AEG | EFK 61 | FOR AERONAUTICS - UNT Digital Library

—,
I
FOR AERONAUTICS
TECHNICAL
NOTE
—_
—..
2899
h
MEASUREMENTS
OF FLYING
TO DETERMINE
QUALITIES
LONGITUDINAL
AND
STALLING
OF AN F-47D-30
STABILITY
AND
AIRPLANE
CONTROL
CBMR.ACTERISTICS
By Christopher C. Kraft, Jr.,R. Fabian Goranson,
and John P. Reeder
Langley Aeronautical Laboratory
Langley Field, Va.
Washington
February
. .
.
1953
..—
-.
...
. —.—.
__.
—_.—.. —__ .——.— —TEQH LIBRARY KAFB,NM
~ Illfllllllllloll!ulluo
m!rIoNAL ADvmoRY
IN
011b57~b
cOmITIEm FOR AERONAUTICS
TECHNICAL NOTE 2899
MEAS~
OF FLYING QUALITIES OF JUTF-471)-30AXWMIE
TO DETERMINE LONGITUDINAL”STABILITY AND CONTROL
AND STALLING CHARACTERISTIC~
By Christopher C. Kraft, Jr., R. Fabian Goranson,
and John P. Reeder
t
Flight tests have been made -to determine the longitudinal stabili~
and control and stalling cbacteristics of m F-47D-30 airplane. The
results of these tests show the airplane to be unstible with stick free
in any power-on condition even at the most forward center-of-gravi@
position tested: At the rearward center-of-gravity position tested the
airplane also had neutral to negative stick-fixed stabili~ with power
on. The characteristics in accelerated flight were acceptdle at the
forward center-of-gravity position at low and high altitudes except at
high speed where the control-force variations with acceleration were
high. At the rearwsrd center-of-gravity position, elevator-force reversals were experienced in turns at low speeds, and the elevator-force
variations with acceleration were low at all the other speeds tested.
Ample stall warning was afforded in all the conditions tested and the
stalling characteristics were satisfactory except in the approach and
wave-off conditions.
&
Introduction
This paper presents an investigation of the flying qualities of the
F-47D-30 airplane. Many flying-qualities investigations have been conducted by the National Advisory Comittee for Aeronautics with vario~
types of airplanes and this paper is intended to supplement this information. By correction of these da~a with pilot opinions of these atiphes,
it has been possible to establish quantitative re@rements
for
satisfactory flying qualities such as those presented in reference 1.
%.qersedes therecently declassified NACARMS~A06
for the Air
Materiel Command, ArIW Air Forces, “Flight Measurements of Flying Qmlities of a P-47D-30 Airplane (AAF No. 43-34-41)to Determine Longitudinal’
Stability and Control and Stalling Characteristics” by Christopher C.
I&aft, Jr., R. Fabian Goranson, and John P. Reeder, 1948.
r-?
.
.
—.—
—-..-——------ —-—--- -..------————
---
.—. ----
----
-.——-
—-——
--—”
-.—-——
---
--
.
NACA TN 2899
2
Additional information is continuaJJy being obtained, however, to determine whether the existing requirements are adeqyate or whether they should
be madified in order to provide for conditions encountered with airplanes
of later design. 5is paper includes the results of the tests of the
longitudinal stability and control @
stalling characteristics of the
F-47D-30 airplane. The results of the investigation of the M.teral and
directional stability and control characteristics of this airpb.ne have
been presented in reference 2.
.
AIRPLAm,
INsm~oN,
AND ‘mm
.
The F-47D-30 is a low-wing fighter-me airplane. This model incorporates cm R-2800-59 engine, a dorsal fin, dive-recovery flaps, roundnose ailerons, and a bubble canopy. A three-view drawing of the airplane
is shown in figure 1 and additional data describing the airplane we presented in table 1. Photographs of the test airplane are shown in figure 2. The airplane was flown at two center-of-gravity positions. The
forward center-of- avity position of approximate~ 26.4 percent mesn
aerodynamic chord rI-angear down) with the gross weight varying from
12,810 pounds at take-off to n,870 pounds was obtained by attaching
200 pounds of lead to the prope~er-reduction-gear box and flying the
airplsae with the fuselage auxiliary tank empty. Photographs of this
ballast installation are shown in figure 3. The lead balMst was more
than sufficient to balance the moment rearward of the center of gravity
brought about by the installation of instruments in the baggage compartment. The,instrument installation caused a resxward center-of-gravity
shift of approxhately 0.2 percent mesm aerodynamic chord and the lead
ballast caused a forward center-of-gravi~ shift of approximately 1 percent. The airplane manual gives the service center-of-gravi~ range for
this airplane as between 24.75 and 31.0 percent mean aerodynamic chord
with landing gear down. The forward center-of-gravityposition of
24.75 percent of the mean aerodynamic chord could not be obtained on the
test airplane with any normal loading. The rearwszd center-of-gravi@
position at which the airpbme was flown was approximately 29.1 percent
of the mean aerodynamic chord with gross weight rangh.g from 13,200 poumds
to 12,400 pounds. This center-of-gratityposition was obtained by using
the same configuration as above and flying the airplane with the fuselage
auxiliary tank filled. Raising the landing gear caused the center of
gravity to shift forward 0.4 percent of the Ean aerodynamic chord.
The friction and travel of the elevator, aileron, and rudder control
systems are shown in figures 4 to 7. The amount of friction in all the
control systems except that of the rudder was small and well within the
requirements of reference 3. A more complete description of the characteristics of the rudder control system is presented in reference 2. “
.—
. ....——
_—. .
..—
_—._
——
. ..
_.— ——
3
NACA TN 2899
the
Tests were carried out at low altitude in the conditions shown in
follcndng table:
Power setting
Flaps
21 in. Hg at 2,550 rpm
Down
CcmdLtion
Approach
off
Glide
m
Down
gear
canopy
Down
open
VP
Closed
Down
Open
Closed
Power-on clean
42.5 in. ~
Wave-off
42.5 in. Hg at 2,550 rpm
Down
Down
Open
l!’in. Hg at 2,550 rpm
Up
w
Closed
Dive
at 2,550 rpm .@
--
Q
Tests were also carried out at high altitude in the power-on clean,
glide, and dive conditions. The data were obtained by both the steady
and continuous record methods. In the steady method, the pilot either
dived or climbed the airplane to a given speed and, when the airplane
reached a steady condition, a record was taken of the required values.
In the continuous.method, the airplane was flown through the speed range
with gradually changing speed and the reqylred values were recorded
throughout the entire period. The data obtained by the conti.nuow method
are indica~d by flagged symbob. Standard NACA photographic recording
instruments were used to obtain the data. A description of this instrumentation is given in reference 2. .
DISCUSSION AND RESULTS
LONGITUDINAL STABILITY AND CONTROL ~STICS
,,
The short-period oscild-ationof normal acceleration and elevator
angle was investigated in the power-on clean, glide, and landing conditions by abruptly defletting and releasing the elevator at various
time histories of these
speeds throughout the speed range. 11’yTicsl
attempted oscillations are shown in figure 8. There was no oscilJ_ation
of the elevator, but the airplane diverged longitudhdly, somttis
violently, at low speeds in the power-on clean condition. (See fig. 8(a).)
