Good books on aerodynamics.

Whatusername

Whatusername

Well THIS is awkward!
Hey guys I'm trying to find some good reading for aerodynamics that can expand on whats in the Airplane Flying Handbook. Unfortunately what I have found gets way to technical. Any ideas?
 
I enjoyed this book:
images

http://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Guide-Aerodynamics-Hubert-Smith/dp/0830639012/

This is highly regarded as well:
images

http://www.amazon.com/Aerodynamics-Naval-Aviators-FAA-Handbooks/dp/156027140X/
 
rframe said:
I enjoyed this book:
images

http://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Guide-Aerodynamics-Hubert-Smith/dp/0830639012/
Click to expand...


I like this one too.

However, for the checkride, you must be able to reference the FAA material.

I would suggest referencing the Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge.

Yes, it will get into detail so take it slow.You will feel more confident about aerodynamics after.

If you get stuck or still feel in doubt about something, let me know and I will be glad to help.
 
DorkFromFL said:
However, for the checkride, you must reference FAA material.
Click to expand...

This is actually not true. You can use any resource you want on a check ride.

During my CFI check ride the FAA inspector said, "so what resources do you like to use?".
I said, "well primarily the FAA's PHAK and AFH to help explain concepts and maneuvers".

He sort of rolled his eyes and said that's fine and everyone says that because they think they need to use the FAA stuff but you can use whatever you want. He said there are only two resources the FAA cannot argue with, that is the FAR and the PTS.... everything else whether published by the FAA or someone else is all a matter of opinion, just be sure that whatever resource you refer to you really do understand. If you reference the Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators, you better be prepared to go into a lengthy discussion on the stuff you bring up. If your inspector or DPE has a degree in aeronautical engineering you may have just opened a door you didn't want to open.
 
Boris Badenov said:
http://www.amazon.com/Stick-Rudder-Explanation-Art-Flying/dp/0070362408/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341215069&sr=8-1&keywords=Stick and Rudder

If it's not in here, you don't REALLY need to know it. Some things don't change.
Click to expand...

I think it was brilliant for it's time, his emphasis on energy management and angle of attack are at the heart of all maneuvering. Because he was writing about concepts that weren't used in common language at the time, he makes up things... for example calling an airplane with low angle of attack and high airspeed one with high "buoyancy" or something like that... some of that may be confusing for a student, but overall it's good stuff.
 
rframe said:
This is actually not true. You can use any resource you want on a check ride.

During my CFI check ride the FAA inspector said, "so what resources do you like to use?".
I said, "well primarily the FAA's PHAK and AFH to help explain concepts and maneuvers".

He sort of rolled his eyes and said that's fine and everyone says that because they think they need to use the FAA stuff but you can use whatever you want. He said there are only two resources the FAA cannot argue with, that is the FAR and the PTS.... everything else whether published by the FAA or someone else is all a matter of opinion, just be sure that whatever resource you refer to you really do understand. If you reference the Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators, you better be prepared to go into a lengthy discussion on the stuff you bring up. If your inspector or DPE has a degree in aeronautical engineering you may have just opened a door you didn't want to open.
Click to expand...

I should rephrase my comment, you must be able to reference the publications prescribed by the practical test standards. Then if you decide to use other material, be prepared to show that the other material being used conveys substantially the same meaning as the PTS referenced materials (depending on your examiner of course). I would just exercise caution and make sure the information coincides if you decide to go that route.

Good Luck!!
 
I liked the Gleim books outline format. I was pretty slow at understanding Aerodynamics (and still have some studying to do), but I found the Gleim outlines to be very helpful combined with a super old FAA video on youtube to help me visualize everything.
 
It's not reading, but you might try looking at some of AOPA's online courses on aerodynamics. It's all the same stuff as in the books, but sometimes seeing it presented in a different way helps with the understanding,
 
TFaudree_ERAU said:
Here's a free PDF version
http://www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/media/00-80T-80.pdf
Click to expand...

WOOF. Too much math. It instantly goes into "reference book" category.

On the other hand ... I'm absolutely thrilled that that's available as a pdf. I'd been avoiding it for years because I had guessed it'd be like that -- I'm an intuitive rather than analytical thinker, myself. Still, might not hurt to give it a read through and gloss over the "math-y" bits. Something I can point my students to, maybe.

~Fox
 
Acrofox said:
WOOF. Too much math. It instantly goes into "reference book" category.
Click to expand...

