Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Questions If you are a professional pilot or your work involves professional aviation please use this forum for questions. Enthusiasts, please use the 'Spectators Balcony' forum.

ANM/ kg vs C of G

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 10th August 2006 | 17:42
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
From: Canada
Grrr ANM/ kg vs C of G

Hello, can someone help?

I was told C of G does not affect ANM/ kg ...

ANM/kg looks similair to SAR.. or TAS/ FF
Would not a rear C of G = less induced drag = increased ANM / kg?

thanks
.80@410 is offline  
Old 11th August 2006 | 06:43
  #2 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,694
Likes: 15
From: Wellington,NZ
I've been told, and it makes sense, that rear CG makes a difference due less tailplane drag. Got the chance to try it in a PA28 (which has a rather forward CG anyway. 2 on board, trimmed, I climbed down the back. Pilot re-trimmed, aircraft gained about 8kt.
Understand that airlines plan for long-range flights to be at or near aft limit on landing for this reason.
Tarq57 is offline  
Old 11th August 2006 | 19:02
  #3 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,188
Likes: 6
From: La Belle Province
Just checked the flight planning manual for one of our aircraft and there is a 0.3% penalty or benefit per 1% cg shift depending on direction of shift - with aft cg giving better fuel burn, exactly as reasoned above.
Mad (Flt) Scientist 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 © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.