|
The early Velocities were capable of just
that. During flight tests, one entered what was termed "Deep Stall"- upon
stalling the canard it went into a vertical descent in an upright slightly
nose-high position. The descent rate was slow- I no longer have the
information but I believe it was between 3-500 FPM, and the attitude was
very stable. Various power and control inputs were tried to no effect. The
pilot even leaned out over the nose in an effort to push it down. It impacted a
river and he received back injuries as I recall.
One lesson from this which may apply to BRS
use- restraints and cushioning may be inadequate for a vertical impact. I know
of one instance where a Cirrus deployed the chute shortly after takeoff near
Indianapolis. The plane dropped into a pond and the passengers were rescued
but the pilot was knocked unconscious and drowned. The NTSB reported the
injuries as "serious"- chute use is not without risk. The pilot lost
control during cruise climb- would he have been competent to make an
emergency landing? Would the passengers have been better off if he had
tried? I don't know.
I agree with Hamid that using the chute as a
selling point may encourage pilots to buy an aircraft that is beyond their
ability. In Lancair's case that may be a moot point. How many
Lancair owners or builders have experience with the
performance they are buying at the time of purchase? The IV-P will
have roughly twice the speed and ceiling that I'm used to in the IO-550 Navion
that I'm currently flying. That deserves respect and requires preparation. I
plan to get some training at least once during the build time and again prior to
testing, which will be done professionally. -Bill Wade
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2007 8:10
PM
Subject: [LML] Re: lancair
announcement?
So, what if, instead of "pointing down", you
removed all forward speed and kept the aircraft pointed "flat"?
Assuming a stable no-yaw, no-bank, no-knot stall, (and no need for distance)
would the descent rate be reduced because the aircraft is now a falling
non-aerodynamic cross-shaped flat plate? Compared with the "best
glide" vertical speed?
And could that descent be converted to Vs 1.3 for
a contolled landing?
I suppose one would have to chuck all loose
weight items (maybe even a co-pilot) into the tailcone to help keep a
flat descent, and then haul them out again for elevator control on
landing.
JHK
|