Anti-Spin Ideas

Discussion in 'Aircraft Design / Aerodynamics / New Technology' started by REVAN, Jun 1, 2017.

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

  1. Jun 26, 2017 #541

    Hot Wings

    Hot Wings

    Hot Wings

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    6,448
    Likes Received:
    2,360
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    Topspeed100, Holden, Aircar, + ???

    Too many already on that list.
     
  2. Jun 26, 2017 #542

    REVAN

    REVAN

    REVAN

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    60
    Location:
    Tucson, Arizona USA
    Any luck gaining access to the document? I suspect it will focus on drag characteristics, but we might get lucky and there could be some wind tunnel data comparing yaw moments for a sheared tipped vs a square tipped wing. With a straight trailing edge, the sheared tip is not quite the design I'm envisioning, but it is part way there, and could show some evidence to contribute toward risk reduction for the concept.
     
  3. Jun 26, 2017 #543

    BBerson

    BBerson

    BBerson

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    12,201
    Likes Received:
    2,401
    Location:
    Port Townsend WA
    No reply.
     
  4. Jun 26, 2017 #544

    Winginit

    Winginit

    Winginit

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2016
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    242
    Location:
    x
    Great question ! I don't know . Neither does anyone else posting on this thread. If you watch the video closely you will see that at the .013 mark the airplane has just taken off and he virtually stops in midair and turns the plane 45 degrees and then brings it back. Wings are level the whole time. Watch very closely for the lack of forward movement at this juncture, yet he can virtually turn the airplane at will. Also notice the direction of flight which I must assume is into the wind.

    Next move to the 1:10 mark and notice that he again performs a directional change with either no banking or minimal banking. Because of the slow speeds the exhibition is being demonstrated at, I feel that banking would lose some of the lift and then require added speed. Thats my opinion, not an engineering treatise.

    Move to the 1:24 mark and you will see a banked turn and you can judge for yourself the area it took to complete the turn.

    Move to the 1:44 mark and you will see that he swoops down to set up for the next maneuver and then rises to scrub speed. He makes another effortless flat turn. I judge that about 3 to 4 wing lengths were needed. The wing is 32 ft. The factory video below appears to have done even smaller turns.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8eg-A8GT7U (note: Check out the factory video points below for some even better looks at skidding and turning a Storch)

    Now there is no way to know exactly how big a radius each turn occupied, but you can see that both were extremely small. One could argue that they were approximately the same, but in no way can anyone definitively say the flat turn required more space than the banked higher speed turn. IMHO

    Now move to the real point as I percieve it. In the Storch factory video, the pilot is shown fliting about only feet above the ground in a field. At several points he makes skidding turns with the wings flat. The turns are executed so quickly that barely the length of the airplane is traveled before the skid is completed. In the general discussion of a skidding turn, I think everyone pictures a full 180 degree skidding turn. The use of a full skidding turn (in a Slepcev) would have a limited use. Something like the box canyon discussion perhaps. Now realize that to perform a banked turn you will need a little time to enter the bank and reset your speed accordingly because you are definitely going to make a major change in lift and drag. All of this takes time which may be of the essence and cause a not necessarily larger radius, but a closer proximity to the impediment directly in front of you.
    The Storch on the other hand does not require an increase in speed but can turn immediately with wings level (if need be) and reverse course. It is also capable of banking its wings and turning, but it will need the same actions of increasing speed somewhat and losing a little time, again placing the pilot closer to the impediment. So, being able to immediately effect a small radius turn with no hesitation seems a better choice. The question is whether there is now a danger to the pilot because of skidding. Well which danger does the pilot wish to face, closing quickly on the canyon face ahead, or a possible skid. If the airplane is stable in a skid, the pilot can then choose the option he is most comfortable with.

    Now lets consider one last caveat. As mentioned before, when landing, the application of skids just above ground level allows immediate directional changes in smaller amounts without dropping a wing. I furnished a video showing an experienced backwoods pilot attempting to make a landing which required a slight change of direction at about 15 feet above ground level just before touchdown. When he tried to make the last second adjustment his wing dropped and he almost crashed the lower wing. From what was demonstrated in the factory Storch video, a simple momentary skid would have been easily done with the wings level.