Not to be one of those douchenozzles who replies to his own post, but ... I retract this statement. Should have read further before opening my muzzle.

Good explanations, supported by math. I like!

~Fox
 
Thanks all for the help. I'm going to polish off the FAA's handbook on weather then start looking at Stick and Rudder and the Naval Aviator's guide. I also want to sit down with the FOI again but I want to re-review some of this other stuff.

SixAlpha said:
It's not reading, but you might try looking at some of AOPA's online courses on aerodynamics. It's all the same stuff as in the books, but sometimes seeing it presented in a different way helps with the understanding,
Click to expand...

I'm going to look into this some more as well.

Boris Badenov said:
If it's not in here, you don't REALLY need to know it. Some things don't change.
Click to expand...

I can agree to that to an extent. I guess part of the problem is there is some stuff I would like to expand on. If nothing else it can so I can satisfy my own curiosity.
 
inigo88 said:
You said "good book on aerodynamics." But you never said "good book on aerodynamics for pilots."
Click to expand...

When I was a kid, maybe around 14 years old, and could think of nothing but flying (OK that hasn't changed a lot :) )... I wanted to design an airplane, so I ordered a book on aerodynamics, it was an introductory text book like that. I was so excited when it came in the mail, I ripped open the package and cracked open the book and it was all equations with squiggly lines and I was like "WTF is this!" :eek:

I tried soooo hard to understand it but being an average math student I didn't even know what I was looking at, LOL. I ended up sending that book back and bought the Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics, that book actually took me through how to design an airplane from selecting an airfoil, to sizing a power plant, to tail surface areas, all that good stuff, it was such an amazing book. Now, granted, the book is simplified for the non-engineer and not really intended for the serious aircraft designer but it was so illuminating on how the basics of aerodynamics work that I literally drew up "plans" for an ultralight (you know, as best a 14 year old kid can, hehe). I wish I still had those drawings, that was such an amazing time of discovery for me.
 
rframe said:
When I was a kid, maybe around 14 years old, and could think of nothing but flying (OK that hasn't changed a lot :) )... I wanted to design an airplane, so I ordered a book on aerodynamics, it was an introductory text book like that. I was so excited when it came in the mail, I ripped open the package and cracked open the book and it was all equations with squiggly lines and I was like "WTF is this!" :eek:

I tried soooo hard to understand it but being an average math student I didn't even know what I was looking at, LOL. I ended up sending that book back and bought the Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics, that book actually took me through how to design an airplane from selecting an airfoil, to sizing a power plant, to tail surface areas, all that good stuff, it was such an amazing book. Now, granted, the book is simplified for the non-engineer and not really intended for the serious aircraft designer but it was so illuminating on how the basics of aerodynamics work that I literally drew up "plans" for an ultralight (you know, as best a 14 year old kid can, hehe). I wish I still had those drawings, that was such an amazing time of discovery for me.
Click to expand...

That's awesome, and I spent a large part of my childhood doing the same. I was also really hoping I could just crack open an Aero Engineering level Aerodynamics book and understand what was going on, but I honestly probably still can't (yet). Aerodynamics just has an absurd amount of prerequisites. Because it deals with "compressible flow" (any time the Reynold's Number Re is larger than 0.3 we have to ditch the "incompressible" approximation), you need to take into account the gas thermodynamics of the atmosphere (especially at supersonic speed). That means at the very least, by the time you crack open that book they expect you've taken the whole calculus series with differential equations and linear algebra, the physics series, the general chemistry series, two quarters of engineering Fluid Mechanics and Engineering Thermodynamics. I'm not mentioning all that to sound elitist. On the contrary, I did all that (still not sure how) and I STILL don't understand half the material. :)

That being said, the author John D Anderson is (or was) the curator of the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum in Washington DC. He's not only an aerospace engineer, but an avid aviation historian. I own some of his other books, and amidst the math he manages to dedicate many pages to historical applications (like the development of an X-plane for example) and HOW the math related to it.

You're absolutely right though, the above book is more of a reference, to be occasionally taken off the shelf if you want to REALLY geek out. A far better introductory text by Anderson is called "Introduction to Flight." It still has math, but it's actually written as a survey of Aerospace Engineering combined with an aviation history book. In my opinion it rivals "Aerodynamics For Naval Aviators." The material is less dry, and the pictures and figures are a lot better. That being said, I own both. :)

Anderson, "Introduction to Flight": http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/007109282X/ref=aw_d_detail?pd=1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top