Well I already contributed to re-derailing a many times derailed thread so I will persist
To me this seems an example of taking a correct technical fact and using it it go somewhere misleading. In a black and white world that would be impossible, but bear with me.
Crumpp:
Quote:
All I said was this:
Quote:
Ideally the very first hint of it...... No, Ideally you have none at all and are at the point just before any buffeting occurs. That is also what the Spitfire Mk I notes relate
From CAA Flight Instructors Guide:
Quote:
Secondly, you should be aware that experiencing any buffet will reduce the rate of turn because of its effects on drag and L/D ratio. Therefore, if the stall warning is not operating, and the lightest of buffets is used to determine maximum CL, performance is degraded, and the aeroplane will not be turning at its maximum rate.
|
Yes, any buffet, even the mildest "buzz" represents some flow separation and a degradation in turn performance. This is true even though it is referenced in a New Zealand CAA website and we are very suspicious of those in Australia
So why do historical military pilots and aerobatic pilots (not talking FBW here) seem to think flying at the onset of just detectable buffet a good idea? Are they all misguided and should be told the truth?
Perhaps instead they know what they are doing and do it because it is a practical tool to stay as close as possible to the AoA for a maximum rate turn. In theory some turn performance is lost this way but there is no comparable signal to tell them how far they are under the optimum (so they can apply more pitch input). Of course the aircraft design plays a part in terms of buffet "depth"...if the aircraft departs very soon (with further pitch input) after the buffet onset is felt, or buffet was immediately "hard" it would not be a good idea to se this technique. Another technique would be to continuously detect flow separation, back off then redetect, but this doesn't seem very practical to me. But unfortunately I feel sick for hours after doing just an (approx) 2G turn for 360' so I don't know
Of course a plane design that will take a maximum pilot stick deflection and apply exactly the optimum elevator deflection to achieve optimum AoA without any flow separation is good, but we need the microprocessor in avionics to get there I think.
But to me that covers how context is important for technically correct "facts" to be useful in the discussion.
Cheers, camber