This unstable condition is in all probabili~ due to the static longitudinal i.mtabili~ of the airplsae.
.-
..-— —
——-—— .---. — ------
.------——-~.-— ——--—-------—- _..
—.——
_. -.. . ..
.-——-
1
NACA m
4
2899
.
static Longilmaiml stability
The static longitudinal stabil.i~ was measured throughout the speed
range for the configurations shown in the preceding table at two centerof-grati~ positions of appro+te~
26 d
29 percent of the mean
aerodynamic chord. The variations of elevator force sad elevator angle
with speed are presented in figures 9 to 14 and show the static longitudinal stability characteristics. The elevator t@ angle 5e+m% was
abo
Uau
measured and is given for most of”the tests made.
The evalmdion of the stick-free and stick-fixed neutral points is
shown in figures M to 20. The variations of the elevator angle 5e
and elevator force divided by dynamic pressure Fe/q @th a~l-ane
normal-force coefficient ~
are plotted and the stick-fixed and stickfree neutial points sre determined from the slopes of these curves. For
a given normal-force coefficient the neutral pofits we at ,the centerdbe .!?@%@
are zero.
of-gravi~ positions at which the slopes —
dCN
dCM
The neutral points as deterdned by the ~ove procedure for each flight
condition are shown in figure 21.
The following discussion of the static longitudinal stability characteristics is based on the reqdmments of reference 3.
Power-on clean condition (fiR. 9) .- The curves of elevator angle
and elevator force as a function of speed show characteristics which do
not meet the requirements of reference 3. The data show the airplane to
be unstable with stick free at both center-of-gravitypositions and to
have neutral to negative stibiliw with stick fixed. The sane conditions
existed at low and high altitude.
Dive conitition(fig. 10).- The airplane failed to meet the requirements in this condition. The data show the airplane to be umtable with
stick free at speeds above approximately 260 qh and neutral to unstable
stick fixed above approximately 300 qh.
The same conditions existed at
low and high altitude.
Glide condition (fig. n). - The airplane was stable with stick fixed
and stick free at both center-of-gravi~ positions except at high speeds
at the rearwsxd center-of-gravityposition where the airplane became
slightly unstable with stick free. At high altitude the airplane was
neutralJy stable with stick free at the rearward center-of-gravity position. The airpkane did not meet the requirements in this condition.
Approach condition (fig. 12).- The curve of elevator force against
speed had a stable slope at the forward center-of-gravityposition but
I
..—— .-— — ——.——
-—. . —
—.
.
.. ——
—-.
-..
—
——-——
——--
9
NACA TN 2899
5’
the slope became unstable above approx~tely 125 mph at the resrwsrd
center-of-grati~ position. The stick-fixed stabili~ was neutral at
the resrwsxd center-of-gravity position at speeds above approxhnately
130 mph. The reqdrement of reference 3 was not satisfied. It should
be noted that the flaps on the F-41T&30 sre of the blow-up type; that
is, the flap deflection vsxies with decreasing airspeed until a speed
is reached where the flaps remain fulJ_down. The variation of flap
deflection tith atispeed is shown in figure 12.
.
IandinR condition (fig. 13 ).- The requirement was satisfied as the
airplaqe was stable both with stick fixed and with stick free throughout
the permissible speed range at both the center-of-gravity positions
tested.
Wave-off condition (fig. 14 )---The airplane was unstable with stick
fixed and with stick free in this condition and the requirement of reference 3 was not satisfied.
Neutmzl points (figs. 15 to 21).- The data shown in figures 15 to 20
illustrate the mthod used in obtatig
the neutral points shown in fig‘
ure 21. Since only two center-of-gratitypositions were tested, the
actual numerical values of the neutral points may not be entirely accurate, but they do give a general picture of the stick-fixed and stickfree s bility. In the power-on clean condition, the stability parameter
‘tFe/~Y jJ3 always negative (see figs. 19 and 20); this fact indicates
dCN
that the center-of-gravi~ position required to m4ke the airplane stable
could not be obtained tith any normal loading of the airplane. These
data also indicate that it wouldbe useless to test the airplane at a
more resrward center-of-gravityposition since it is slready lnmwn that
the airplane will be unstable. The same condition existed in the waveoff condition. b the approach condition a more accurate determination
of the neutrsl point was possible since data were obtained with the
center of gravity both forward and rearwsrd of the neutral point. In
the glide and landing conditions the airplane was stable throughout the
speed range except at low normal-force coefficients in the glide condition where the stick-free neutral points were slightly forward of the
resrmost center-of-gravityposition tested. The neutial points would
have been better defined had a more r,esniardcenter-of-gavity position
been tested in these two conditions but the significance of these data
did not wsrrant the tests.
It can be seen from the above discussion that the application of
power had a definite destabilizing effect on both the stick-fixed and
stick-free stabili@. The adverse effect of rearward center-of-gravity
position is markedly shown and it shouldbe noted that center-of-gravity
positions resrwsrd of the resrmqst test center-of-~avity position may
be obtained with norml loadings of the airplsne.
●
—..
. ..
—.——~——
..—.
— .. . . .—-—
------ .. . . ... . . ... —.——— —.——- .. ——-—
—
-----
-—-—
----’
-.
NACA TN 2899
6
Longitudinal
Control
(
Lmgitudiml control in accelerated flip$t.- The ‘longitudinalstability characteristics in accelerated flight were investigated by making
steady turns at constant speed and acceleration at both high and low
altitude and at the two center-of-gravi@ positions. The changes in
elevator control force and elevator angle with change in acceleration at
the different speeds tested are shown in figures 22 to 24. In figure 25
the variations of elevator singlewith tirmal-force coefficient in the
aforementioned turns are plotted. The stick-free and stick-fixed maneuver
points were evalmted by plotting the sloye of the curve of elevator @e
plotted against normal-force coefficient d5e/d~
(fig. 26) and the stick
force per g (fig. 27) as a function of center-of-gravi~ position. The
maneuver points are the center-of-gratity positions at which these slopes
are zero.
At the forward center-of-gratityposition of 26 percent of the mean
aerodynamic chord and low altitude, the elevator-control-force increment
per unit acceleration in left,turns was 7.5 pounds pei g at 200 qh and
11.O pounds per g at 350 mph. (See fig. v(a). ) This value was approximately 1 or 2 pounds per g higher in right turns. The requirement given
in reference 3 is 3 to 8 pounds per g. ~
effect of altitude WM to
.
decrease the force per g at the lower speeds. (See fig. 27(b).) However, at 350 qh or a Mach nunber M of approximately 0.6, the force
per g reached a value of 14.2 pounds per g in right turns. This fact
indicates that SOE form of breduhwn of flow was taking place. The
plot of force per g against ~ch nunibershown in figure 28 shows -that
the force per g increases with increase in Mach nunber to a maximum at
a wch ntier of about 0.6. 13eyonda Mach nuiber of 0.6, the force
per g decreases until the maximum test Mach number of 0.7 is reached.