    Now there is video proof of everything that the Storch is capable of. There are no physical dimensional measurements available. Again I say I don't have any accurate measurements and neither does anyone else. You just have to watch the videos and form your own opinion as to whats true and whats hyperbole.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QgfPxmIpKg

    2:11 Coming right at you and skidding How large was that turn ?

    5:09 Close up of Flat turn

    5:42 last second course change with no wing drop

    6:37 low skid How short was that turn ?


    Update: As I predicted, the two professional pilot/authors with thousands of hours (one has 16,000) have now been sumarily dismissed as credible references. They have a different opinion and back it up by training other pilots, but expectedly they know nothing either.
     
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2017
  5. Jun 26, 2017 #545

    Topaz

    Topaz

    Topaz

    Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    13,873
    Likes Received:
    5,483
    Location:
    Orange County, California
    Moderator Note: Gentlemen, enough with the personal attacks. And I mean on BOTH sides. If you can't keep your post about the topic instead of the person, don't post it. Please. Just deleted a post that was nothing but an attack on another poster. I don't care how justified you feel, or how persecuted you feel, or if the "other guy" really is a genuine idiot. "Attacking back" has exactly ZERO place here.

    If you see a post that you feel is attacking you, please report it to the moderators. We'll look into the matter and act according to the rules Jake has defined for this forum. Any other action is going to be counter-productive in the long-run. If you make a series of reports and you don't see us acting on them, consider that your interpretation of the situation or the rules may be in error. Look in a mirror. You may be part of the problem.
     
    Jerry Lytle likes this.
  6. Jun 26, 2017 #546

    Himat

    Himat

    Himat

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,811
    Likes Received:
    654
    Location:
    Norway
    The cause of ventral fins I presume.
     
  7. Jun 26, 2017 #547

    Himat

    Himat

    Himat

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    2,811
    Likes Received:
    654
    Location:
    Norway
    As I see it, high yaw inertia is at its best a double edged sword. Yes, it does take some more aerodynamic force to establish the spin. But once the forces to spin are initiated it does take more aerodynamic force to stop the airplane from spinning. On a high inertia airframe counter spin control input may be needed even before the spin is established , whereas on a low inertia airframe centring the controls may be sufficient.

    At the extreme low inertia end, look at light aerobatic radio control models. These models can be commanded to tumble, but the moment the controls surfaces are centred they fly straight.
     
    BJC likes this.
  8. Jun 26, 2017 #548

    BBerson

    BBerson

    BBerson

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    12,201
    Likes Received:
    2,401
    Location:
    Port Townsend WA
    Yeah, there is several double edged swords beside inertia. That's why spin resistant design is difficult. As far as I know no spin resistant airplane (certified) has also qualified for intentional spins. (Columbia, Cirrus and probably ICON are spin resistant)

    The dynamics of sport R/C models are hard to get much data from. They are so light they don't really react like full size. Most of the trainers just won't spin at all unless the CG is way back.
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2017
  9. Jun 27, 2017 #549

    Sockmonkey

    Sockmonkey

    Sockmonkey

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,668
    Likes Received:
    433
    Location:
    Flint, Mi, USA
    Not to mention that they also tend to be overpowered for their size. Hammer the throttle and they can muscle their way out of bad positions.
     
    BBerson likes this.
  10. Jun 27, 2017 #550

    REVAN

    REVAN

    REVAN

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2016
    Messages:
    181
    Likes Received:
    60
    Location:
    Tucson, Arizona USA
    There's no way to put a measurement to the radius from looking at the video, but the 'S' turns starting at 1:28 may have a tighter turn radius. The turn rate looks higher in the banked turn and the flight speeds appear similar.

    Anyway, it would be appropriate if you'd take this flat turn stuff to a separate thread dedicated to flat turns. This subject has little if anything to do with this thread's topic. This thread is not about STOL airplanes or bush-flying techniques. It's about spin resistant control concepts. There are planes that can spin at 20 knots and planes that can spin at 100 knots. It's not about the speed, it's about stability and control authority when the wing is stalled.
     

Share This Page



arrow_white