Spit/109 sea level speed comparisons in 1.08 beta patch

[Al Schlageter]

Bungay didn't do the graphs as anyone who can read can easily see.

"Turning circles are calculated by John Ackroyd of Manchester School of Engineering."

[Crumpp]

John Ackroyd of Manchester School of Engineering

Care to explain them.......

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

I did not say the guy was stupid, Snapper. He is very intelligent and well respected. He has also written some good books.

He is not an aircraft performance engineer or an aerodynamicist.

Sooooo, he's very intelligent and well respected....but since he is not an aircraft performance engineer or an aerodynamicist he therefore publishes incorrect information? Please clarify.

[Al Schlageter]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Care to explain them.......

The altitude for the graph is at 0.0ft. The sources for them is stated at the bottom of the page.

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Snapper

Sooooo, he's very intelligent and well respected....but since he is not an aircraft performance engineer or an aerodynamicist he therefore publishes incorrect information? Please clarify.

Unfortunately there are very few aviation or aviation related books that meet Crumpp's extremely high standards, because they are not written by engineers. Until true professionals like Crumpp descend from their elevated heights and start researching, writing and publishing books on aircraft, our bookshelves will continue to be cluttered with books written by intelligent, well respected amateurs who know nothing and write abysmal nonsense.

[Crumpp]

The altitude for the graph is at 0.0ft

So the entire left column showing altitude does not exist or is a typo or are you saying the turn performance is in EAS??

Maybe some experts will be along to tell us how wrong it is to use EAS??

LMAO!!!!!



Thanks Milo, you are so predictable in your zeal to prove me wrong!

[bongodriver]

My interpretation of the graph is that that bot the left and bottom figures are radius (note how the lines intersect exactly the same figures on both) and the note on the left just means 'sea level', no EAS or IAS involved, admittedly it is a very badly designed illustration.......what's the big deal?

[ATAG_Dutch]

I just googled EAS. So are you referring to the sports nutrition product, Energy Action Scotland, Employment Agency Standards, the European Athletes Society, European Astronomical Society, or are you just throwing in an acronym for the sake of it?

The graph in the book is a simple demonstration of relative turning circles. It's not scientific. It's very 'layperson', but not necessarily 'wrong' per se.

I'd say the altitude is a typo. The x and y axes obviously show the same parameter, i.e. radius of turning circle in feet. But I have the book, so I'll check if it's clarified in the text.

[bongodriver]

EAS is equivalent air speed, Crumpp will be along in a minute to teach you all about it....

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

EAS is equivalent air speed, Crumpp will be along in a minute to teach you all about it....

Ah, thanks Bongo. I did guess that really. Bit of facetiousness I'm afraid.

However, I checked the text and there is no clarification as to the methods of calculation re the turning circle. It's a simple example for the readers of a book who don't have PhDs in aerodynamics. Or even a GCSE come to that.

But this doesn't make it 'wrong' per se.