,,
At the rearwsxd center-of-grati~ position tested, 29 percent of
the mean aerodynamic chord, the stick-force gradient varied from 2
to 7 pounds per g (fig. 23 (a)). At 200 mph, elevator-force reversal
occurred in both left and right turns. At high altitude, push forces
were reqdred with increasing acceleration at 200 mph in both left and
right turns and in left turns at 250 mph. (See fig. 23(b).) At the
higher speeds at high altitude, the curves of force against acceleration
show that pull forces were required but that these forces were dangerously low.
In figure 29 the data at 200 qh are plotted as a graph showing the
center-of-gravi~ range and altitude at which desirable stick “forces,
according to the req.drements of reference 3, can be obtained. The
center-of-gravi@ range for desirable stick forces shown in figure 29 is
only approxhate because the stick-force variation with acceleration at
200 qh was nonlinear. The tests at 200 mph were used because this condition was the most critical one tested and indicated the smallest centerof-gravi~ range for destrable stick forces.
.
—.—-
-———-———.
—.—
———— .——
— -
——.——-
.-- ——.
-
.
.>
.
NACA TN 2899
...
7
From the above discussion, it can be seen that the airplane did not
completely satis~ the requirements of reference 3. The values of force
per g at the forward center-of-gravityposition were in general within
the required limits of 3 to 8 pounds per g. The airplane did not meet
‘ the requirements at the resrwsrd center-of-gravityposition because of
the force reversal experienced at low speeds, especially at I&h altitude.
The most forward stick-fixed maneuv~ point was found to be 29.7 percent mean aerodynamic chord at 300 mph at high altitude, and the most
forward stick-free maneuver point, at 27.4 percent mean aerodynamic chord
at 200 mph at high altitude. The data obtained show the airplsme, in
general, to have higher stick force per g in right turns. Part of this
difference was probably due to the gyroscopic mment of the propeller,
but the results are not consistent and the ~oscopic nmment does not
account for the entire difference.
Ialgitudinal control in landinR.- The elevator deflection used in
landing is shown as a function of speed in figure 30. These data show
the elevator deflection to+be adeqyate at all the speeds tested and at
both center-of-gravitypositions. The elevator angles shown were not
necessarily the minimum elevator angles required to land. The elevator
force required during lsading did not exceed the 35-pound Mmit of the
requirements of reference 3. (See time histories of stall approaches in
the approach and landing conditions in figs. 36(b) and 37(b).) The
~
pilot thought that the characteristics of the airplane in landing with
power off were unsatisfactory because of the very high rate of descent,
approximately 50 fps. (This value was obtained from the pilot’s
readings of the instruments in the cockpit.) The application of a small
amount of power corrected this undesirable characteristic but brought
about the static instability previously discussed relative to the power-on
approach condition. This instability was also considered undesir~leby
the pilot. After the airplane reached the ground, the pilot considered
the airplane to be easy to control.
Tests were nmde to determine the change in trim causedby the
lowering of the landing flaps. The tests were made with tie controls
held fixed and repeated with the controls used to correct the ensuing
motion. l?ypica lthehistories are shown in figure 31. The results
sho~d that the two flaps did not lower at the same rate, the left
leading the right, so that a slight rolling tendency resulted and had to
be corrected by use of small deflections of the ailerons and rudder.
Longitudiml
control in take-off.With the center of gravi~ in the
most rearwsrd position tested, it was possible to hold the tail of the
airplane off the ground at any atti%ude up to thrust-axis level by use
of the elevator at approximately 80 mph. (This speed was obtatied from
the pilot’s readings of the instruments in the cockpit.) The pilot considered the airplane satisfactory under all conditions during tske-off.
... . .
..........-.—.—— .-.—.-.—
—-—
-——
1.
---—-- --—-— .——
——
-.— - .—— —.
8
NACA TN 2899
IOngitudinal trimming Contiol.- It was possible to trim the airphne
to zero elevator force by use of the elevator trim tab in a12.conditions
and at all the speeds bebeen, the sta~ and the msximum speed tested.
The requtmment of reference 3 is therefore satisfied.
Trti changes due to flaps and power.- The trim changes due to flaps
and power are shown in table II. The tests were made according to the
specifications of the requirements in reference 3. The elevator force
required to trim the atrplane due to flap deflection or power change was
usuRlly small, O to 5 pounds, and well below the limits set by the requirements. The change in rudder force required when the power was changed
was large. (See ref. 2.)
Dive-Recovery-Flap Investigation
The dive-recovery flaps of the F-47D-30 were tested at both centerof-gravi@ positions at high and low altitude. The tests were conducted
by deflecting the dive flaps when the airplane was trimned to zero control forces and the controls were free. The results are presented in
figure 32 as ihe variation of the change in normal acceleration with
speed snd Mach nuaiberto illustrate the dive-flap effectiveness.
The &Lve flaps reached maximum effectiveness in high-altitude tests
at approximately 3g at the forward center-of-gravity position and 3.5g
at the rearward center-of-gravi~ position. At-low altitude, however,
the maximum effectiveness could not be obtained at either center-ofgravi~ position. Accelerations as high as 4.6g at a Mach number of
0.66 were obtained, but there was no evidence of a change in slope at
this Mach number. !I!hese
data are in fair agreement with those obtained
in the wind-tunnel tests of reference 4.
The dive flaps were considered effective at all speeds and altitudes tested and the dive recovery was considered satisfactory.
1
STALLING CEMRACTERISTICS
The stalling characteristics of the atrplane were investigated in
the various configurations by makhg staH approaches, starting a few
miles an hour above the stall and extendfng into the stall region.
These stalllswere performed h two ways: first, by using the controls
to overcome the motions of the airplane brought about by the stall and,
second, by holding all but the elevator contiol fixed and allowing the
atrplane to roll off. Time histories of @ical
stalls performed by
both of these methods are shown in figures 33 to 40. The stalling
characteristics may be se
ized as follows:
(a) Inthepower-on
clean
condition
was afforded by mild buffeting a%out 4 qh
(figs. 33 and 35) stall warning
above the stall. As the stall
.
I
NACA TN 2899
9
was reached, an initial tendency to roll to the right was experienced,
followed by a roll to the left. This rollihg tendency coqld be controlled by normal use of the controls but with a little difficul~.
During the actual stall a strong buffeting occurred. The stall warning
and characteristics during the stall were considered satisfactory.
(b) lh the glide condition (figs. 34 and 35) ample warning of the
stall was provided in the form of buffeting about 5 mph above the stall.
At the stall there was a mild roll to the left which could be easily
controlled by norml use of the controls. The stalJing characteristics
in this condition were consideredsatisfactory.
(c) bthe
approach condition (fig. 36) the stall was preceded by
mild buffeting about 3 mph above”the stall.. The aileron and rudder
forces required to hold the airplane level were slightly high and irregular, and maximum rudder deflection was reached before the stall.
