Flying "on the step"?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: East of West and North of South
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Two aircraft that I have flown previously, the DC-6 and the F.27 (and FH.227), achieved much better cruise performance if climbed (for example) 200 feet higher than the desired cruise level and then slowly descended while accelerated to the desired cruise airspeed."
Why not just let the aircraft accelerate in level flight with climb power? Why the need to climb and descend first?
Why not just let the aircraft accelerate in level flight with climb power? Why the need to climb and descend first?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CosmoK---
Descend at climb power to achieve better cruise airspeed. Works on the DC-4 and DC-7 as well. But, oddly, not on the L-1649A Connie. Did not get to fly this model all that long as the chief pilot crashed it at SCK. Tried a short landing and tore the gear clean off.
Pigboat--
Yes indeed, same on the 532-7 powered aircraft, except that if desired, cruise at 742C altho hot section longevity is not enhanced.
Descend at climb power to achieve better cruise airspeed. Works on the DC-4 and DC-7 as well. But, oddly, not on the L-1649A Connie. Did not get to fly this model all that long as the chief pilot crashed it at SCK. Tried a short landing and tore the gear clean off.
Pigboat--
Yes indeed, same on the 532-7 powered aircraft, except that if desired, cruise at 742C altho hot section longevity is not enhanced.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: very close to STN!!
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
okay, this seems to be an insider's thread.
i backed up the "step" captains with the two longests replies on this thread and get ignored.
i'm taking my toys and going home.
i backed up the "step" captains with the two longests replies on this thread and get ignored.
i'm taking my toys and going home.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whoa, stator vane, don't run off just yet.
Would have to agree with you about some F/O's, all mouth and no brains. Fortunately they are in the minority.
Example-- high station outbound on the Kos vor approach, and sunnyboy in the right seat has now suddenly "forgotten" about proper configuration and speeds, and on final appears to delight at diving for the runway.
And this in a TriStar. Parked at the gate, his highness says...."well, that was not all that bad, was it Captain?" After more than 10,000 hours in the L10, I have to admit that he was positivly the worst that I have seen, and this includes ten years in SV. 'Course, according to him, he was ace of the base.
Would have to agree with you about some F/O's, all mouth and no brains. Fortunately they are in the minority.
Example-- high station outbound on the Kos vor approach, and sunnyboy in the right seat has now suddenly "forgotten" about proper configuration and speeds, and on final appears to delight at diving for the runway.
And this in a TriStar. Parked at the gate, his highness says...."well, that was not all that bad, was it Captain?" After more than 10,000 hours in the L10, I have to admit that he was positivly the worst that I have seen, and this includes ten years in SV. 'Course, according to him, he was ace of the base.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: very close to STN!!
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
411;
thanks for the response.
sometimes i wonder if i am from another planet.
it feels like it sometimes.
probably was in a bad mood last night.
southwest airlines told me NO for the second time.
they will not get another chance.
4500+ hours in the left seat of a B737 with no scratches and they say NO. they must want some shiney buttons that will always say YES or somebody who knows somebody.
this interview thing is worse than dating girls.
maybe i said something about being on the step during the interview.
thanks for the response.
sometimes i wonder if i am from another planet.
it feels like it sometimes.
probably was in a bad mood last night.
southwest airlines told me NO for the second time.
they will not get another chance.
4500+ hours in the left seat of a B737 with no scratches and they say NO. they must want some shiney buttons that will always say YES or somebody who knows somebody.
this interview thing is worse than dating girls.
maybe i said something about being on the step during the interview.
still learning....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: USA
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to hear aobut the turn-down, stator vane. Hang in there.
I'm part of the hiring process at my airline, and I'm frequently PO'd at the results. Human Resources has veto authority and there is nothing we (flight ops) can do about it. We've lost some damn fine pilots because of HR. That's life in the majors today.
