aterpster
BTW, our last 10 727-200s were the "advanced" model with, I believe, the Sperry 250. It would do a poor man's CAT three quasi-auto-land. It would flare but not de-crab nor provide roll-out guidance. We were trained on it in the sim but no one in his right mind would actually use it. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...lies/smile.gif |
Quote from JammedStab:
"Upgoing right wing means the right side of your artificial horizon line is going down. It is easy to mix up and make the wrong input." True. Further to my earlier post about recovery on the VC10, my previous (older) types had had A/Hs on which the bank indicator pointer was at the bottom of the instrument, whereas the VC10's followed the later practice of incorporating a skid/slip bubble-indicator at the bottom, displacing the bank indicator to the top. That is less intuitive, IMO, and can create confusion. It could easily have led me to apply aileron/roll-spoiler in the wrong direction. Not a good idea... Has anyone else ever had that problem? |
It could easily have led me to apply aileron/roll-spoiler in the wrong direction. Not a good idea... Has anyone else ever had that problem? |
Simply read Handling the Big Jets....:)
|
Quite. No doubt Dai Davies would be turning in his grave (assuming he is dead?) on reading most of our stuff.
I now find that he is yet to get a Wiki entry, despite that book - and being responsible for the redesign of the early B707's empennage (ventral fin added) to improve directional stability. |
D P Davies and the B707
This may be old-hat to the afficionados, but I've found a well-researched article on the 'net, originally published in a magazine called "Airways" (?) in 2010, here courtesy of the Renton (Washington, US) website:
http://rentonwa.gov/uploadedFiles/Li...20combined.pdf Compare the fins (VSs) on the photos on pages 32 & 33. The account of the British certification process that led to the modifications starts on the right column of page 35. I hadn't realised that the ventral fin retrofitted to those early models was dual-purpose - it also stopped the a/c over-rotating on take-off, in the absence of a suitable stick-shaker for that purpose. ** The other part of the B707 "fix", the top extension, is clearly visible when you compare the two photos. The B707-320B/C "Advanced" types, such as I flew in Caledonian/BCAL, had dispensed with the ventral fin, apparently for the reasons stated on page 36 (yaw-damper and a stick-shaker). OFF-TOPIC Although the stick-shaker was supposed to prevent over-rotation on T/O, I once over-rotated (and probably rotated at too-high a rate) on a MTOW departure at LAX, and had to check forward slightly before the a/c would unstick. ** The British certification authority, the ARB, had pioneered the test of taking-off with the tail scraping along the runway, and the concept of Vmu (minimum unstick speed), as a result of accidents on the Comet 1. |
Maxarets? Think that is the name.
|
Maxarets are mechanical anti skid devices.
|
I ran across an incident report about a 737 yaw damper behaving badly:
Air Accidents Investigation: 1/1998 G-BGJI |
Originally Posted by Chris Scott
(Post 8040942)
Quite. No doubt Dai Davies would be turning in his grave (assuming he is dead?) on reading most of our stuff.
I now find that he is yet to get a Wiki entry, despite that book - and being responsible for the redesign of the early B707's empennage (ventral fin added) to improve directional stability. Early yaw dampers, stick-shakers and stick-pushers were essentially the electro/hydro-mechanical forebears to the modern flight control systems with envelope protections. |
Here is rather self-explaining video of what happens when you disconnect yaw damper(s). It's made by Dutch students...doing, errr... Dutch roll...
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:33. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.