Although there was a buffet warning, the stalling characteristics were
considered u.risatisfactory.In tests in which the airphne was pulled
further into the stall than those shown in the time histories, there was
a rapid roll which could not be controlled by either the ailerons or the
rudder, or both.
(d) lh the landing condition (fig. 37) no buffeting preceded the
stall, but the positive stabili~ in this condition affords ample stall
warning because of increrisedstick forces or rearward movement of the
stick. At the stall the airplane rofied generally to the left but occasionally to the right. The roll could be easily controlled by normal
use of the controls. ‘l!he
stalling characteristics in this condition
were considered satisfactory.
(e) Jh the wave-off condition
(fig. 38) the airplane was not carried
to the complete stall because of the instability in this condition. Rudder control was lost before the stall ad almost complete aileron deflection had to be used. The nose-high attitude of the airplaue was also
uncomfortable to the pilot. Mild buffeting preceded the stall and there
appeared to be a tendency to qol.1right. The stalXng characteristics
were considered unsatisfactory because the airplane was unstable in this
condition.
(f) !l?he
stall in accelerated flight inthe power-on clean smd landing
conditions (figs. 39 and 40) was preceded by buffeting. At the stall mild
lateral instabili@ existed which could be easily controlled with the
ailerons. The stalling characteristics for this condition were considered
satisfactory.
.
.
. .. . ..- —...——. —
-—
—-. _. .—.——
..— —... -. .— ,....- —..
.-— _
.———- -————— .— .-—
-
10
NACA TN 2899
CONCLUSIONS
-,
Flight tests made to determine the longitudinal stabili~ and control
and stalling characteristics of an I?-47D-30airplane led to the following
conclusions:
1. An abrupt deflection and release of the elevator produced no
oscillation of the elevator, but the atrphe
itself diverged longitudinally in the low-speed, power-on clean condition, sometimes violently.
2. The airpbme did not satisfy the Air Force handling-qualities
requirements for stick-free stability at either center-of-gravity position for any power-on condition with flaps and landing gear up or down.
The airplane had satisfactory stick-fixed stabili~ in the glide and
approach conditions; the other conditions tested showed the airplane to
have neutral or negative stick-fixed stabili@ for some part of the speed
range at either of the center-of-gravitypositions.
3. At the forward center-of-gravityposition of 26 percent mean
aerodynamic chord, the increment of elevator control force per unit
acceleration was within the limits of the Atr Force requirements except
at 350 mph at low altitude. At the rearward center-of-gravity position
of approximately 29 percent mean aerodynamic chord and at low altitude,
the force per g was low and force reversal occurred at the low speeds.
At high altitude force reversal occurred at speeds below 250mph and the
force per g above these speeds was dangerously low. Over the speed range
and altitudes tested the force per gwas higher in right turns than in
left turns. !l?he
rmst forwsrd stick-free maneuver point was at 27.4 percent mean aerodynamic chord.
/
I
e
4. The elevator contiol for landing met the Air Force requirements,
but, because of the longitudinal instabili~ in the power-on approach
condition with the small amunt of power applied, the pilot thought the
I-and* approach was unsatisfactory. On the ground during take-off and
landing the airplane had satisfactory handling qualities.
5. The power of the elevator iximning tab ,passufficient to trim
the control forces to zero throughout the speed range at both the centerof-grati~ positions tested.
6. T& elevator-him-force changes due to power and flaps were small
and satisfactory.
.
\
—.
———
—— . .
. . . __
___
___
_____ _ .
NACA TN 2899
IL’
.
7. The performance of the dive-recovery flaps was satisfactory
throughout the speed range and altitudes tested.
8. The stalling characteristics of the F-47D-30 airplane were considered satisfactory except in the approach and wave-off conditions. h
all cases t-e
was sufficient stall wsrning several miles per hour ~ove
the stafi in the form of mild buffeting, ticreased stick tortes, or by
rearward movement of the stick.
o
‘
Langley Aeronautical.Laboratory,
National J%IvisoryCommittee for Aeronautics,
~ey
Field, Vs., February 18, 1948.
,.
REFERENCES
1.
@ities
of
Gilruth, R. R.: Requirements fdr Satisfactory F-g
NACA Rep. 755, 1943. (Supersedes NACAACR, Apr. 1941.)
A&@mes.
“
.
2. Goranson, R. Fabian, and Baft, Christopher C., Jr.: Measur=nts
of Flying Qualities of @ F-4~-30 A@?~e
~ ~t~e
~~~
and Dtiectional Stabili@ and Control Characteristics. NACA
TN 2675, 1952. (SupersedesNACA RM l%L31.)
3. Anon.: Specification for Stability and Control Characteristics of
Airplanes. SR-l19A, Bur. Aero., April 7, 1945.
4. Hamilton, William T., and Boddy, Lee E.: Hiti-5%eed Wtid--el
Tests of Dive-Recoveiy Flaps on a 0.3-Scal~ M&el of the P-47D
Airptie. NACAACR 5D19, lx.
.
,
.——. .-—. —. .. ..- .-.
..—
—— . ..— — . . —-.
..—.- ... . -...—..- —..— -—
—-—
.,’
———-— . ._ -- __
._. ——-—
NACA TN 2899
12
r.
.
DIMENSIONS OF TE3 F-47D-30
c..
. .. o-o ..o=opratta~i~y
.
. . . . . . . . .
. . (four blades) Curtiss
Tot-d wingsrea, sq ft...
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total aileron area, sqft
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Aileron-&bn-tab area (left aileron), sq ft . . . . . .
Stabiliz= area, sq ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Elevator srea, sq ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Elevator-tr@-tAb srea, sq ft . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Finsxea, sqft
. . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Rudder area, sift.....
Rudder-trm-tab area, sq ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
‘Wee---.
J2mpelhr
._ —_—.
— —..—
.
..._—
—
..
——.
—— .— ——
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
R-2800-59
NO. SPA-5
. . . 300
25.7
. .
0.89
. .
33.0
. .
22.0
. .
. .
0.9
13.9
. .
11.g
. .
0.87
. .
-—. —.-
NACATN 2899
13
TABIEII.-!CRIMCEAEGES
OF F-47D-30DUETO FLAPSAND POWER
(a)Centerof graviw, 0.291meanaerodynamic
chord,
gearretracted
I
I
klaicatea
draped,
mph
164
164
164
I
4
Power
Flaps
Gear
Ebvator
50 percent
m
50 percent
m
VP
50 percent
166
Down
139
off
162
off
m
163
off
m
165
Mleron
o
0
5.4
heft
o
5.&
o
50 percent
139
Rudder
o
.8
off
I
Controlforce,
Ill
3.9
0
.1
.6
gleft
right
33 left o
62 left
left
.5right
.2right
0
0
h
Sia.eslip
.mlgle,
aeg
o
.6
r~~t
2.7right
0
o
3.9
1 left
off
1.1
71eft
1.0 left
1.1left
139
off
0
o
0
o
138
M3rmalrated
139
IbrOalrst.-cd
138
Horml.rated
VP
-3.8
138
mnmml rated m
m
-3.8
117
mlrmal.
rated ?!?