I'm part of the hiring process at my airline, and I'm frequently PO'd at the results. Human Resources has veto authority and there is nothing we (flight ops) can do about it. We've lost some damn fine pilots because of HR. That's life in the majors today.
Welcome back, stator. I thought your posts were to the point. Sorry if I gave the impression of trying to create anything other than a straight statement of fact.
Some people may learn from it, some may not. Call me cynical, but I don't much care one way or another.
Some people may learn from it, some may not. Call me cynical, but I don't much care one way or another.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: very close to STN!!
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i need to get a life!!
last night i woke up thinking of this "on the step" thread.
i could see it as a picture of our learning process in flying. (and every other part of our lifes) we have to go a little beyond our present capabilities and then settle back down on the right side of the "step"
and there seems to be a fine line between confidence and arrogance. if we think we are a bit above everyone else and better, it usually isn't long before some "turbulence" comes along and if we are really smart, we settle back down a bit and achieve a balance of confidence.
and at least for me, when i am in the air, i realize that there have been many times that those who were a lot better than i could ever be, have encountered things that were beyond their capabilities. and in that confidence that we all have should be a little package of caution since we move in a medium that still has some unseen surprizes.
"on the step"
i remember when i was flight instructing in alaska, that i was reprimanded by the operator for making my INITIAL students read accident reports. i wouldn't stop doing it. i thought that from the first day, they needed to realize that they were starting an endeavor that definitely had some hazards and that these accident reports will explain why we instructors were so adamant about certain things.
on the step in a risk management endeavor.
last night i woke up thinking of this "on the step" thread.
i could see it as a picture of our learning process in flying. (and every other part of our lifes) we have to go a little beyond our present capabilities and then settle back down on the right side of the "step"
and there seems to be a fine line between confidence and arrogance. if we think we are a bit above everyone else and better, it usually isn't long before some "turbulence" comes along and if we are really smart, we settle back down a bit and achieve a balance of confidence.
and at least for me, when i am in the air, i realize that there have been many times that those who were a lot better than i could ever be, have encountered things that were beyond their capabilities. and in that confidence that we all have should be a little package of caution since we move in a medium that still has some unseen surprizes.
"on the step"
i remember when i was flight instructing in alaska, that i was reprimanded by the operator for making my INITIAL students read accident reports. i wouldn't stop doing it. i thought that from the first day, they needed to realize that they were starting an endeavor that definitely had some hazards and that these accident reports will explain why we instructors were so adamant about certain things.
on the step in a risk management endeavor.
Moderator
If I may make a couple of brief observations.
As a first approximation, cruise performance is a matter of thrust minus drag. If one approaches the desired cruise speed from below with the book thrust figure, then one would never quite get to the target speed as there is a need for a bit of excess thrust to do so.
Conversely, if the speed is approached from above with the nominated cruise thrust set, then speed will progressively decrease to and, usually, slightly below target speed as the atmospheric bumps and thumps take their toll. It is a bit of a battle on a small scale. Depending on the state of the air mass, this might occur comparatively quickly or slowly. Also the particular drag polar shape will influence the degree to which the effect is seen.
Whether you get into the initial higher speed state by using excess thrust or descending from a slightly higher level is immaterial.
I have always presumed that this phenomenon is what people mean when they refer to "the step" although, clearly, the term is an historical reference to flying boats and planing speedboats and the like as one of our colleagues observed in an earlier post.
I fail to see why it is something which people get excited about. The manufacturer gives us a bunch of numbers for performance and the ops engineers monitor and, if necessary, modify the figures for individual aircraft in line service.
Within the constraints of practical operation, we can probably squeeze a few knots out of the old girl from time to time - but it is a small matter.
Some aircraft, such as the F27, have a quite pronounced "low drag bucket" in the drag curve shape in the region of cruise alpha for all the obvious reasons. The term is quite apt as the curve has such a shape.
