Quote from Jane-DoH:
"Quote from Chris Scott:
"...as soon as the (control wheel) is (fully) displaced, the spoilers will rise on the downgoing wing (to 43deg)......and the spoilers on the upgoing wing will retract. In this config, maximum roll rate is about 400deg per second."
"...as soon as the (control wheel) is (fully) displaced, the spoilers will rise on the downgoing wing (to 43deg)......and the spoilers on the upgoing wing will retract. In this config, maximum roll rate is about 400deg per second."
That's on par with some aerobatic aircraft...
Why would they have configured the control-system to produce such a heavy roll rate all the sudden at maximum control surface deflection? I thought the whole idea is so that it builds up in a predictable manner..."
Apologies, Jane: I completely missed your post. Did have some later misgivings re mine, though. Obviously, once the roll-spoilers on the upgoing wing have retracted, the situation is the same as if they had been retracted (as speedbrakes) in the first place.
However, I think the point my BAC 1-11 ground instructor was making may have been relating to the initial response. Due to the moment of inertia of a 30-ton aeroplane with a fairly large wingspan, the rate of increase of roll-rate is likely to be pedestrian in relation to lighter fast jets with small wingspans, like the contemporary English Electric (BAC) Lightning that he was comparing it with.
I think you have a point, except that it wouldn't happen all of a sudden on the One-Eleven. Mind you, the 200 series I first flew certainly was agile. If you look back to my post, you'll see reference to the roll-spoilers not "cracking" until a moderate amount of aileron displacement (unlike the B707). Being airline pilots, we tried not to pass that threshold if convenient, because of the slight aerodynamic rumble from the spoilers.
Regards,
Chris