Definition of a wing over

[imcaeros]

Help - would a few of you please settle an argument between a colleague and myself by posting the definition of a 'wing-over'

Thanks.

[FNG]

The following definition was posted here a while back by John Farley. I quote:-

"A wingover is just a turn through 180 degrees that is started from a climb and finished in a dive.

For this manoeuvre to count (in the eyes of a casual observer) as a wingover it will probably have to start from a minimum of 45 deg climb and finish with a minimum of a 45 deg dive."


See also the following, from an aerobatics FAQ at http://acro.harvard.edu/ACRO/faq_aerobatics.html#basics

Wing Over

The Wing-Over is a competition maneuver in glider aerobatics. You pull up and at the same time bank the plane. When the bank increases past 45 degrees, the nose will start to drop while the bank keeps increasing and the plane keeps turning. Halfway through the maneuver, the plane has turned 90 degrees, the fuselage is level with the horizon and the bank is 90 degrees. The plane is above the original flight path. The nose then keeps dropping below the horizon and the plane keeps turning, while the bank is shallowed. When the bank drops below 45 degrees, the nose is pulled up towards the horizon and the plane reaches horizontal flight with wings level after 180 degrees of turn. At the completion of the maneuver, the plane is at the same altitude as on entry and flying in the opposite direction.

[chrisN]

As a glider pilot, I was told that the "wingover" as described for glider aerobatics (above) is also known as a "Chandelle". Is that a universal term for this manoeuvre, or a misnomer?

Another way of describing it is a 180 degree turn, carried out with a 45 degree bank, but in a plane at 45 degrees to the horizontal. It is started by changing from (fast) level flight to the 45 degree plane (straight pull up), then the turn ending up straight back but 45 degrees down, and finally pulling back to resume straight level flight.

[Evo]

Chandrelles and wingovers are similar, but are different things I think. See

http://acro.harvard.edu/ACRO/acro_figures.html#chandelle

(useful link, FNG :) )

[Keef]

I did chandelles when starting on the (aborted) FAA CPL. They achieve the same result as a wingover, but they don't go to 90 degrees of bank. Or mine didn't, anyway!

Not being an aerobatic pilot (wasn't designed for it!) I've not done anything so energetic, but I thought they were the things you see on films like Battle of Britain where the leader rolls over to 90 degrees of bank and pulls up going in the opposite direction, or diving on the "hostiles".

[Vedeneyev]

A chandelle is a turn through 180 degrees, as is a wingover - except in a chandelle you are climbing throughout the whole 180deg turn and roll out at just above stall speed at a higher altitude tha you started with. In a wingover the climb is stopped after 90deg of turn and allowed to develop into a dive, so that you come out with approx the same speed and altitude.

In powered aerobatics at least, the wingover is not considered an aerobatic maneouvre, but is used as an expeditious way to change direction 180degs without a loss of energy state, and also allows a great lookout into the turn in the direction of the next manouvre...

[FNG]

Wandering slightly off thread, and why not, simulated aerial fighting in the movies involves not so much wing overing, but quite a bit of split-arseing, as they would have called it at the time (Split-S: roll inverted and pull through a half loop). Early Spitfires and Hurricanes had to invert in order to follow Bf 109s in dives, but risked losing sight of the baddy if they did so.

PS: keef: as you are the resident sky-pilot/god-botherer, shouldn't all your posts be accompanied by the blue winged and haloed chappie fellow?

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Wandering slightly off thread, and why not, simulated aerial fighting in the movies involves not so much wing overing, but quite a bit of split-arseing, as they would have called it at the time (Split-S: roll inverted and pull through a half loop). Early Spitfires and Hurricanes had to invert in order to follow Bf 109s in dives, but risked losing sight of the baddy if they did so.

Actually, this is the best way to keep the baddie in sight, and is far more comfortable than 'pushing over', when the nose blocks any forward and downward view, you float up in the straps, and all the fag ends and other cr*p comes up from the cockpit floor into your face ;~)

I prefer the 'reverse half cuban', which the Yak 52, with its very responsive ailerons, does very well. 45 degree climb; half-roll to inverted (takes about 1 second) and continue the 45 egree climb; check wings level and still 45 degrees nose-up; pull through to level flight.

Very satisfying :~))

SSD

[imcaeros]

OK - I'm slightly confused. Put another way here's what I was shown to do in a PA28:

1. Full power and pitch for a minimum of 110 kts

2. 'Oik the nose up aiming for 45 degs. and at the sime time roll on 60 degs of bank.

3. Hold and allow the nose to drop, closing the power as it falls through the horizon.

4. more or less standard spiral dive recovery out onto the reciprical heading.

So does this qualify as a wingover?

[FNG]

Gosh, I always thought that PA 28s exploded into smitheroons if they exceeded 30 degrees of bank or ten degrees nose up, but you always learn stuff on pprune. Anyway, that sounds sort of wing-overy, imcaeros, and accords with Mr Farley's simple definition above, so have you won your wager?

SSD, it is true that you can get a good view on your back (in a variety of situations, or so I am told), but (concentrating on the flying for a minute) you might miss the evil dude whilst rolling (a MK 1 Spitfire with fabric ailerons might not roll as quickly as a Yak), and anyway he would be putting some distance on whilst you do this, which is why the 109s used a pushover and hard dive to evade pursuing Spitfires. They must have been fed up when the later models with improved carburation came along and bunted straight after them.

[imcaeros]

I have been trying to break the PA28 for about 5 years but my nerve always breaks before the aircraft :D

My colleague is a glider pilot who is now trying to invoke the 90 degree rule - pedant!

I hope the only thermal's he finds are at Christmas from his Mother:D

[Bottle Fatigue]

Very simple really, It's like a leg over, but more fun :p

[Skylark4]

Bottle Fatigue,
Takes longer too.

Mike W

[Flyin'Dutch']

S4

Obviously room for improvement in your technique!

:D

FD

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

SSD, it is true that you can get a good view on your back (in a variety of situations, or so I am told), but (concentrating on the flying for a minute) you might miss the evil dude whilst rolling (a MK 1 Spitfire with fabric ailerons might not roll as quickly as a Yak), and anyway he would be putting some distance on whilst you do this, which is why the 109s used a pushover and hard dive to evade pursuing Spitfires. They must have been fed up when the later models with improved carburation came along and bunted straight after them.

If you are the persuer, it would be quite easy to keep them in sight while rolling - then you pull down onto the target.

I was once driving up the side of a steep valley in the Yorkshire dales when a Tornado appeared in my rear-view mirror, flashed over us, and on reaching the top of the ridge, rolled inverted and pulled over into the next valley, where he presumably continued a half-roll to erect. I'm told this is standard RAF low level technique, since it keeps the (very close!) ground in sight and also gives you first sight of any baddies waiting on the other side of the ridge.

SSD