| Crumpp |
08-08-2012 12:57 PM |
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
In the end it comes down to the last sentence as underlined here, Mr Mel Gough NACA :
|
Mel Gough was a test pilot for the NACA.
The quote is in the context of the meeting to determine stability and control standards for the individual services, the US Navy and Army Air Corps.
The NACA already had developed stability and control standards and Mel Gough was a co-developer of those standards.
The end result is the document posted below. It did not result in things being left up to "how much instability one can stand".
In fact, Mel Gough was one of the pioneers in eliminating the "pilot opinion" standard.
Quote:
The handling qualities of all future airplanes would be based on the parameters they outlined. Up to that time a pilot would fly an airplane, and the attitude was, “Well, if you go back and fly it the second time, it must be a good airplane.” Or the pilot would be asked, “What is it that you like about the plane?” And those early-time pioneer pilots would try to describe what it was they liked about the airplane. Whether the stick forces seemed too heavy or if the plane didn’t roll fast enough, etc. It was all kind of subjective stuff based on pilots’ opinions.
Then Mel and Bob decided, “Let’s quantify this. Let’s put some numbers to these opinions.” What is it that a pilot likes in a fighter as well as in all other categories of planes? What does the pilot want to feel? What response is he looking for? How much G [gravitational] force does he want to pull? How much can he handle in a roll? When does he get uncomfortable or reach his limit of physical response. Is any of this different in a fighter or a bomber? Does he expect the same stick forces and rudder forces in a fighter as he does in a bomber?
So all of that became a matter of negotiation, and between the two of them, the pilot and the engineer, they quantified the parameters. They wrote what I call a bible of stability and control and described what ideal handling qualities are in any type of aircraft. It was no longer up to the designer and manufacturer to produce and present a product that was satisfactory to their designers and test pilots. It was a mandate to meet the requirements outlined by NACA.
|
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...I69j8yvj-7PvKg
The result is attached. It is the quantified answer to the question, "How much instability can one stand?"
In England, Jeffery Quill was the Chief Test Pilot for the development of the Spitfire. If it met his standards in his opinion, without quantification, it went forth despite the some early testing investigating the longitudinal instability, his acknowledgement, and all the warnings found in the Operating Notes that are the result of longitudinal instability.
It was not until the design was evaluated under a set of measured and defined standards that the longitudinal instability was quantified and fixed in the Spitfire. |
