Windy bumpy flight in a 152

CamYZ125 said:
The forumla is the sqrt of (actual weight/max gross). Make sure you do the division, then take the square root, then multiply by the original. Thus, 95.9 is the new one.

BUT, and correct me if I'm wrong, these should be done in regards to KCAS, as our KIAS and KCAS are going to differ by a bit near stall speeds.
Click to expand...

Actually its not. It is the square root of the individual weights not both weights combined. Take a look at The Proficient Pilot, vol 1, p.31. The equations are listed there. They should be done using KIAS as its the speed the pilot will be able to visually see on his/her ASI and will vary little from the calibrated airspeed. The wing does however, "feel" calibrated airspeeds.
 
meritflyer said:
Actually its not. It is the square root of the individual weights not both weights combined. Take a look at The Proficient Pilot, vol 1, p.31. The equations are listed there. They should be done using KIAS as its the speed the pilot will be able to visually see on his/her ASI and will vary little from the calibrated airspeed. The wing does however, "feel" calibrated airspeeds.
Click to expand...

Hmm. I don't have that reference, and I don't feel that I know it well enough to argue. You may be right.
 
meritflyer said:
Actually its not. It is the square root of the individual weights not both weights combined. Take a look at The Proficient Pilot, vol 1, p.31. The equations are listed there. They should be done using KIAS as its the speed the pilot will be able to visually see on his/her ASI and will vary little from the calibrated airspeed. The wing does however, "feel" calibrated airspeeds.
Click to expand...
It shouldn't make a differance.
In math (√a)/(√b) = (√a/b)
just like (√a)x(√b) = (√axb)
 
Prove it...
icon10.gif
 
mtsu_av8er said:
Did you feel that the aircraft was out of control? Or, were you just being tossed around a little bit? Were loose items being tossed about the cabin? Did you feel at any time that you were beyond your capabilities?

If you're in doubt, slow the airplane down to Va, and ride it out. Don't fight the bumps, but don't let the turbulence take over the aircraft. Turbulence of this nature isn't harmful to the airplane, and it just takes some getting used to. Of course, the only way that you're going to get used to it is to go fly in it. If you're not sure about it, grab an instructor and go out in it a little bit. After a short time, you'll see that it's ok!

Good luck, and let us know how it works out!
Click to expand...

I was just being tossed a little bit. Y'all seem to be agreeing with my instructor that these bumps aren't that dangerous and you just plow through it with as little input as possible on the yoke and rudder.

I was actually going below Va...should I have sped up to Va?

p.s. Been meaning to tell you that your avatar cracks me up.
 
Texguy said:
I was actually going below Va...should I have sped up to Va?
Click to expand...

Slowing to Va is probably overkill outside of a T'storm, particularly in a C152. The a/c can pull 4.4 positive G's; plus, a/c can withstand higher load factors when produced by turbulence as opposed to pilot control inputs. Stalling in turbulence is no good either.
 
meritflyer said:
It sits within part 25 of the FARs. I'll send you a link. I was taught 1.6-1.7 Vs as a form of simplification by groundschool teacher (ret. UAL CA).
Click to expand...

I am skeptical as to the validity of that formula, because

1) Our aircraft are not certified under Part 25
2) The determination of Vb is more complicated than that.

Under Part 23, Vb is going to be higher than Va, but your formula would put it lower. Not reasonable.
 
Hi Alchemy...do you have a Mustang now? I think I saw you the other day.

Alchemy said:
I would not worry about the turbulence damaging the airplane unless it gets to the point where you cannot maintain a level flight attitude at all.
Click to expand...

Really I was more worried about me getting damaged. :)

In general you do not want to make abrupt control inputs to fight the turbulence because you could potentially increase the load factor on the airframe and cause structural damage. However, it takes extreme situations for damage to occur.

How much was the turbulence causing you to bank? 40 degrees? If it gets to the point where it is physically unomfortable, I would just get it on the ground and wait a few hours. Typically the winds die down later in the evening.
Click to expand...

Not even 30 degrees. And yes, by sunset it was calm.
 
Texguy said:
OK but now on windy days you're supposed to land a little fast, right?
Click to expand...

Ehhh . . . not necessarily. When the winds are gusting, you should add one half of the gust factor to your final approach speed. For example, you have a final approach speed of 75 knots. The winds are at 25 knots, with gusts to 35. This means that you have a gust factor of 10 knots. One half of that is 5 knots, which should be added to your final approach speed.
 
Texguy said:
Hi Alchemy...do you have a Mustang now? I think I saw you the other day.



Really I was more worried about me getting damaged. :)



Not even 30 degrees. And yes, by sunset it was calm.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I do have a mustang now! Where'd you see me you sneaky son of a gun? ;) Hopefully it wasn't on Guadalupe and 15th after I got rear ended the other day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top