Inverted roll in J Model

[fantom]

I was there in 1995. How did I miss this?!!!

Jim

 

I think I know:

 

[yvesg]

I think I know:

 

Are they coming back this year? If yes... they will be the right age range with me and the hell with the Mooney Caravan... I want to park my bird right next to them!

Yves

[WardHolbrook]

Now here's a J model derivative that I would have no problem rolling...

 

 

[201er]

Looks nice but I bet yours could take just about anything that one can.

[aviatoreb]

I remember reading in the MAPA Log years ago that the USAF complained about the Predator's heavy controls and/or slow roll rate, which Mooney said could be corrected, but the EFS competition timeline did not allow time for a fix. At least I think that this is what I read. It has been 20 years. The Predator is pictured below.

Jim

 

Wait a second!  Wasn't skynewbie also complaining that the Mooney controls were too heavy too?  Just like those Air Force Generals on the airplane trainer selection committee 20 years ago. Hmmmm....and didn't it turn out that skynewbie just didn't know about the trim wheel?  Maybe....just maybe....could it be that the airforce generals also were neglecting to trim-out that lovely Mooney MT20 TX-1?!!  If only....

[NotarPilot]

For those folks doing aerobatics in aircraft not designed for it, don't be surprised if Darwin kicks in. Remember there's old pilots, bold pilots but no old bold pilots.

I think Chuck Yeager and Bob Hoover were pretty bold in their day and they're still around... Just sayin.

Anyone see the video of Bob Hoover when he rolls the Twin Commander while pouring a cup of tea? I was amazed he was able to pour backwards with his right hand, upside down no less!

[BigTex]

Okay... I'll give you that there's two old bold pilots!

[NotarPilot]

I agree, probably not many more.

[Bill_Carter]

Tom Cruise is still around! LOL

[BigTex]

Here's the video of Bob Hoover pouring the cup of ice tea while executing a perfectly coordinated barrel roll.

 

 

You'd be hard pressed to find a better aviation exhibition.

[chrisk]

I have to admit I had to resort to google to understand the difference between a barrel roll and an aileron roll. 

[BigTex]

Maybe it's me but I personally find executing a perfect barrel roll one of the hardest maneuvers to Perform. Snap rolls or even point rolls are simple compared to a barrel roll.

[xftrplt]

Barrel rolls are much more natural feeling because 1 positive "g" is maintained throughout the maneuver. Aileron rolls vary between 1 positive and 1 negative "g" throughout the maneuver, and the rudder function reverses when upside down in the negative "g" arena, so they are much harder (and more rewarding) to execute properly.

Jim (aerobatics novice)

-- A barrel roll is a positive G but not a 1-G maneuver.

-- The rudder does not reverse its effect (in yaw) at negative G's.

[xftrplt]

.

[WardHolbrook]

Looks nice but I bet yours could take just about anything that one can.

Probably could. However, of all of the Normal and Utility category aircraft (that I'm aware of) that were modified and sold as limited aerobatic aircraft only one the Beech Sundowner was able to do it without any airframe mods - just quick release doors. All of the rest - the Cessna 150/152 Aerobat and the Beech F33C Aerobatic Bonanza needed strengthening of one form or another in addition to the doors. I've seen the airframe damage that poorly executed "light" aerobatics can do and it ain't pretty. I'm a big fan of basic aerobatics and spin training - I think all pilots would be well served by taking an extreme attitude recovery and basic aerobatics course - but if you need to demonstrate your aerobatic prowess please get the appropriate training and do it in something that has the proper certification. Leave the Mooney airshows to the airshow pros.   

[xftrplt]

Jim,

Consider:

1-G level flight--

Right rudder; nose yaws right.

0-G (parabolic flight)--

Right rudder; nose yaws right.

-1-G upright flight--

Right rudder; nose yaws right.

With respect the the controls, the aircraft doesn't "know" if it's right-side up or upside down.

[Bennett]

From : AeroNews.net

NTSB Cites Pilot Error In 2011 Cirrus Accident

Report: Evidence Suggests Right-Seat Pilot Attempted Aerobatic Maneuver At A Low Altitude

The NTSB has released its probable cause report in an accident involving a 2008 Cirrus SR22 which went down in a wildlife refuge near Boynton Beach, FL. According to the report, two friends were flying back from an air show along with two other airplanes when one of the two pilots on board the Cirrus attempted a low-altitude aileron roll. Both pilots on board the aircraft were fatally injured by the impact.

According to the probable cause report, the Cirrus was returning from an air show on November 13, 2011, and flying in formation with two aerobatic airplanes. A pilot of one of the aerobatic airplanes reported that, shortly after the accident airplane crossed the border of an unpopulated wetland area, the airplane's pitch smoothly increased upward to an angle of about 30 degrees. The accident airplane was flying at a global positioning system-derived altitude of 29 feet. The airplane then began a roll to the left, and, as the airplane rolled toward an inverted attitude, the pitch quickly began decreasing below the horizon. The airplane then began a rapid descent and impacted the marsh below in a 68-degree nose-down pitch attitude. Postaccident examination of the wreckage revealed no evidence of any preimpact mechanical malfunctions or failures with the airframe or engine that would preclude normal operation. Flight data recorded by a device onboard the accident airplane, along with statements provided by witnesses, suggested that one of the pilots likely attempted to perform an aileron roll at low altitude and that the maneuver had been performed on at least two previous occasions, at higher altitudes.

The investigation could not determine which of the pilots was physically manipulating the controls at the time of the accident; however, given the right seat pilot’s substantial previous flight experience, the provisions of the exclusive agreement under which he rented the accident airplane, and statements from witnesses affirming that the pilot had attempted the maneuver in the past, it is most likely that the right seat pilot was acting as pilot-in-command at the time of the accident and was either manipulating the controls or directing the left seat pilot’s manipulation of the controls at the time. The right seat pilot had not logged any previous aerobatic experience, and witnesses described any undocumented experience he may have had as “low.” The manufacturer maneuver limits for the accident airplane model prohibit aerobatic maneuvers.

