Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Other Aircrew Forums > Flight Testing
Reload this Page >

VG's on light twins

Wikiposts
Search
Flight Testing A forum for test pilots, flight test engineers, observers, telemetry and instrumentation engineers and anybody else involved in the demanding and complex business of testing aeroplanes, helicopters and equipment.

VG's on light twins

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 15th Oct 2007, 01:15
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
VG's on light twins

Some light twins, Piper Chieftain for example, have a gross weight increase when fitted with these after market STC items. I know what VG's do in terms of energising the boundary layer but not sure how it enables a weight increase. What otherwise limiting factor is being enhanced? Many Thanks.
Brian Abraham is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2007, 03:47
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Den Haag
Age: 57
Posts: 6,260
Received 334 Likes on 186 Posts
I had assumed it was a Stall Speed function, and some research seems to bear this out. I found this article which seems to cover the issues (around page 6/7 I think)

http://cobweb.ecn.purdue.edu/~andris...001/twnvgs.pdf
212man is online now  
Old 15th Oct 2007, 04:32
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Millington
Age: 59
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The gross weight increase offered by the VG STC is a direct
result of the reduction in stall speed. Under the FARs, light twins are required to have an engine-out rate-of-climb (in feet/minute) equal to .027 times the square of Vso (in knots). If you lower Vso by a few knots, the required single-engine ROC goes down. At the same time,
That requirement is outdated, from CAR 3. The current Part 23 climb requirement is not related to the stall speed.
Nathan Parker is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2007, 05:36
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
212man - thanks, its marvellous how you can't see the woods for the trees at times. So obvious. Will have to improve internet skill apparently. Trawled net for info but all I found dealt with resolving aero issues on heavies. But still don't see how it can increase the ZFW.

Nathan - FAR 23.67 details the climb requirements and are based on Vso.
Brian Abraham is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2007, 06:42
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Den Haag
Age: 57
Posts: 6,260
Received 334 Likes on 186 Posts
Nathan, I assume you mean the RoC climb requirement has changed and is now a climb gradient requirement?:

http://rgl.faa.gov/REGULATORY_AND_GU...8?OpenDocument
212man is online now  
Old 15th Oct 2007, 14:14
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Millington
Age: 59
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nathan, I assume you mean the RoC climb requirement has changed and is now a climb gradient requirement?:
Yes.

(Now gotta make the message longer.)
Nathan Parker is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2007, 14:18
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Millington
Age: 59
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Brian Abraham
Nathan - FAR 23.67 details the climb requirements and are based on Vso.[
Yes, the existence of a climb requirement depends on Vs0, but the actual rate of climb does not.
Nathan Parker is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2007, 20:36
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rate-of-climb

Just an ahah - the requrement for some aircraft (<6000 lbs, reciprocating engines) IAW FAR 23.67(a)(2) is to determine a ROC at 5000 ft., it does not mean the aircraft can climb, this could and sometimes is a minus (decent) number.
No_7DAD is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2007, 10:21
  #9 (permalink)  

Why do it if it's not fun?
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I was about start a new thread, linking to a question I've asked in Private Flying. Then I saw this thread, and realised it's very closely connected to my question.

I wonder if I could trouble you to click on this link and add any comments?

Thanks!

FFF
---------------
FlyingForFun 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.