As a first approximation, cruise performance is a matter of thrust minus drag. If one approaches the desired cruise speed from below with the book thrust figure, then one would never quite get to the target speed as there is a need for a bit of excess thrust to do so.
Conversely, if the speed is approached from above with the nominated cruise thrust set, then speed will progressively decrease to and, usually, slightly below target speed as the atmospheric bumps and thumps take their toll. It is a bit of a battle on a small scale. Depending on the state of the air mass, this might occur comparatively quickly or slowly. Also the particular drag polar shape will influence the degree to which the effect is seen.
Whether you get into the initial higher speed state by using excess thrust or descending from a slightly higher level is immaterial.
I have always presumed that this phenomenon is what people mean when they refer to "the step" although, clearly, the term is an historical reference to flying boats and planing speedboats and the like as one of our colleagues observed in an earlier post.
I fail to see why it is something which people get excited about. The manufacturer gives us a bunch of numbers for performance and the ops engineers monitor and, if necessary, modify the figures for individual aircraft in line service.
Within the constraints of practical operation, we can probably squeeze a few knots out of the old girl from time to time - but it is a small matter.
Some aircraft, such as the F27, have a quite pronounced "low drag bucket" in the drag curve shape in the region of cruise alpha for all the obvious reasons. The term is quite apt as the curve has such a shape.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Norway
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Step or no step:
Stator vane: What are you, some kind of hobby-psychologist?
Just because an FO doesn't "believe" in your beloved step, doesn't mean he's unable to take any advice or helpful hints that his more experienced FC is providing him with.
WHAT ATTITUDE? The "I have a brain, and can think for myself" -attitude?
I understand that you have had some bad experiences with your FPs, but you must surely have had some bad experiences with your FCs over the years too. If you're able to look that far back...?
I always try to learn as much as I can from my very experienced captains. Nevertheless I am equipped with something called sound judgement. I let most of the hints and advices I recieve become a part of my flying skills and experience. But some of them I reject, because my own sound judgement and gut feeling tells me to.
I had a captain who adviced me to pull the throttles "just a tiny bit" into the Beta-range if we were hot and high.
Judging from your reply to Vmu, you'd expect me to "buy" everything any FCs tells me. What kind of attitude is that? What do you think you are: "God's gift to aviation"? Just because you have this "step"-thing all figured out?
Of course there are FOs that do stupid things, due to their lack of experience. (That's why they are FOs, isn't it?)
But there certainly are FCs around who's only merit is the number of flight hours in their log book. And not much more.
There are plenty of others in this forum who disagree with you on this little "step"-debate. Why let go of all your supressed anger on an FO that disagrees with you, just because you are obviously having your period?
So please: Pick on someone on your own size.
And don't jump to conclusions.
I hate that.
Nick.
Stator vane: What are you, some kind of hobby-psychologist?
Just because an FO doesn't "believe" in your beloved step, doesn't mean he's unable to take any advice or helpful hints that his more experienced FC is providing him with.
...that attitude is dangerous, especially in an aircraft.
I understand that you have had some bad experiences with your FPs, but you must surely have had some bad experiences with your FCs over the years too. If you're able to look that far back...?
I always try to learn as much as I can from my very experienced captains. Nevertheless I am equipped with something called sound judgement. I let most of the hints and advices I recieve become a part of my flying skills and experience. But some of them I reject, because my own sound judgement and gut feeling tells me to.
I had a captain who adviced me to pull the throttles "just a tiny bit" into the Beta-range if we were hot and high.
Judging from your reply to Vmu, you'd expect me to "buy" everything any FCs tells me. What kind of attitude is that? What do you think you are: "God's gift to aviation"? Just because you have this "step"-thing all figured out?
Of course there are FOs that do stupid things, due to their lack of experience. (That's why they are FOs, isn't it?)
But there certainly are FCs around who's only merit is the number of flight hours in their log book. And not much more.