U7
Hornmlrated UP
.
. ..-—
-----
m
-8.5
0
0
VP
-3.8
0
o
.6 IEft
0
* rifjhto
2.2 left
2 right o
2.5left
14 right
3
.6 hi%
right .6 m
0
o
19 right o
. ..— .-. — ..— —-— .- ———--—.
—
————
3.1 left
4.7 left
o
.1 left
——
-.
NACA TN 2899
14
TKfMCHAHGESOF F-47D-30DUE TO FLAH!MD POWER- Concluded
TABIE. rr.-
(b)Centerof gravl~,
0.263meanaerodynamic
chord,
retiacted
gear
C!od2mlforce,
IJI
Iil&k!atea
I?drspeed,
FlapE
Elevator
Mkron
164
50 prceut
m
o
165
50 pemmt
m
4.6
14left
.8right
.5ri@lt
165
50 percent
1.5
18 I.&%
.8right
.7right
4.6
44 left
.8ri@t
163
U7
off
o
0
50 percent
6.3
o
o
o
1.2right
.
o
o
138
off
164
off
VP
0
o
0
ti
off
m?
5.3
21eft
4.8kft
.1 left
I-64
off
3.1
27 left
6.om
.2right
U8
off
0
140
IWrml rated
-18.5
139
u-
138
KOrmiL rated
m
-3.8
1 right 0
137
U-
m
-4.7
31eft
0
1.2 I&t
Izo
KornLsl
rated WP
o
0
o
xt8
K-
0
rated
rated m
rated
w?
0
-4.7
30left 0
o
o
* right 0
o
0
5 right 0
2.0 right
o
o
2.9 lefi
o
.2right
.7 left
w
-—.
— .–. ---- —.———— ..-. . ..—
—————.—— ——
--—.
——. ......——.—.— _.. _.__-—
..
15
.
Elevator
hfnge#ne
I
I
u
D’hedrofe
2%:
‘7+
I
●
N-WI
11---l+z2i2i5i-i
“‘ —
+
/
,
,~T‘<k+-’-=
I
azl5-
i.
-“’A
‘~njercder
exitMh sides
Accessdw, h?liside
C@
A!Ac
Iockfence
= 1“
@ublk .itioil
S-3
Sfafic
,!
=!9=
Y lY6”/7’
Figure 1,.
- Three-view drawing of the F-47D-30 airplane.
,“..—.—-----.--—
—— ...
——.
-..
.—..————
~.—
——
__
_______
____
... ........ ...
-/
..
..
/
(
(a) Three-quart=
Figure
2.-
F-lt7D-30
front view.
teat
airplane.
1
.
I
I
I
$
,.
,.
,43344’
I
I“iw
I
1
‘
,-
i“
(b) Side
view.
I
I
Figure
2.-
Continued.
I
I
(c)
!i?hree-q~
rem
Tie.
.
F~e
z
“- conclud~
.
.
.
a%kle.
-.. - ,, . . .._
— ____ -..
.
__
----
—.. _
‘1
- ...__
._
.&_
—--–-——
_____
-—
-..
_
—-------
._.~_
I
I
I
I
I
I
(b) Details
of lead ring
~gure
mounted
on reduction-ge=
hcmsing.
3.- concluded.
—
,
,,
.,.
.
NACA TN 2899
21
3/0
I
I
o
/0
20
/7/ghf
30
20
“\
o
$/0
6
{
I
20
Figure4.,
.—. ..—
I
I
o
/0
/0
I
20
of’aileron and elevator deflection with stick
F-47D-30 airplane.
. . . . . . ...-— —.—.——
.——. —-.
——
—..
.
—_____
._ .-—___
...__ -..
. .— ___
22
NACA TN 2899
.
4
0
4
30
●
20
/0
o
/0
0
/’@
20
30
1
o
.
a
Ljp
Lb%?
.Ezekwfb- +%24’, A&
Figure 5 .- Aileron and elevator stick force due to friction as measured on
the gound with no load on the ailerons or elevator. F-47D-30 airplane.
.. . ... ——.—.—
—.
—-— .--. -.—
——.
.—
————————-
is
s
I
I
m
.3
Ffgore
I
6.-
Variation
of rudder
/
z
eagle
with
rudder-pedal
position
no rudder load.
as measured
on the .grouIMIwith
I
40
I
24
,0
I
20
‘ 40
1,
FigOre
7.-
Rudder-p.4aJ_ forces due ta friction
ground with no rudder load.
in the nxider control
Free-air t~~b,
-.
I
4N
NACATN 2899
25
,
I@
-
I
0
I
L
IM
/0
I
k
Aileron
ElevatorJ
30
F
Rudder
Tda/
aileron
Total ai/eron
1
o
1
ic
I
E/ivufor
10
D--4
I
o
Time,
I
z
I
4
I
6
I
8
Time, sec
sec
(a) Airspeed, 120 mph.
.
Figure 8.- Time histories of short-period oscillations induced by a rapid
deflection and release of the elevator. Power-on clean condition;
center of .gravi& at 29.0 percent of the mean aerodynamic chord.
.—.. . —.—— . . . . .... ._
. ...—.
. ..—
——. _____
___ .. . .. ._.
___—
——
_
___
—..— ..-.
.
56
0
2.
I
1
L
50
JO
30
30
2’0
/2’0
~Elevafor
/0
Aifefzw
Ai/eron
—
—
o
/0
h
E’Ierafor
20
.
rE/evdor
z?
f
/’
z.
/
o
o
L
4
Time,
sec
Time, sec
(b) Airspeed, @O
mph.
Figure 8.- Conclur3ed.
—..
—
—.—
.—
--
—.
..
.——
— -----
--. —.. —
NACA TN 2899
27
.
..
.
.-’
d
/!,670
/b
/Z#d9 /b
I
~
I
.
/20
4%
ZZv
Service
(a)
240
Adku+ed
280
320
airspeed,
I
360
I
4W
I
440
mph
Altitude, a~roximatel.y 5,000 feet.
Figure 9.- Longitudinal stabili~ characteristics of the F-47D-30 a~lane
in the power-on clean condition.
—,—.
——. — .. ..—
—
——
—.-.
. .——.
I
28
NACA TN 2899
I
I
I
I
/4
/20
S.$%e
Zm
#o
.230 320
Aw%ufed
ol~s~qj A#J
(II
) Altitude, approximately 25,000 feet~
Figure 9.- Concluded.
.
..—
.— — .—..-
3@
NACA TN 2899
,.
/0-
$
&f_.&
o
u,dddgd
I
r
I
.4
$
/60mz4uz#m
Servke )Pdimkd
I
1
A
I
A
A
A
A
t
I
1
4
360’
4o04@
ul>speed, mph
.
‘ (a)
Altitude,approximately 5,000 feet.
Figure 10.- Longitudi&l-stabili@ characteristics of the F-4~-30
in the dive condition.
..—.
. ..
. —.. .—.. —.-. z_____
-—.
.—
...- —..
_.
a-l=
—. —__
... ..- __. ....
.
.
.
