On 14 July 2015 at 06:07, ChrisB <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> At least 1G, Ken. And if you keep the nose well above the horizon for the
> first half, the second half should be safe enough.
>
> The problem arises if the pilot manages to turn it into a looping
> manoeuvre without sufficient height to recover.
>
>
I looked up the famous footage of a Vulcan supposedly barrel-rolling at
Farnborough back in the fifties. It's certainly a roll, but not really
what I'd call a barrel roll. It looks to me like the pilot started with a
climb, but he'd had to have done that to execute an aileron roll without
crashing. The following changes in altitude are simply down to that
initial climb, gravity and the rather slow (compared to, say, a Hawk) rate
of roll available. That makes it look a bit like a barrel roll, I guess
the distinction might be a bit academic - is it still a barrel roll if it
happens within the wingspan of the aircraft? I defer to your greater
expertise in any case.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ac7_1332758712
Ian
--
Stand firm for what you believe in, until and unless logic and experience
prove you wrong. Remember: when the emperor looks naked, the emperor *is*
naked, the truth and a lie are not "sort-of the same thing" and there is
no aspect, no facet, no moment of life that can't be improved with pizza.
-Daria Morgendorffer
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|