Rolling 'G'
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2019
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
From: Sydney
Rolling 'G'
For the aerodynamicists
I'm looking into UPRT training for large jet aircraft, specifically Boeing.
AFM limitations provide values for + and - G but no 'rolling G' (combined roll and pitch), and UPRT recovery generally separates manoeuvers by pitch and roll (not combined). During nose low recovery, the nose is often raised (unintentionally) by inexperienced trainees as the lift vector becomes more vertical, whilst they are rolling wings level, and thus inducing greater G.
Am I guessing correctly that the + and - G limits are fixed whether in a turn, rolling or wings level?
Thanks in advance..
I'm looking into UPRT training for large jet aircraft, specifically Boeing.
AFM limitations provide values for + and - G but no 'rolling G' (combined roll and pitch), and UPRT recovery generally separates manoeuvers by pitch and roll (not combined). During nose low recovery, the nose is often raised (unintentionally) by inexperienced trainees as the lift vector becomes more vertical, whilst they are rolling wings level, and thus inducing greater G.
Am I guessing correctly that the + and - G limits are fixed whether in a turn, rolling or wings level?
Thanks in advance..
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 337
Likes: 82
From: Australia
It was my understanding that rolling G was limited to two thirds of the normal G limitation of the aircraft (so a 2.5G limit is reduced to 1.65 whilst rolling) - although I’m not 100% sure that applies to transport category aircraft, but it does apply to FAR 23 certified aircraft.
Certainly the G limit whilst rolling is NOT the same as the G limit in wings level flight.
In the UPRT simulator sessions that we do, there is a focus on rolling G and in fact the UPRT functions of the simulator give cautions to the instructor if the pilot conducts a recovery that triggers rolling G over a pre determined threshold.
Certainly the G limit whilst rolling is NOT the same as the G limit in wings level flight.
In the UPRT simulator sessions that we do, there is a focus on rolling G and in fact the UPRT functions of the simulator give cautions to the instructor if the pilot conducts a recovery that triggers rolling G over a pre determined threshold.
Joined: Mar 2005
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 6,563
Likes: 953
From: Aus
Another thread on the subject with test pilot comments
Why is Rolling G dangerous?
Some flight manuals specifically state two thirds rolling 'g'.
§ 23.349 - Rolling conditions.
(b) (b) The loads resulting from the aileron deflections and speeds specified in § 23.455, in combination with an airplane load factor of at least two thirds of the positive maneuvering load factor used for design.
Why is Rolling G dangerous?
Some flight manuals specifically state two thirds rolling 'g'.
§ 23.349 - Rolling conditions.
(b) (b) The loads resulting from the aileron deflections and speeds specified in § 23.455, in combination with an airplane load factor of at least two thirds of the positive maneuvering load factor used for design.
Last edited by megan; 6th December 2024 at 03:18.
Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 199
Likes: 41
From: Laredo, TX
You can roll and pull. You just have a limit. T-38 max weight, straight pull - 6g, asymmetric pull - 4.4g.
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 936
Likes: 67
From: USA
- something extremely startling and disorienting
- for the first time in their life
- there is no instrument in the cockpit showing this information
- as the airspeed is rapidly shooting toward the limit, forcing you to pull high G to level off
- the airplane is trimmed for a big pull without the pilot doing anything
- and there is an overwhelming instinct to pull also
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 86
From: England
Vessbot, jimtx, et al
You have to consider stick force per g in the human actions.
Commercial aircraft have much higher control forces than most military aircraft.
Then additively the ergonomics of the pitch combined with the rolling stick force
You have to consider stick force per g in the human actions.
Commercial aircraft have much higher control forces than most military aircraft.
Then additively the ergonomics of the pitch combined with the rolling stick force
Gender Faculty Specialist
Joined: Mar 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 2,325
Likes: 432
From: In your head.
On the other hand your poor average schmuck has been trained to roll and then pull. I think they'd do just fine.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 86
From: England
Chesty, #10
Spherical Objects
also
Many accidents show that what we think will happen is not what happens in real, surprising conditions.
-------
Megan et al, the FAR reference # 5 was for a part 23 aircraft; the op question relates to 'large jet aircraft'.
However Part 25 is similar
§ 25.349 Rolling conditions.
The airplane must be designed for loads resulting from the rolling conditions specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. Unbalanced aerodynamic moments about the center of gravity must be reacted in a rational or conservative manner, considering the principal masses furnishing the reacting inertia forces.
(a) Maneuvering. The following conditions, speeds, and aileron deflections (except as the deflections may be limited by pilot effort) must be considered in combination with an airplane load factor of zero and of two-thirds of the positive maneuvering factor used in design. In determining the required aileron deflections, the torsional flexibility of the wing must be considered in accordance with § 25.301(b):
Question:- is the design maneuvering factor greater than the AFM limit?
Spherical Objects
also
Many accidents show that what we think will happen is not what happens in real, surprising conditions.
-------
Megan et al, the FAR reference # 5 was for a part 23 aircraft; the op question relates to 'large jet aircraft'.
However Part 25 is similar
§ 25.349 Rolling conditions.
The airplane must be designed for loads resulting from the rolling conditions specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. Unbalanced aerodynamic moments about the center of gravity must be reacted in a rational or conservative manner, considering the principal masses furnishing the reacting inertia forces.
