Va calculation question

riot shields

Well-Known Member
If i have to figure out maneuvering speed for a chandelle and my answer comes out to 94 but the poh says 105 for a c172s. what would be the correct one? i think the published 105 in the poh is based on max gross weight, is that correct? when i interpolate Va from max gross weight Va i get 101. so would you use 101 in the Va calculation or just go with 105?
 
If i have to figure out maneuvering speed for a chandelle and my answer comes out to 94 but the poh says 105 for a c172s. what would be the correct one? i think the published 105 in the poh is based on max gross weight, is that correct? when i interpolate Va from max gross weight Va i get 101. so would you use 101 in the Va calculation or just go with 105?

Yes, 90 at min weight (which you will probably never be at) and 105 at max gross.

I usually fly at max gross or at least pretty close to it, but I always use 90 kts as my Va just because I know I am safe there.
 
You could calculate Va by taking your current weight, devide by max gross, take the sqaure root of that number, then multiply by Va at max gross. Depending on weight I usually end up with somewhere around 92-95 in the 172.
 
If i have to figure out maneuvering speed for a chandelle and my answer comes out to 94 but the poh says 105 for a c172s. what would be the correct one? i think the published 105 in the poh is based on max gross weight, is that correct? when i interpolate Va from max gross weight Va i get 101. so would you use 101 in the Va calculation or just go with 105?

Sorta depends on what you're going for here. At 105, no matter what the weight, the control surfaces will remain attached to the airplane when you deflect them fully or abruptly. That's what Va is intended to ensure.

If, however, you want to make sure you can't exceed the load limit factor of 3.8 (actually 4.4 in utility category), then you'd need to scale according to weight. Interpolation doesn't work if you're using a linear interpolation, because it's actually a square root function, as another poster said.

You won't be getting anywhere close to 3.8 g's in a Chandelle, so the scaling of the Va is not particularly imporant, unless you just want to show the examiner you can do it.
 
Sorta depends on what you're going for here. At 105, no matter what the weight, the control surfaces will remain attached to the airplane when you deflect them fully or abruptly.

Not so much. Va decreases with weight. At max gross wt in the 72 it is 105. Everything after takeoff it will be less
 
Not so much. Va decreases with weight. At max gross wt in the 72 it is 105. Everything after takeoff it will be less

Va as defined by the FAA has nothing to do with weight.

Many manufacturers, at their option, do scale it with weight. Not all do.
 
At 105, no matter what the weight, the control surfaces will remain attached to the airplane when you deflect them fully or abruptly.

So when you are flying with half a tank, by yourself, and you enter some bad turbulence pulling back to 105 is good enough to keep the wings on? I guess at least you won't take anyone with you if that were to ever happen.

One thing that always bugged me is the placard in the 172, it just lists Maneuvering speed as 105 but does not list Va for the lighter side of the operations. I guess that is why it comes with a three inch thick POH in the backseat.
 
You could calculate Va by taking your current weight, devide by max gross, take the sqaure root of that number, then multiply by Va at max gross. Depending on weight I usually end up with somewhere around 92-95 in the 172.

where did you get this formula?
 
So when you are flying with half a tank, by yourself, and you enter some bad turbulence pulling back to 105 is good enough to keep the wings on? I guess at least you won't take anyone with you if that were to ever happen.

Notice what I said in my first post:
Sorta depends on what you're going for here. At 105, no matter what the weight, the control surfaces will remain attached to the airplane when you deflect them fully or abruptly. That's what Va is intended to ensure.
Va, as defined by the FAA, is a speed solely designed for protecting the control surfaces. It is not intended to protect you from turbulence or excessive load factor. Va, legally, can be set well above the speed that will protect you from exceeding the load factor limit.

Notice how Va is defined in the front of the C172 AFM:

"Do not make full or abrupt control movements above this speed"

That's why it reads that way.

The reason that confusion exists on the subject is that aerodynamics books refer to a speed called "maneuvering speed" that is defined as the sqrt(max load factor) * stall speed, which will indeed protect you from overloading the aircraft. Va is not intended to be this speed. However, Cessna has always made them the same and Piper often gets close.

