View Single Post
  #90  
Old 04-15-2011, 08:15 AM
klem's Avatar
klem klem is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,653
Default

[QUOTE=Viper2000;261610]If you look at the g history for a later transonic dive (where there was a greater need to expedite entry due to the need to get high TAS at high altitude) you'll see that it was quite possible to dive very steeply without ever seeing negative g:

QUOTE]

Thanks for that Viper.

I'm really just a layman but looking at the dive figures it seems that quite a high rate of descent can be achieved in quite a short time without even hitting 0.5G.

The average rates of descent over the 2.7 sec periods are in the order of (without splitting hairs) and against g values
1........0.82.....0.65....0.7.......0.42.....0.28. .....0.29.......0.54
0........-2667...-2000..-2000...-5333...-12000...-15778...-14444

The g values seem quite benign and I did wonder if the g figures were variations in g value (although I would have expected them to be -ve values) which would have made the actual g values
1...0.18...0.35...0.3...0.58...0.72...0.71...0.46. ..0.56
That would take us into the questionable g territory for engine cutout at the beginning of the dive, perhaps less than 0.5 as is being speculated.

Anyway, thats even more speculation
__________________
klem
56 Squadron RAF "Firebirds"
http://firebirds.2ndtaf.org.uk/



ASUS Sabertooth X58 /i7 950 @ 4GHz / 6Gb DDR3 1600 CAS8 / EVGA GTX570 GPU 1.28Gb superclocked / Crucial 128Gb SSD SATA III 6Gb/s, 355Mb-215Mb Read-Write / 850W PSU
Windows 7 64 bit Home Premium / Samsung 22" 226BW @ 1680 x 1050 / TrackIR4 with TrackIR5 software / Saitek X52 Pro & Rudders
Reply With Quote