(a) Maneuvering. The following conditions, speeds, and aileron deflections (except as the deflections may be limited by pilot effort) must be considered in combination with an airplane load factor of zero and of two-thirds of the positive maneuvering factor used in design. In determining the required aileron deflections, the torsional flexibility of the wing must be considered in accordance with § 25.301(b):
Question:- is the design maneuvering factor greater than the AFM limit?
Gender Faculty Specialist
Joined: Mar 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 2,325
Likes: 432
From: In your head.
3721
Not my words but the words of someone who, for the best part of the last 40 years, has been a military and civilian experimental and developmental test pilot and test pilot tutor/instructor who has flown more types than you or I ever will, probably combined,
Not my words but the words of someone who, for the best part of the last 40 years, has been a military and civilian experimental and developmental test pilot and test pilot tutor/instructor who has flown more types than you or I ever will, probably combined,
Joined: Feb 2005
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 1,427
Likes: 5
From: Correr es mi destino por no llevar papel
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 255
Likes: 15
From: australia
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 86
From: England
Clandestino, zzuf, thanks,
Thus if the rolling 'g' limit is determined by the pilot's limiting stick force, or that the structure does not break (although it might twist) within the AFM 'g' limits, as determined by flight test, this implies that if you can do it (rolling g) then it's OK ?
From experience in a manual control commercial aircraft, the combined pitch and roll control forces at VMO / MM0 are very high, much higher than pilots might expect. Are simulators representative ?
For those who have been above VMO, the forces become extremely high which may require both pilots input for recovery.
This discussion should also raise the question of how such situations might be encountered, particularly if the aircraft started from a trimmed condition; and although some procedures (generically) require a check or reset of trim position to a normal range, trim should not be used to recover the aircraft because of the risk of exceeding the normal g limit.
Thus if the rolling 'g' limit is determined by the pilot's limiting stick force, or that the structure does not break (although it might twist) within the AFM 'g' limits, as determined by flight test, this implies that if you can do it (rolling g) then it's OK ?
From experience in a manual control commercial aircraft, the combined pitch and roll control forces at VMO / MM0 are very high, much higher than pilots might expect. Are simulators representative ?
For those who have been above VMO, the forces become extremely high which may require both pilots input for recovery.
This discussion should also raise the question of how such situations might be encountered, particularly if the aircraft started from a trimmed condition; and although some procedures (generically) require a check or reset of trim position to a normal range, trim should not be used to recover the aircraft because of the risk of exceeding the normal g limit.
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 255
Likes: 15
From: australia
Generally, the majority of test points are easy to fly but some can be extremely demanding and require a work up and a few attempts to obtain acceptable data.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 86
From: England
zzuf, yes missing, misinterpreting - most probable.
The quest was for a practical answer - if rolling 'g' is not limited by the AFM, then do crew have to be concerned by a combined pull / roll during an upset recovery.
My conclusion is no, and that in some circumstances the control input is difficult.
Furthermore, with the surprise in such situations then the likelihood of the crew recalling an obscure limit, if it exists, is remote.
The quest was for a practical answer - if rolling 'g' is not limited by the AFM, then do crew have to be concerned by a combined pull / roll during an upset recovery.
My conclusion is no, and that in some circumstances the control input is difficult.
Furthermore, with the surprise in such situations then the likelihood of the crew recalling an obscure limit, if it exists, is remote.
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 255
Likes: 15
From: australia
zzuf, yes missing, misinterpreting - most probable.
The quest was for a practical answer - if rolling 'g' is not limited by the AFM, then do crew have to be concerned by a combined pull / roll during an upset recovery.
My conclusion is no, and that in some circumstances the control input is difficult.
Furthermore, with the surprise in such situations then the likelihood of the crew recalling an obscure limit, if it exists, is remote.
The quest was for a practical answer - if rolling 'g' is not limited by the AFM, then do crew have to be concerned by a combined pull / roll during an upset recovery.
My conclusion is no, and that in some circumstances the control input is difficult.
Furthermore, with the surprise in such situations then the likelihood of the crew recalling an obscure limit, if it exists, is remote.
To find out what is required to be demonstrated in flight read the flight handling and performance parts of FAR 25. To get some idea of how to do, read the Advisory Circular - Flight Test Guide FAR25.
There are plenty of ways to break aircraft that are not covered by limitation in the AFM. What is the maximum rate of descent for landing, what is the maximum sideslip angle?
Also remember that once the aircraft is certificated there is no need to repeat any of the certification procedures.
A classic is training sections requiring a demonstration of VMC, in flight. That is a really good way to set up a loss of control situation.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 86
From: England
zzuf,
It's along time ago, age, and feeble mind. (been there, done that, can't remember)
For simplicity, a practical situation, pilots perspective: aircraft 2.5'g' AFM limit, with roll and pitch upset.
What 'g' should the crew observe during a combined roll and pitch recovery; noting post # 2 Colonel Klink.
It's along time ago, age, and feeble mind. (been there, done that, can't remember)
For simplicity, a practical situation, pilots perspective: aircraft 2.5'g' AFM limit, with roll and pitch upset.
What 'g' should the crew observe during a combined roll and pitch recovery; noting post # 2 Colonel Klink.