/0
~,o.
t--=-v
Z@
280
.zzW
.3W
Sem%e kw!!+ed uirsped,nph
(b) Altitude, approximately 25,000 feet.
Figure 10.- Concluded.
.-_.
__—
_— - .
——— .-.
—..
———
——
.
NACA TN 2899
Y-
\/0 .
x
-&I’
q
-@
1
&
e
I
&
I
H
.
.
I
.
L
u
.
I
A
/2u
J“
Ser~/ke
200
m
l>dl>~+ed
280
~l>speed,
(a) Altitude, appro~tely
.720
3&
400
mph
7,000 feet.
Figure Id.:-Longitudinal stability characteristics of the F-47D-30 airplane
@ the glide condition.
..-.
,. —..-.—
.,.,.
.—— .--— .. . .. . __ ._. . .-. __
— —_________
__
____.__.
—.——
.—.—. —.-
NACA TN 2899
/
T
I
I
/20
/40
Serrice
“200
ind&=/ffd
240
280
airspeed,
320
3@
mph
(b) Altitude, approximately 22,000 feet.
Figure 11.- Concluded.
.——. ——————————
..—.
-.. —.——
———-
-——— -—--——
—.-.
—
‘5N
NACATN 2899
33
.
Figure 12.- Longitudin&l stability characteristics of the F-47D-30 airplane
in the approach condition at an altitude of approximately 5,000 feet.
/40
/60
/80
/20
Service Adicafed umspee@mh
MO
Figure 13.- Longitudinal stability characteristics of the F-47D-30 airplane
in the landing condition at an altitude of approximately 5,000 feet.
———
——.——. .—
.-. ._——_—.—.
.-— —
—
NAC.A
TN 2899
.
n“
0, I
I
I
I
I
I
-4+
“
Lef/
Service
M!icu+ed mrspeed, mph
7
of the F-4~-30
Figure14.- Longitudinalstabilitycharacteristics
in the wave-off condition at an altitude of appro~tely
-----
. .. . . . .. --. -.— .—-..
_—
————
.—.
._
a~l~e
5,000 feet.
.——_— _______
—-. .
$.
h.
I
A’
I
(a) Power-on
Figure
15. - Variation
a@~
nom-fone
of-gravi~
positio~
I
1,
.
—
.—.
clean
condition.
of elevatar
deflection
(b) GIAde
and elevator
force
divided
coefficf-t
in the power-on cl=
and gHde
.5&i low altitude.
F-47D-30 airplane.
s
5’
comiition.
by impact
conditiom
pressure
with
at two center-
~
N
&?
Q
.
+“
\
4
M
0
2%
%4?%%
A 293$AW4C.
I
/ -
0
-/ I
o
I
I
!
‘.4
.8
/.2
/w.%tz/knw
(a) Power-on
cle~
condition.
(b) Glide
&f%&wf&
condition.
RLgure 16. - Variation of elevator deflection d
ekvator
force divided by impact pressure with
airpkne
normal-force
coefficient
in the power-on clean and glide conditiom
at twu cent&r-ofgravity po6itione and high altitude.
F-47D-W
airplane.
.
3
/ -
0
A
I
0
1
.4
1
.8
“(a) Approach
I
1
A?
/6
condition.
I
o
I
,4.
(b) Wave-off
1
.8
1
/2
I
M
condition.
elevator force ditided by @act
pressure with
Figure 17.- Variation of elevator deflection ad
airplane normal-force
coefficient
in the approach and wave-off conditions at two center-ofgravity positdmm . F-47D-3Q airplane.
-.
I
20
39
.
C.g
o 26.3 % A??+Z
A25!0 %’Mkz
-i
_/L
=&=
I
I
o
.4
&Z’&7%dP
I
/8
I
I
/6
/
/2
dZ?7t-fiC/@W”
&
Figure 18.- Variation of elevator deflection and elevator force divided
by impact pressure with airplane
nmmal-force coefficient in the
landing condition at two center-of-gravi~ positions. F-47D-30 airplane.
,
. . ..
. . .. .
.. ——.
—.——. ..— — .—._
___________
___
_.
..._ ________._
t
8}
/!
/2
4
8
0
4
I
+1$$$$=
k
4
8
0
4.
G’
o
k
0
G/
A ,8
❑
10
G
02
0
A
.6
0
2
.4
❑
.6
0.8
b Lo
❑
2
0
v /!8
.4’0
/!2
h 4
A /!6
2
/
o
4?
I
o
-/
./
0
7/
-2
I
0
R&
I
I
k$t
C%fb
(a)Power-on
clean
condition.
(b) Glide
Conditiom
o/mwYy,
pirea/ M.4C
(C) Approach
condition.
.
(d) Wave-off
con!2Ltion .
(e) Landing
condition.
B
:
Figure
19. -
Detennination
of neutral
points
F-47D-3)
for the variouE
airplane.
condition
at low altitude.
g
‘6N
NACA TN 2899
41
.,
8
d& 4
dc~
o
.
--4
1
‘
CN
0
..2
.4
EI .6
0 .8
A a
~
.4
EI .6
0 ;8
h /0
A
2
‘d’
‘1
o
-/
-/
I
2’4
I
28
I
5’2’
(a) Power-on clean condition.
Figure
24
2’8
32
(b) Glide condition.
20. - Determir@ion of neutral points for the power-oh clean and
glide conditions at high altitude. F-47D.30 airplane.
,
—
.
—-.
— . . . —. -. -. . . .— ..._
——-.—
—-.._
._ ._...___
._
--- .—.-
—.
34 -
30 -
I
26 -
I
(a)
Figure 21. - Variation
indicated airapeed
condition
at high
Stick-free
neutral
points.
of neutral points with airplme
normal-force
coefficient and approdmate
for all cond.itione at low altitude and for the power-on clem
and glide
F-47D-30
drpbe.
aktitude.
!3
N
&7
u)
,
1
I
Landing~-------
I
J
44
NACATN 2899
.
P
4
0“k
o
2
4
f.
o &? ff; 302 m~;
A RL#vj 301+;
cg%f:.z~c
-\c
4500 ff
6>OOft
4
.
o“k
o
z
4
‘.
(a) Low altitude.
Figure22.- Turningcharacteristics
of the F-k7D-30airplane
in the powerd center-of-gravi@ position.
Oriclean condition. For’war
.
——.— —.—- .—
____
._ ._.
—-._—.
—
—_ .”.- . . . . .
,
45
0 Ldi; Zolnjvh;23,000P+
Rlgh+ .202mp4;23000ff
.- n 9,?0MAP’
A
.- 1A
“o-
4
2
4
t
OOL
2
4
4
00k
20
k
“2
4
.345 mph; 2~OM
A Rqh+ 347 mph; 2<000
cg,L?263 M&.
e Leff;
A
/0
o
0
z
4
(b)
norms/
ucce/8tia +lbn,
g
.
High altitude.
Figure 22 .- Concluded.
,
.. ..-
—. . --
.. -.-.----— .- ——-—-—-—— - ———-—-- —-—- -—-
-—----— ‘- ---——
—--- -—------..... .