There is a new V-speed that is intended to give you what you thought you had in Va. It's called "Vo". Newly certified airplanes should have this V-speed.

As for turbulence, slowing down to Va or Vo is probably excessive. Va will not necessarily prevent you from exceeding the load factor limit, but Vo will. However, the aircraft can withstand a larger load factor when the load factor does not result from deflection of the flight controls. The reason is the load is more evenly distributed about the aircraft, from what I understand. If you see a complete Vg diagram, it will often show part of the envelope exceeding the load factor limits. These are the gust lines that must be calculated for aircraft certification.

The thing about Vo in turbulence is that you don't want to stall the airplane any more than you want to bend the wings. If you know you have a little more leeway on the airspeed thing, you don't have to do either.

If you're skeptical, bring up the Part 23 Certification regs and do a search on Va.

One thing that always bugged me is the placard in the 172, it just lists Maneuvering speed as 105 but does not list Va for the lighter side of the operations. I guess that is why it comes with a three inch thick POH in the backseat.

I'm not sure what exists on the type certificate, but arguably there is only one Va for the aircraft, at max gross. Perhaps the placard is a reflection of that.
 
You know what...I don't remember. I'll try to find out.
Be interesting if you do. I don't remember where I first found the mathematical formula for the reduction of load-based speeds by a reduction in weight either. I do remember that I learned rate X time = distance in 7th grade, though ;)
 
You could calculate Va by taking your current weight, devide by max gross, take the sqaure root of that number, then multiply by Va at max gross. Depending on weight I usually end up with somewhere around 92-95 in the 172.

I use that formula as well...I got it from the flight data sheets we use before each flight. :) Actually since all V-speeds are calculated at max. gross weight, you could recalculate any V-speed for your aircraft's weight using that formula.
 
I use that formula as well...I got it from the flight data sheets we use before each flight. :) Actually since all V-speeds are calculated at max. gross weight, you could recalculate any V-speed for your aircraft's weight using that formula.

Some of them anyway. Vy and Vx aren't likely to be true to that formula, because the quantity of excess power and thrust change with airspeed.
 
Some of them anyway. Vy and Vx aren't likely to be true to that formula, because the quantity of excess power and thrust change with airspeed.
Correct me on this but I think the formula still holds but because Vx and Vy also change with altitude and power and thrust, not just load, change, it's more complicated.
 
I think the formula still holds but because Vx and Vy also change with altitude it's more complicated.

That depends on what you mean by "still holds".

Thrust required will scale with weight as per the formula, but the thrust available will not. It's the difference between the two that determines Vx, for instance. The drag on an airplane depends on CAS, so that won't change with a constant airspeed climb at a given weight, thus any change in the angle of climb occurs due to a change in the thrust available curve. There's also a two-fold effect of weight on climb angle:

Sin(Climb Angle) = (Thrust Available - Thrust Required)/Weight

So the weight effectively appears twice in that formula.

I would say the overall *trend* is the same as the formula dictates...at lighter weights you should climb at slower speeds, but the formula won't tell you exactly what that speed is and I don't know of any rule of thumb that will tell you so.
 
If i have to figure out maneuvering speed for a chandelle and my answer comes out to 94 but the poh says 105 for a c172s. what would be the correct one? i think the published 105 in the poh is based on max gross weight, is that correct? when i interpolate Va from max gross weight Va i get 101. so would you use 101 in the Va calculation or just go with 105?


So did your question get answered or were you left even more confused?

After reading this thread, I am not sure I understand Va anymore :)
 
actually according to my 152/172 POHs the Va increases with weight...

1670= 104
1500= 98
1350= 93
That is correct. Va increases as weight increases. The reason is because at a higher weight you have a higher stall speed, so you can go faster and use full and abrupt controll movements, and you'll stall rather than break the plane. At lower weights, you'll damage the plane before you stall, because your stall speed would be lower.
 
Back
Top