Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Speed vs Turbulence

Wikiposts
Search
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Speed vs Turbulence

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 22nd Sep 2017, 14:10
  #41 (permalink)  
G-V
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: HK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@Goeasy

I agree with 99% of what you just said. There is no way of knowing how slowing down affected the ride unless we fly thru the same (theoretically and practically impossible) pocket of turbulence 2 times at two different airspeeds.

No question, at optimum cruise altitudes we cant slow down significantly. Sometimes not at all.
In my airplane, if we fly at optimum altitude .80 above FL430, we are already at Vref or very close to it so there is no margin to slow down anyway.

However, if you depart Shanghai to Tokyo, Chinese will keep you at FL260 for 250nm. That is where we have an option to fly 320 knots or as slow as 240 knots at moderate weights and still have safe margins to stall (like Vref +70 or so).

@FE Hoppy

In my airplane turb pen speed is 240 below 10000ft and 270/.80 above
It doesnt take a rocket scientist to realise that it doesnt work like that: 240 knots at 9999ft and 270 knots at 10001ft.

For me personally, if I have a very good margin to Vref at current configuration and altitude with PAX, I will slow down below 270 KIAS for light to moderate and above. If it is ferry flight, I normally never slow down below Vb.
G-V is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2017, 14:26
  #42 (permalink)  
G-V
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: HK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
After reading all the input, it appears that if turbulence imposes lift changes (ie vertical wind shear or horizontal turbulence which comes on the nose or tail) than its:

increase speed by 1% = increase bumps by 2%

If it is horizontal wind shear from 3 or 9 O'clock, than its linear as there is no lift change involved:

increase speed by 1% = increase bumps by 1%

Comments?
G-V is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2017, 15:21
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by G-V
@Goeasy

I agree with 99% of what you just said. There is no way of knowing how slowing down affected the ride unless we fly thru the same (theoretically and practically impossible) pocket of turbulence 2 times at two different airspeeds.

No question, at optimum cruise altitudes we cant slow down significantly. Sometimes not at all.
In my airplane, if we fly at optimum altitude .80 above FL430, we are already at Vref or very close to it so there is no margin to slow down anyway.

However, if you depart Shanghai to Tokyo, Chinese will keep you at FL260 for 250nm. That is where we have an option to fly 320 knots or as slow as 240 knots at moderate weights and still have safe margins to stall (like Vref +70 or so).

@FE Hoppy

In my airplane turb pen speed is 240 below 10000ft and 270/.80 above
It doesnt take a rocket scientist to realise that it doesnt work like that: 240 knots at 9999ft and 270 knots at 10001ft.

For me personally, if I have a very good margin to Vref at current configuration and altitude with PAX, I will slow down below 270 KIAS for light to moderate and above. If it is ferry flight, I normally never slow down below Vb.
lol
you are taking the mickey right?
Would you rather have 3 numbers to remember or a graph?
FE Hoppy is offline  
Old 22nd Sep 2017, 17:04
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Mordor
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
See the diagram of maneuver envelope AND gust envelope:


As you can see, the load for vertical gust is linear with speed, whereas the maneuver loads are proportional to v-squared.
Sidestick_n_Rudder is online now  
Old 23rd Sep 2017, 12:16
  #45 (permalink)  
G-V
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: HK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks Sidestick.

Can you please post the source? Thanks
G-V is offline  
Old 23rd Sep 2017, 23:39
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
GV https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/23.333
underfire is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2017, 06:40
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by oicur12.again
Yeah i always get a chuckle when lads reduce from .8 to .79 or .78 in turbulence. Makes zero difference to the ride down the back.
But it does get you away from the overspeed for which you will be fined!
Outtahere is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2017, 08:16
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Great posted illustrations from underfire and, Sidestick and rudder. Thanks.
Onceapilot is offline  
Old 28th Sep 2017, 15:19
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Reading
Age: 41
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Capn Bloggs
OK, next time you see that nice Cu in front, enter it at 320. Then do an orbit and hit it at 250. Tell how you get on. Oh, and ask the cabin crew what they thought about the rides.
Are you saying you slow by 70 knots for a Cumulus? Your approaches must be interesting. Or is this a slightly bizarre hypothetical example with no relation to what's being discussed or real world practice?

The point being made is that slowing by M.02 is not going to make any meaningful difference in ride. The advice is there to protect the structure of the plane in severe turbulence, in everyday stuff it really isn't necessary for that purpose, and will make no practical difference to the ride.
neila83 is offline  
Old 28th Sep 2017, 16:14
  #50 (permalink)  
G-V
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: HK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by neila83
Are you saying you slow by 70 knots for a Cumulus? Your approaches must be interesting. Or is this a slightly bizarre hypothetical example with no relation to what's being discussed or real world practice?
That was just an example.

Read the thread. Its not about slowing down from .82 to .80
G-V is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.