Far as I know, Mooneys have a single-piece wing from tip to tip and as a result are said to be exceptionally strong. At one time I was told the only Mooney that had suffered an in-flight wing failure was being repeatedly flown through a tornado, which was probably exaggerated but none the less illustrated that it’s a very strong structure.
Having said that, how on earth do you do this to one?
JTFC Mooney Accident
-
- Posts: 630
- Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2020 9:29 pm
- Contact:
This one?
Twin Beech restoration:
www.barelyaviated.com
www.barelyaviated.com
- Colonel
- Posts: 2564
- Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:02 pm
- Location: Over The Runway
Shot in the dark: +16 G'show on earth do you do this
sqrt(16) = 4 x 80 mph stall = 320 mph
seems doable. Slippery airplanes and low-time pilots in cloud that don't
get the auto-pilot on, are not a good combination.
People like to make instrument flying far too complicated. If you can't see
a horizon, get on the attitude indicator. And if you're low-time, see if you
can get the autopilot on.
JFK jr anyone?
-- EDIT --
Tucker said he indicated 280 mph in his highly modified Pitts during his
10 descending snap rolls airshow sequence. That's +14G or thereabouts.
With Steve Wolf wings, of course.
Steve Wolf is the most amazing person you have never heard of. He is
not only a highly skilled pilot, but also a brilliant engineer. Most people
aren't even one of those. He is both. Smell the tiny overlap of those
Venn diagrams.
45 / 47 => 95 3/4%
- Colonel
- Posts: 2564
- Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:02 pm
- Location: Over The Runway
Note: every pilot should (at some point in their flight training) read this book. It's not very expensive.
In it, you will read that a torsional load should be reduced to 2/3 of the
design (not ultimate G). This is important. Remember that.
This is pretty neat, when you think of Tucker's ten descending +14G
snap rolls. This implies that Steve's wings are good for a design (not
ultimate) load of +21G.
Pretty impressive!
Reminds me of Skip Stewart, whom over time broke and upgraded
pretty well everything on his Pitts. He broke the gas tank mount. He
broke the seat. Kept blowing the canopy off under high negative G.
He even managed to bend the I-strut, which is probably the strongest
part of the airplane. What a guy!
He lost his card for that, but IMHO it was worth it.
Skip flies freight for a living. I suspect passengers might complain.
In it, you will read that a torsional load should be reduced to 2/3 of the
design (not ultimate G). This is important. Remember that.
This is pretty neat, when you think of Tucker's ten descending +14G
snap rolls. This implies that Steve's wings are good for a design (not
ultimate) load of +21G.
Pretty impressive!
Reminds me of Skip Stewart, whom over time broke and upgraded
pretty well everything on his Pitts. He broke the gas tank mount. He
broke the seat. Kept blowing the canopy off under high negative G.
He even managed to bend the I-strut, which is probably the strongest
part of the airplane. What a guy!
He lost his card for that, but IMHO it was worth it.
Skip flies freight for a living. I suspect passengers might complain.
45 / 47 => 95 3/4%
-
- Posts: 138
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:08 am
" In it, you will read that a torsional load should be reduced to 2/3 of the
design (not ultimate G). This is important. Remember that."
I wonder what the torsional load is in the middle of the wing
if the fuselages pitch at a different angle
design (not ultimate G). This is important. Remember that."
I wonder what the torsional load is in the middle of the wing
if the fuselages pitch at a different angle
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
There are only 3 kind of people in this world
Those that can add and those that can't
Those that can add and those that can't
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 3 Replies
- 1955 Views
-
Last post by Colonel
-
- 0 Replies
- 856 Views
-
Last post by News
-
- 11 Replies
- 3073 Views
-
Last post by Squaretail