The airplane’s ballistic recovery parachute system likely activated during the impact sequence and was not activated by either of the occupants before impact given that the system’s safety pin was found installed; it is unlikely that activation of the system would have affected the outcome of the event. Additionally, based on observations of the airplane’s occupant restraint systems, recovered positions of the pilots’ remains, and preaccident photographs recovered from an electronic device onboard the airplane, it is unlikely that the right seat pilot was wearing his shoulder restraint. It could not be determined if this apparent lack of upper body restraint may have inhibited the right seat pilot’s ability to control the airplane during the maneuver.

The NTSB determined the probable cause(s) of this accident to be the right seat pilot’s decision to attempt a low-altitude aerobatic maneuver in a non-aerobatic airplane.

FMI: www.ntsb.gov

[chrisk]

From : AeroNews.net

NTSB Cites Pilot Error In 2011 Cirrus Accident

Report: Evidence Suggests Right-Seat Pilot Attempted Aerobatic Maneuver At A Low Altitude

 The accident airplane was flying at a global positioning system-derived altitude of 29 feet.

 

 

Stupid is not even close to the proper description of the pilots actions.

[xftrplt]

Yes.

Note: My above post containing only a period (.) was the result of deleting a duplicate post, not an expression of finality.

[WardHolbrook]

OK. I was on my phone. I had a double post too.

Now we have proceeded 180 degrees into our counter-clockwise aileron roll to the left and are inverted. The controls are unchanged. Are they still correct?

Jim

 

How about the same scenario only this time you're in an MU-2 with spoilers for roll control...

[xftrplt]

Yup. But the rudder may be neutralized as the roll progresses.

I think what is confusing is that in negative G flight, the upward (from the cockpit) aileron may create adverse yaw. The rudder's effect on yaw is the same: right pedal, nose right. A lot depends on whether the airfoil is symmetric or not. Non-aerobatic GA aircraft almost always have asymmetric wings, which produce lift when the relative wind is parallel to the chord.

Jim, regarding Ward's question: Hint, spoilers produce proverse yaw.

[WardHolbrook]

Knowing how to do aileron rolls is something that can save your sorry arse if (when) ATC vectors you in just a little too close behind something bigger. It wasn't all that many years ago that a Westwind was lost on approach to SNA. They were following a 757 and ended up getting too close. All it takes is a little training to have the proper inputs come automatically and to resist the urge to pull as you're rolling inverted due to wake turbulence. It doesn't take a lot and a little really does go a long way. This type of training is also readily available. If you haven't done it don't put it off, it's a perfect excuse to work in a taildragger endorsement, some basic aerobatics and spins and a BFR. Money well spent and I've NEVER met a pilot who's had the training who said it wasn't worth it.

[aviatoreb]

Stupid is not even close to the proper description of the pilots actions.

 

I said in

http://mooneyspace.com/topic/9299-ga-lets-talk-stats/?hl=bozo#entry103248

 

...but it is my strong believe that "90% of the population risk is concentrated on 10% of the people"....

P(incident|you are not a bozo)<P(incident|you are a pilot selected from the general population)<P(incident|you are abozo).

 

BorealOne proposed to name this "the Bozo Proposition" and this accident is a prime example.

[Bennett]

From AVWebflash:

Crashed Cirrus Data Recorder Tells Aerobatic Tale

The NTSB has determined that two cousins age 23 and 34 were killed in the crash of a rented Cirrus SR-22T on Nov. 13, 2011, near Boynton Beach, Fla., while attempting aerobatics. There were no other occupants aboard the aircraft, which impacted in a marsh. A pilot who witnessed the crash told the NTSB that the aircraft pitched from level flight to a 30-degree nose-up attitude before rolling inverted, reversing the roll and ultimately impacting the ground in an (estimated) 80-degree nose-down condition. Information contained in the aircraft's data recorder largely coincided with that account. It also showed that roll wasn't the aircraft's first.

Data contained by the crash-hardened flight data recording device covered the period from Nov. 11, when the accident aircraft's 34-year-old right-seat pilot signed a rental agreement for the aircraft. It showed that on that day the aircraft was flown for more than 10 minutes below 1,000 feet and for nearly 90 seconds it was flown between 195 and 38 feet. Low-altitude banks of up to 70 degrees were also recorded -- along with a successfully completed 360-degree roll to the left.

The investigation found that the right-seat pilot (who signed the rental agreement for the aircraft) held a commercial certificate with ratings for single- and multi-engine land, rotorcraft helicopter, and instrument airplane and helicopter, all acquired after 2008. His recovered logbooks listed at least 4,384 flight hours with at least 183 in the accident airplane make and model. The investigation also found the pilot had been awarded at least some of his certificates twice. "On Feb. 17, 2006, the pilot had submitted a letter of surrender to the FAA, which constituted an 'unequivocal abandonment' of his commercial pilot certificate," according to the NTSB. The reason for that action was "voluntary surrender in anticipation of FAA certificate action." The NTSB has determined the accident's probable cause to be "the right seat pilot's decision to attempt a low-altitude aerobatic maneuver in a non-aerobatic airplane."

Cirrus Owners and Pilots Association (COPA) created the following animation they say was produced from "flight data recorded from the accident airplane."

Animation:

[fantom]

Hǝʎ' ıuʌǝɹʇǝp ɟlıƃɥʇ odǝus ɐ ɥosʇ oɟ uǝʍ ɔɥɐllǝuƃǝs