._
NACA TN 2899
46
.
“f
(
E/’
0.
~5uoff
300mph
oLefij
+?igh~.3L!!mph
C-+??7ZZ
M=+473
4
2
\
Ci
/
/0
Y
1
1’
I
4
2
Chdffge in normui
(a)
ACCCkrUfiO/?~
g
Low altitude.
of the F-47D-30airplane
in the
Figure 23.- Turning characteristics
power-on clean condition. Rearward center-of-gravityposition.
.—..——— -——------
. .. —._—
47
NACATN 2899
(b) High altitude.
Figure23.- Concluded.
-.
-. - ———-
——
.. —.-— --. ———
——
—--
————
--- —--—
- - -———- —-
A
..
A
/,,
o
0
/,
y
4
2
Chuflqe
of the F-J7D-30 airpl=e
in the MU
cofition:
Figure 24. - TuxnlIM characteristics
flaps and geer down, camopy closed, pawer for level flight at 170 miles per hour.
center-of -gravity position.
-.
—.
~
ForwaM
F
E
“N
g
m
NACA TN 2899
o
/!
.8
.
/
o~
.4
o
.8
,
352 mph; @90 f~
q.,
4
@z63 (%??
~
-
..
t>
~L—_d——d
o
.4
/
.8
Normal - force
(a)
coefficient,
[N
Low altitude amd forward center-of-gravi~ position.
Figure 25.- Variation of elevator angle with airplane normal-force coefficient
in turning flight, power-on clean condition. F-47D-30 ai!rplane.
—
—-.
-. _____
. . . .r___ ____ ____
———..=
.—.
.— _.
. . —.——
—— ______ ...___
50
NACA TN 2899
47?
7%.ms-
u~
/0
.6
.2
L&5_
*/,
o
.8
4
A&icz+%-z-e
Cm%xex.. &
(b) High alti-%udead
forw& d center-of-gravityposition.
Figure 25.- Continued.
_— —_____
..—
—..–.....=
.—. _
________
__
NACA TN 2899
51
Left
R@ht
turns
.
turns
.
,.
0
.
(c)
,8
4
Low altitude and rearward center-of-gravi@ position.
Figure 25.
. . . . ... . . .
..
. . ._ ———.
——.—.—.
-
Continued.
. ——z.
_ .-._
______
-_ ---_____
NACATN 2899
52
n
“..2’
.6
..0
O.-
o@-.4
‘o
,8
AZzd-%??ce Coef’%ezf
(d)
High sltitude
and
re arward
-,---- .-—
..._ .._. —
CM
center-of-gravityposition.
Figure 25.- Concluded.
———.
——.. —— .- —.. .——
.8
53
NACA TN 2899
‘t
o
‘v”
1
26
I
28
I
30
I
\
32
I
34
36
@zzw
pvz???
/
,.
(a) Low sltitude.
‘
Figure 26.- Determination of the stick-fixed maneuver
points
of
F-47D-30 airplane.
. ..
. .
-.. . . ...— .—. .- ——— —-. . .—
——
-—--- -
—-—
-- --——-—- - --—- —---
——--— --
54
NACATN 2899
‘.
01 26
I
I
28
30
I
l\
0[
I
>
I
I
32
34
36
I
I
I
32
54
56
A
I
26
I
28
3ZU\
4’/v%-”a’’%7z7w@w@’
/Gz/7izq &z??%’/
(b) High altitude.
Figure 26.
-.—————
--
—.. —.-
.——
-
-.. —
Concluded.
NACA TN 2899
55
eeB7’leF-Aymzz7jy-&7j/z2M,%4?4C
(a) Low altitude.
Figure 27.. D@ermination of the stick-free maneuver points of
F-47D-30 airplane.
----- .---. —.
.——- L
.——
_____
_ ———
-- —.—
.. —_.
56
NACATN 2899
.
/4
A
0,
\
o
A
\
.
A
/@
,,
o
t\
A
\
I
I
26
28
\
I
I
30
32
&f17i?ra&Yz?Y/7j’
(b)
High
I
34
#!a&??,
2L4%-C
altitude.
,
Figure 27.- Concluded.
—-—-— .—-— —
..._
____ ..__
._.
-.
.—
.
.
.-.
. -.. .
!?
4’
i
(8
,
=Ey’
f?
“2
.3
.4
Mach
.5
.6
.7
#’&z?A9-
Figure 28. - Veriation of force pm
g with Mach nuriber at low and high
aLtitude at the forwmxi center-of .grati@
pOsitlon.
F-47W30
ajmplane.
Data shown exe averages QP the force per g in left and
right tuna
at the focenter-~ -~tity
position of 26.3 perc&t
of the mean ae ~c
Chofi.
NACATN 2899
58
\\\\
////
/42’/”
7%X’S
A&$7 7$ZZS
23-
2U
/5
e5
/0
.
Figure 29.- Variation with sltitude of the center-of-grati~ range for
desirable stick force per g in left and right turns at 200 miles per
hour . F-47D-30airplane.
0
——.——
-—
---—
—--
—.
._—
.. ———
——
—.—
-—-
I
1
)
\
1
$
OA
I
I
I
J
m
I
#
I
I
I
Figure
30. - Variation
of elevator
I
I
90
AAafec#
I
I
I
//0
/#
I
/20
a+zwedm~
angle
required
to land tith
airspeed,
F-47D-W
airplane.
NAC.A
TN 2899
Rudder
l——
.,
.
—
I
I
1
L
>
Tofu/ ai/eron
-.
,/
/
I
I
Y
---—
-
/“
R\@hf
I
.
I
I
/
o
-=s=
—
/40
/30 I
0
r
z
I
4
Time,
(a)
I
6
I
8
I
@
1
/2
st3c
Controls held fixed.
Figure31..
- Time histaries showing results of deflecting landing flaps.
Center of gravi& at 29.1 percent of the mean aerodynamic chord;
gross weight, 13,280 pounds; altitude, 5,000 feet.
!
.—. —.—
—--— --
-——
—.. —.. ._—
————..-.
—.
61
NACA TN 2899
—
1
Aileron
\
7
1
.
1
-
/’?uG’b’8r
I
,U
I
Rolly
II
.
,.
I
I
I
Pifch
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
8
1
/0
I
/!2!
(2
/
o
I
o
I
/2
I
4
Time,
(b) Wings
6
s ec
held level by use of con&ols. ‘
.
FiWe
. .. . . .. .
31.- Concluded.
.... —-— ------ .-——— ——— -- .--—--—
—---- .--- ——-——— --—--——
------
--
I
/4
I
/m
1
1
220
m
I
m
I
I
m
3#
I
420
A7&7’2d#@uP&Aj?j?
Figure 3ZI. - Variation of the change in normal acceleration with Mach
nuniherand airspeed as the div~-recovery flaps were deflected.
F-47D-30 airplane. (TwO sets of points for same condition indicate
data from two flights.)
..—
____
_.
—-z—.
— _____
_. ._.
63
NACATN2899
,
OL
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
/0 -—=_
-
—
0
I
\
I
I
10
I
I
I
I
1
f
Wk
‘?0r
/0 -
Elevafor
o -.
