Don't Snap Roll A Hawker

Dugie8 said:
Mmm. Pastrami
Click to expand...
When in BOS
sam-la-grassas-logo.png
 
hook_dupin said:
There's some technical reasons why it's a bad idea, but I would have to dig up my glasses and velcro shoes to present those. The short version is that control margins and force gradients may be very different in the negative angle-of-attack regime than in the normal one. Most airplanes are not tested in that high-negative AOA area because there isn't a need to do so.
Click to expand...

I'm a little curious what you mean here pertaining to negative AOA?

Also, I'd agree with you about not rolling aircraft for the sake of repercussions, particularly if it was not my own aircraft - and for the sake of the regulations. However, I'd like to see some data concerning how bad a constant G aileron roll is for a particular aircraft in say, a normal category with a 3.8G restriction (but perhaps not the real structural factor, but the given certification number). My argument (and obviously the contrarian point of view in this thread) is that airplanes aren't engineered for specific maneuvers, rather they're designed for certain maximum loads, gradients, pressures, accelerations, torque, etc - to cover a variety of maneuvers, turbulence, etc - at least from a Part 23 perspective http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?rgn=div5&node=14:1.0.1.3.10#ap14.1.23_11589.a

However, some aircraft may not have been tested in various regimes with x amount of variables and combination factors so however the engineering would be validated without the specific maneuver accomplished is realistically anyone's guess. As far as light aircraft goes, many manufactures would rather not assume extra liability, so they're perfectly happy to keep the normal or utility category.
 
ryan1234 said:
My argument (and obviously the contrarian point of view in this thread) is that airplanes aren't engineered for specific maneuvers, rather they're designed for certain maximum loads, gradients, pressures, accelerations, torque, etc - to cover a variety of maneuvers, turbulence, etc - at least from a Part 23 perspective http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?rgn=div5&node=14:1.0.1.3.10#ap14.1.23_11589.a
Click to expand...

Where it may come into play is that many fuel systems and engine lubrication systems won't work inverted, even if you are keeping a constant 1 G load on the airframe. That requires testing and, most planes won't undergo that sort of testing during certification, unless of course they are being certified to do that sort of thing.
 
BobDDuck said:
Where it may come into play is that many fuel systems and engine lubrication systems won't work inverted, even if you are keeping a constant 1 G load on the airframe. That requires testing and, most planes won't undergo that sort of testing during certification, unless of course they are being certified to do that sort of thing.
Click to expand...
Please clarify, this would be something I need to know. Airplanes experience negative Gs a lot in turbulence and they keep running. Perhaps the AHRS tells the FADEC "This guy is getting a little sporty, please shut down and record this event in your trend monitoring as will I"(read in a british accent).
 
Last edited:
CFI A&P said:
There is an old promotional sales video on YouTube of a Bellanca Viking doing medium aerobatics, including snap rolls. All approved maneuvers for that airplane. @fholbert
Click to expand...

Back in the day there were a couple of Super Vikings on the airshow circuit. They had a waver from the FAA, other than an inverted oil pump and smoke system they were stock. A Viking isn't certified for acrobatics but I believe it could be, it's a really strong aircraft. I always say it's the safest GA airplane to crash.

wingwalkers.jpg


cheerleaders.JPG




Factory Demo Video. Acro starts at about 6:00 minutes. For the record I don't roll, loop or hammer head stall my Viking.


Debbie Gary, she was married to the President of Bellanca at the time.
 
Last edited:
Derg said:
All of this braggadocio about rolling airplanes solidifies my nagging paranoia about renting airplanes.
Click to expand...

Well, it makes sense, look at all of the rental planes shedding wings and falling out of the sky! Can't believe you'd even consider it!
 
I think a more important debate is whether or not this should be shared on a public forum. The bravado or whatever want to call it, and notion that you can willingly break regulations because you are • super pilot is sad. Are you going to fall out of the sky for rolling a airplane, probably not. You want to brag about it, get off my lawn.
 
mikecweb said:
I think a more important debate is whether or not this should be shared on a public forum. The bravado or whatever want to call it, and notion that you can willingly break regulations because you are *I don't have the education to emote without using a curse word* super pilot is sad. Are you going to fall out of the sky for rolling a airplane, probably not. You want to brag about it, get off my lawn.
Click to expand...
Aka, never go full retard?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top