirement or lack thereof backpressure.

 

[jmig]

Sure, but the dihedral/anhedral accounts for losses and gains of lift as well, not just AOA. Imagine with me two wings with the same wing area, AOA and dihedral that produce drastically different lift at drastically different speeds. What's the answer? Please humor me.

You're joking, right? The second law of thermodynamics is summed up most commonly as: "the entropy of the universe tends to a maximum" and refers to work obtained from non-equilibrium differences by a heat engine. Going further, you can break even. Opposite forces tend to equalize. You're talking about lift and turning tendencies as if they're something different. Are you just messing with me? You are a 747 pilot, right?

The horizontal component of lift turns an aircraft, bar none. The amount of vertical lift lost when it turns horizontal determines the amount (if at all) of vertical lift needed. This lift can be obtained many ways, not just through increases in backpressure and all that backpressure encompasses.


We also never spoke of increased thrust, we only spoke of a requirement or lack thereof backpressure.

Actually, he is not joking. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics basically says that it takes an input of energy to keep the status quo. This applies to everything in the universe. So a house left to itself will eventually fall apart. A muscle not exercised will go soft, etc.

You can never break even. That would be perpetual motion in action. Perpetual motion is impossible because of the above law of physics and the universe.

Using the airplane example, turning causes induced drag. This drag will result in lower airspeed and by extension less lift. To evercome entropy a spot of power is added to maintain airspeed and level flight.

Also, I am sure you didn't mean anything by it but, a statement such as,"Are you just messing with me? You are a 747 pilot, right?" can be seen as insulting. I think it is obvious that both you and fliger747 have flying experience and aviation knowledge. Questioning another's competency will only lead to negative things.