As a graduate level aeronautical engineer, I can assure you that only
magic and no aerodynamics is involved in getting "on the step". I also
recall an article in AOPA Pilot by Barry Schiff (a man whose wisdom
I have a great respect for) thoroughly debunking the step myth.
Now in hydrodynamics, planing theory, that is another matter! ;
)
Pops
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa@aztec.houxou.com
Subject: RE: Inflight Variable Pitch Props
Here's the URL for Linda Pendleton's article:
http://www.avweb.com/articles/myths/
There is no "authoritative source" on this subject because by definition one
can not prove a myth.
Best regards,
Rob Housman
A070
-----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of Fred Fillinger
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 9:14 PM
Subject: Re: Inflight Variable Pitch Props
I'm forever curious about that "on the step." Is there an
authoritative source that documents the aerodynamics involved?
Anybody? Three texts I have (Hoerner, Raimer, and Strojnik) don't
cite it at all.
A Google.com internet search I did only debunks it, if one ignores the
positive comments on non-authoritative pages like discussion group
archives (and floatplanes of course). Avweb.com has an article by
Linda Pendleton, who works for King Schools (videotape flight
training) and author of "Flying Jets." Myth she says, and proves so
in a Mooney. A paper by Jim Irwin, V.P. S-Tec Systems (the autopilot
people) says "old wives tale." Another posits a possible source for
this "urban legend," namely inefficient designs from the "old days"
where cruise wasn't too far along the front side of power curve, and
it seemed you couldn't get there unless you zoomed down at it.
Can't afford to bet on the issue, though. Homebuilt aircraft builder,
you know.
Regards,
Fred F., A063
> Tony Krzyzewski wrote:
> ...
> UBD maxes out at 137kias, 65% cruise is 120kias though you
> can get her onto the step a bit more if you are lucky and
> it'll creep up closer to 125kias.
> ....
|