Martin,
I have no information on the U2 flight envelope, but, given its cruising
altitude, I suspect what you say is correct.
Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Walters, Martin" <Martin.Walters@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 6:28 AM
Subject: Re: [OM] Titanic, was More from the Airport
> Along those lines, didn't the U2 have something like a 50 knot(?) window
> when cruising at designed altitude? Drop the speed and it stalled. Not
> an easy plane to fly apparently.
>
> Martin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Nichols [mailto:jhnichols@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 1:24 AM
> To: Olympus Camera Discussion
> Subject: Re: [OM] Titanic, was More from the Airport
>
> Chris,
>
> I trying to recall something I read a number of years ago. In an upper
> corner of the flight envelope, the cruise AoA can approach the stall
> AoA.
> Think of it this way: The aircraft weight does not change, except for
> the fuel that is burned off. As you climb to jet cruising altitudes,
> the air density falls rapidly, so the dynamic pressure, or "q", falls
> off as well.
> This means that, in order to support the weight, the wing requires
> higher and higher angles of attack. When the flight AoA approaches the
> stall AoA for the flight Mach number, it takes very little stick force
> to get into trouble. For crews flying fly by wire systems with
> computers in the loop, they very seldom experience the subtleties of
> hand flying in this regime.
> Loss of pitot pressure on a dark night under such conditions is a
> worst-case scenario.
>
> I've heard the term "departure" used to describe the loss of flying
> ability in such cases. I think I first heard of it in reference to the
> early Lear jets.
>
> Jim Nichols
> Tullahoma, TN USA
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris Barker" <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 11:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [OM] Titanic, was More from the Airport
>
>
>> Jim
>>
>> It would be bad if there were no indication of AoA, but I don't know
> for
>> certain what they have.
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> On Thursday, 25 August 2011, Jim Nichols <jhnichols@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>>> Piers,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the link. As an aeronautical engineer with a career in
> wind
>>> tunnel testing, and as a civilian pilot, that was interesting
> reading.
>>>
>>> I noted that the Company's actions did not make reference to the
>>> recommendation of an AOA indication in the cockpit in view of the
> pilots.
>>> Some other articles I have read recently have considered this to be a
>>> worthwhile addition in many aircraft. I have seen sensors on several
>>> business jets, but have no idea how the data are used or displayed.
>>>
>> --
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
>> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
>> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|