Easiest Warbird to Fly?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

I think I need a bit more info. As far as I know, there is only one cg point, which has three components, longitudinal (station line?), vertical (waterline?) and lateral, which every aircraft has. If you are saying that both the longitudinal and vertical cg components of the cg point must be closely maintained, I would understand, but I am confused about the two points.
Both the "horizontal" and "vertical" cg components had to be maintained - 2 CGs - Just like on some helicopters. Check out page 20A of the P-39Q flight manual.

Also with all this talk about the P-39 spinning, check out page 16, Paragraph 14, the first sentence! :lol:
 

Attachments

  • P-39Q[1].pdf
    5.2 MB · Views: 91
The notes on spin recovery are interesting.

-Power off, Stick full back, then apply full opposite rudder and (once rudder effect is noticable) push stick full foreward and apply ailerons. (rudder must be initially applied when spin is slowest)


Is the "stick full back" step usual for spin recovery?
 
The notes on spin recovery are interesting.

-Power off, Stick full back, then apply full opposite rudder and (once rudder effect is noticable) push stick full foreward and apply ailerons. (rudder must be initially applied when spin is slowest)


Is the "stick full back" step usual for spin recovery?

Normally you would go opposite rudder and full forward on the stick so the spin "breaks." Bell probably established that procedure to ensure that you would have rudder effectiveness prior to breaking the spin.
 
What were the training requirements for say the USAAC before they saw a front line fighter?

How many hours in what type?

Interesting that the P-40 was used as an advanced trainer but does this translate to say a P-47?
 
The notes on spin recovery are interesting.

-Power off, Stick full back, then apply full opposite rudder and (once rudder effect is noticable) push stick full foreward and apply ailerons. (rudder must be initially applied when spin is slowest)


Is the "stick full back" step usual for spin recovery?

When I flew T-34C's the spin recovery procedure was full opposite rudder and stick slightly fwd... break spin then recover from nose low. Every aircraft is different though.
 
Both the "horizontal" and "vertical" cg components had to be maintained - 2 CGs

More precisely the the cg range has to be within certain limits, in every aircraft. As the fuel and ammunitions is usually not at the cg, the exact cg location varies when the fuel and ammo is used. In case of P-39, the nose wheel (up or down) affects also, hence 2 cg's shown.
The P-39 nose gun ammunition , when used, had a noticeable effect on handling.
 
Normally you would go opposite rudder and full forward on the stick so the spin "breaks." Bell probably established that procedure to ensure that you would have rudder effectiveness prior to breaking the spin.

That's interesting because most "manuals" on the net tell you to put the stick in neutral position. But maybe I'm confusing spin and stall here.
 
More precisely the the cg range has to be within certain limits, in every aircraft. As the fuel and ammunitions is usually not at the cg, the exact cg location varies when the fuel and ammo is used. In case of P-39, the nose wheel (up or down) affects also, hence 2 cg's shown.
The P-39 nose gun ammunition , when used, had a noticeable effect on handling.
Here's something interesting form Wiki...


Some World War II airplanes were notoriously prone to flat spins when loaded erroneously, such as the Bell P-39 Airacobra. The P-39 was a unique design with the engine behind the pilot's seat and a large cannon in the front. Without ammunition or a counterbalance load in the nose compartment, the P-39's center of gravity was too far aft to recover from a spin. Soviet pilots did numerous tests of the P-39 and were able to demonstrate its dangerous spinning characteristics. Bell then issued a recommendation to bail out if the airplane entered a spin. North American P-51 Mustangs with auxiliary fuel tanks not originally designed for the P-51 suffered from the same problem. Similarly, the Vought F4U Corsair was reputed to have appalling stall and spin recovery characteristics, even in the "clean" (no stores) configuration.

That's interesting because most "manuals" on the net tell you to put the stick in neutral position. But maybe I'm confusing spin and stall here.
You might be confusing spin and stall recovery, although every plane is a little different. Most planes I've flown that can be spun have you apply opposite rudder and bring the sick full foward to berak the spin, reducing engine power first. In a Cessna 152 the "break" is very pronounced when you come forward with the yoke. In a Cessna 172 its really hard to get the aircraft spin even with full power.
 
In my experience you usually recover from a spin by pushing the stick forward and applying full opposite rudder (compared to spin), like FLYBOYJ said.
 
It should be noted that, in the specific case of the Airacobra, these were Flat spinns, so that may be part of the reason for the different recovery method. (that and it apears that the spin was rather difficult to break, the manual emphasizing how important it was to apply rudder when the spin was slowest, being an ocillating spin)


If the amunition load had such a significant effect, you'd think the spin characteristics of the 20 mm armed versions would be worse. (D-1, P-400, and some D-2's; as the Hispano M1 + 60 rounds would weight ~1/2 that of the 37 mm M4 with 30 rounds)
 
That's very true. They also take orders from the pilot to stop fuel flow etc. Say if an engine is damaged. and there feathering it
 
That's very true. They also take orders from the pilot to stop fuel flow etc. Say if an engine is damaged. and there feathering it
That was in WW2 - today the pilot "asks" the FE to do something....
 

Attachments

  • rfe.jpg
    rfe.jpg
    99.5 KB · Views: 184

Users who are viewing this thread

Back