Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Abnormal Configuration
If this doesn't clear problem,
If aircraft control is not an immediate concern
If touchdown speed exceeds 182 knots GS, consider further weight reductions
Fly using frontside approach characteristics (Pitch = GS, Throttles = Speed)
Use immediate and maximum available reverse thrust
Off the top of my head in some Cessna 172s, 182s, the max flap extension was raised from 40 degrees to 30 degrees because of the possibility of "washing out the elevators in a slip."
I've also seen 707s and DC-8s with limited or disabled slat/ slot/ flap systems flown during maintenance ferry flights.....
I got the info from this site which looks authentic including the identification of the aircraft number. In addition, two other sources I have and trust agree to the data shown in this flight test. The P-51D shows 375 mph at SL using about 1630 hp. I think my comments are good.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/p51d-15342-level.jpg
The P-51D was introduced into the 8th AF in March '44. The Bf-109K was introduced in November, '44.
Six months in WWII during this time was a generation of aircraft development. In the summer and fall of 1944, a whole family of aircraft with much greater performance over the mainstay of WWII aircraft, was introduced on both sides. These include Fw-190D-9, Bf-109K, F4U-4, P-47M/N, P-51F (later H), Ta-152H, and others.
The XP-51F, the predecessor of the H, flew in Feb. 44. Unlike Germany, who was desperate to stop the hordes of P-51s, P-47s, B-17s, B-24s, and Brit planes, with advanced aircraft, the US, whose aircraft performance was adequate and the quantity was overwhelming, did not expedite new models. Had the need arose, there is no doubt that a P-51H or the similar P-51F could have been available in the fall of '44.
My multiple sources show that the P-51D was capable of 375 mph at SL at about 1640 hp.
The Bf-109K had 1800 horses available and could not achieve that (and my source for that is not Mike Williams site).
I don't know. While the data I referenced looks authentic and professional and states that it is flight test data (no tail numbers however), I have researched a lot and have not come up with support data for those values. Since I do not like depending on sole source data, especially when other data is available, I must withdraw my comments referencing F4U-4 climb rates.
Unfortunately, I do not have any data from you on climb for the Bf-109K, so the only data I could use was from Mike Williams site and this particular data (but not most at Mike's site) may be a bit suspect. I would be glad to update my data base to better data if you could give it to me.
But the bottom line the aircraft shown can be flown and were flown under certain conditions and it would not be unreasonable to believe that in a combat situation and in a foward combat area an aircraft like the Lysander would operate with its LE slats closed due to maintenance limitations...
I've also seen 707s and DC-8s with limited or disabled slat/ slot/ flap systems flown during maintenance ferry flights.....
For a single incident on a one time maintenance flight to be repaired. Maybe...
As for continuing normal operations, no way.
Nothing you have shown has any aircraft continuing to operate normally.
Yes, ferry flights out of Mojave Ca on aircraft removed from storage. Not the norm however.....Do you know for a fact the LE slats were disabled on these?
If you want to include short field landings in a Super Cub!?!?You are pilot correct? Have you made many frontside curve approaches?
If you want to include short field landings in a Super Cub!?!?
Page 47 of 'Whirlwind' by Victor Bingham-1987
I take your term as being on the front side of the curve as having both power and airspeed in a landing configuration....You can't be on the frontside of the curve in a Super Cub and make a short flield landing. You would be dead.
You are probably confusing terms here as I do not doubt your experience in a Cub.
What would the sustained load factor be for the Fw-190 A-5 by comparison to the A-8 ?
I take your term as being on the front side of the curve as having both power and airspeed in a landing configuration....
We are confusing terms here.
The front side of the power curve refers to the portion of the flight envelope where throttle controls airspeed and elevator controls altitude. We can only use the term "power curve" when referring to propeller aircraft.
This is also called the region of normal command. In this portion if we go slower, it requires less thrust and to go faster requires more thrust. Think of operating the aircraft at speeds at or faster than maximum range cruise or L/Dmax.
You can see why landing of the front side of the power curve is not normal or safe. You can also see why the C-17 manual calls for maximum braking and reverse thrust ASAP.
The backside of the power curve is the portion where throttle controls altitude and elevator controls airspeed such as landing.
This is also called the Region of reversed command. If for any reason, the aircraft is slowed down, more thrust is required to maintain altitude. Here going slower requires more thrust and going faster less thrust. Notice on landing that reducing thrust causes our sink rate to increase. Sink rate is velocity. The airplane needs this speed to remain aloft. However it takes a large amount of power to maintain level flight at approach speeds.
Because propeller aircraft are not thrust limited at low velocity, they can lead pilots to the wrong conclusions about what is going on with aircraft.
All the best,
Crumpp
Ok - I think I Gotcha - you're on final (say in a cub, no wind) nose high and using power to control pitch - if you lack the airspeed, you drop, if you lack the power you drop BUT if you had altitude you could lower the nose to pick up that precious airspeed without increasing power - am I understanding?
Thank you Crumpp, but is that with the A-5 running at 1.65ata ?
The A-5 weighed in at 4,100 kg and the A-8 4,300 kg, correct ?
The LW deployed a light version of the A-7 with MW-50, how would that compare ?
Today 04:49 PM
Hi FlyboyJ,
In this example you are on the backside of the power curve. You are using elevator to control airspeed and throttle to control sink rate.
That is a clear indicator you are on the backside.
I think Glider, Kurfürst and others have pointed us to a very important constraint: typical performance vs. best (or for that matter...worst) aircraft performance.
Hi FlyboyJ,
In this example you are on the backside of the power curve. You are using elevator to control airspeed and throttle to control sink rate.
That is a clear indicator you are on the backside.
OK guys, again sorry for going off topic....