Posted for "Robert Overmars" <robert.overmars@tiscali.it>:

 Brent Regan wrote:
 
 "Given the 745 available horsepower (near sea level) and the 2,067 RPM prop
speed I calculated an engine reaction torque of 1,893 foot pounds, roughly the
same as putting a 200 pound weight about mid span on the aileron"
 
 
 No argument about that Brent but I think there's more involved. To counter
the torque the pilot manipulates the control to drop the port aileron for more
lift on that side. Corresponding to that, the stbd aileron is raised and
reduces the lift on the stbd side, so to balance the torque we have an
increase of lift on the port side but a reduction of lift on the stbd. Lets
for the sake of the illustration say that the increase of lift on the port
outboard section is 100lbs and the reduction of lift on the stbd outboard
section is 100 lbs we've balanced the torque but have a net reduction of lift
by 100lbs necessitating a small increase in pitch AoA to produce 100lbs more
lift to maintain a stable flight path.
 
 Now in this situation we have a slight increase in AoA, plus the port aileron
is lowered which results in the port outboard section working at a higher
coefficient of lift but which brings it  closer to the stalling AoA. Remember
basic training? ...drop an aileron and the upwash angle at the wingtip
increases. With more upwash on the port outboard section than on the stbd
which brings it closer to the stalling AoA than the stbd,  pull more backstick
to flatten out the flightpath.... and I'm getting that that queasy feeling
 down in the stomach just in this little thought experiment.
 
 Then it gets really messy when considering P factor and prop wash on the vert
stab, need a Cray brain to work all that out.
 
 Blame it on the Sunday run endorphins....
 
 ciao,
 
 Roberto d'Italia.