There are plenty of others in this forum who disagree with you on this little "step"-debate. Why let go of all your supressed anger on an FO that disagrees with you, just because you are obviously having your period?
So please: Pick on someone on your own size.
And don't jump to conclusions.
I hate that.
Nick.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Scandinavia
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wish i had not written the "i hate" part of my first post. To sound arrogant or provoke anyone was not my intention. It has also caused this thread to drift away from the topic.
John_T: You seem to be the first engineer on this thread. A couple of questions; Isn't a "drag bucket" on the drag vs alpha curve rather normal on modern airfoils? As far as I know this does not imply that there is a "bucket" in the drag vs airspeed curve. The way I understand the "pro step" people, they argue that there is a bucket in the drag vs airspeed curve giving lower( or perhaps equal) drag as airspeed is increased. Have i understood things correctly?
John_T: You seem to be the first engineer on this thread. A couple of questions; Isn't a "drag bucket" on the drag vs alpha curve rather normal on modern airfoils? As far as I know this does not imply that there is a "bucket" in the drag vs airspeed curve. The way I understand the "pro step" people, they argue that there is a bucket in the drag vs airspeed curve giving lower( or perhaps equal) drag as airspeed is increased. Have i understood things correctly?
Moderator
I only mentioned the situation on the F27 as I did a study on that wing many years ago and it was mentioned in an earlier post. I have no position regarding "the step".
[ 08 August 2001: Message edited by: john_tullamarine ]
[ 08 August 2001: Message edited by: john_tullamarine ]
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: very close to STN!!
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vmu;
i will make a public apology for as figaro described as "picking on you" if that is how you took it.
the thread started as a question about "on the step" and it's validity. your response went into another area of how you were embarrassed by those captains who used the term and that it indicated their ignorance of performance.
my response merely aimmed to point out that implying that your captain is stupid for using a terminology that may not be so precise yet does indeed describe a valid description of curves and lines and actual experience in the aircraft, could be dangerous in the aircraft. he may actually have a large amount of experiential knowledge about performance without having the terms used in books.
and as figaro pointed out, accepting everything he or she does or says can be just a dangerous.
so i hope you accept my apology.
and to quid, at least i made a small contribution to your thread earning that much coveted flaming folder.
cheers;
i will make a public apology for as figaro described as "picking on you" if that is how you took it.
the thread started as a question about "on the step" and it's validity. your response went into another area of how you were embarrassed by those captains who used the term and that it indicated their ignorance of performance.
my response merely aimmed to point out that implying that your captain is stupid for using a terminology that may not be so precise yet does indeed describe a valid description of curves and lines and actual experience in the aircraft, could be dangerous in the aircraft. he may actually have a large amount of experiential knowledge about performance without having the terms used in books.
and as figaro pointed out, accepting everything he or she does or says can be just a dangerous.
so i hope you accept my apology.
and to quid, at least i made a small contribution to your thread earning that much coveted flaming folder.
cheers;
still learning....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: USA
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, guys and gals, it's been two weeks, and anyone interested has had an opportunity to respond.
Now (for what it's worth), let's take a vote:
Flying a swept wing transport jet at cruise altitude, IS THERE A "STEP"?
Yes or No?
Now (for what it's worth), let's take a vote:
Flying a swept wing transport jet at cruise altitude, IS THERE A "STEP"?
Yes or No?
still learning....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: USA
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
warpfactor8,
I can't speak for the others, but I certainly am.
Do you have something to offer in the way of an opinion/explanation?
[ 12 August 2001: Message edited by: quid ]
I can't speak for the others, but I certainly am.
Do you have something to offer in the way of an opinion/explanation?
[ 12 August 2001: Message edited by: quid ]
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...there is an "invisible step." It's in cruise at altitude. If you fly less than LRC the airplane is not optimally speed configured because the deck angle is too high and you can feel it as you leave and reenter the cockpit. Flying less than LRC is neither fuel efficient nor aerodynamically efficient. 