7bfo/ ai/efon J
/.
/1
1
I
I
1
1
1
I
I
I
0
0
A.s)-l
/l
I
1
I
I
1
/20
80
I
I
I
=3=
I
\
1 ,
Z
0
1
1
4
,
6
t
8
1
10
12
16
B
7Zmt3, sec
(a) Elevator alone used; pilot attempted to hold other controls fixed.
Figure 33.- Time histories of stall approaches irithe power-on clean
condition.
Center of gravity at 26.4 percent of the me= aerodynamic
chord; altitude, 5,000 feet.
—.——...———
..———-————
—--
..
.—.—
————
.-— —-
I
/49
0
v
I
1
I
1
v
,
I
,
2’
}0
I
o
/0
I
Aileron
I
I
I
~
I
!
1
I
0
used.to hold wings level after ipitial stall.
controfi
Figure 33.- Concluded..
,
L—.—..——
.—..
.__—..
-...
_
.
. ..—
. ..-.
.-.
—.
.—.
.
_-
.
.
.
..—.
—.——
——.
.NACATN
9N
I
1
t
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
(
,
1
,
,
1
t
,
t
,
[
10L52J@oy
o
A//eronElevafor
/5 Tofol
ailerony
1i
o --
.f?u#er~
1P/Ych
0
—
ROu=
II
,
1
,
1
t
t
t
1
1
0
.
10
,
/l
/40
1
I
t
,
t
t
1
1
t
I
I
L
1
t
I
t
L
=s=’
r
.
7ZM.$
J2c
(a)
/
..
Elevator alone used; ~ilot attempted to hold other controls fixed
after initial stall.
Figure 34.- Time histories of stall approaches in the glide condition.
Center of gravity at 26.3 percent of the mean aerodynamic chord;
gross weight, 12,400 pounls; altitude, 5,000 feet.
—.—
———
-
-...——...
_
----
.- -
,-
66
NACA TN 2899
k700
w
1
m
w
I
40 -
30 20 -
0‘
L
Aileron
/0 -
I
I
I
/3 -
/0 -
(b) All controls used to hold wings level titer initial stall.
Figure 34.- Concluded.
.——
—.——
———
——-.
—
——.
NACA ~
2899
1
I
1
1
t
1
/00
/
0
/~
A9
l+=Pifch
Rd/
. —
l=--
/0
0“
I
Kiiiiiz
/ -
Normal
A4b77al~
&/
L#%z’kzy
la
t
,w~
‘~
/@
02
.. . . .
(a)
4
~ms,4sec
.
Glide condition. Average
24,000
feet; center
of gravity at 26.4 percent of
the mean aerodynamic chord;
gross weight, 12,770 pounds.
wings
. ..
—.,- .
. .— ..—. .—________
of stall
level
__
.
8
Tim6. stu
.
altitude,
Figure 35.-Time histories
024
after
/0
(h) Power-pn clean.condition.
Average altitude, 26,5oo feet;
center of gravi~ at 26.4 percent
of the mean aerodynamic chord;
gross weight, 12,570 pounds.
approaches;
initial
all controls
used
to hold
stall.
..—
. —...
_.
—
. ——.
NACAITN 2899
ILV-
(2L
I
1
I
,
t
I
I
\
Tofal uilcron
10M.
o
,
1
F/wafnr
/1
I
I
1
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
02!4661UIZ
t
I
M
Time,
SEC
(a) Elevator &lone used; pilot attempted to hold other controls fixed
after initial stall.
historiesof stallapproachesin the approachcondition.
Figure 36.- T@
Center of gravity at 28.9 percent of the mean aerodynamic
chord; gross
weight, 12)860
pounds; altitude, 5,000 feet.
1
—..
—___—
_
._
.._.
_
-.
_____
___
__
—.
.
..—
. .
.
. . ___
. .
. .
.
____
____
______
-. _____
,,
NACA TN 2899,
/to
-
I
.
.
/l
o.
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
/0-
90
I
1
I
I
L748
Z.z-ec.
(b) All
used to hold wings
Figure
—
-----
-.- ——._. . _ ——-——.
I
/6
level
1
20
titer
I
24
initial
.
stall.
36.- Concluiied..
/ —_. ——
.. —. —.
-——. –—.—.—-=
________
._.
-..
--
——
NACA TN 2899
70
‘P-----/#
I
I
I
1
I
1
1
1
/
t
/0 -
0-——
/0
I
1
1
/
p?@-%42w’
I
—
I
0
J
0
I
I
1
,
8
2?4
!
/0
1
(
/2
Z.%&cc
(a)
Elevator alone used; pilot attempted to hold other controls fixed
after initial stall.
Figure 37.- Time histories of stall.approaches in the bnding condition.
Center of gravity at 29.O percent of the mean aerodynamic chord;
gross weight, 13,170 pounds; altitude, 5,000 feet.
—. —
——.— —.
.——-.——
-. —
—-
. . . ..
.
. ..— —.—.
71
.
Xv -
0
I
/#’
I
I
t
I
I
r
1
I
/4 -
o
/ --\/’—’
\
\\/
!
/4
1
I
I
v
%%Azw
I
I
I
t
I
1
I
I
/0’.-x
-%-
0
/0
1
/f7fW’
0
I
!
1
I
I
F.*A
100/0
/
pG?@-/xz%A7/
I
0
1
Z%w.swmeJ
~
/10 -
90 -
OZ46
I
1
I
I
I
8
T/*, se<!
1
I
/Z
#
I
t
/6
/6
(b) All controls used to hold wings level after initial stall.
Figure 37.- Concluded.
-.
.. —. ——. —.. —..—
———.
-—. _—
—-. . —--—- -- —----
-
NACATN 2899
72
r
m
t
,
I
ELw..ory
-r
t
o
I
—I%f7
–-Pi+ch
[“
——
o—
/0
$./
ol~
,
,
1
t
2
t
4
I
6
!
I
I
w
80
1
O
77im6,
(a)
alone
sec
used; pilot attempted
after
initial
v
I
g
1
10
to hold
stall!.
t
12
other
controls
fixed
Figure 38.- Time histories
of stall- approaches in the wave-off condition.
Complete stall was not reached became
of insufficient
rudder’ control.
chord; gross
Center of gravity at 28.8 percent of the mesa aerodynamic
weight, 13,210pounds;altitude, 5,000 feet.
.———. .——....—
_ .__. ..-—.—
- ——-
– --
– -–- -
.———- -
—
——
—.
10N
.-.
—
NACA TN ZtJ99
,
73
/%29
m -
0
I
t
1
!
1
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
H0
/0
a’efk+n%w
~RMz%
~flkrhum
30 - ——
0
/
t
/fzd/\
0
~,..7--d
1.
lo~
/-.
/-*o/z7a/
..
Lmqi!udina/3
0 ~
=@&=
m -
80 -“
0
I
1
I
I
??.
I
I
/2
/+
1
246
I
6
Sc$”
(b)AU controlsused to hold wings level after i&tial
Figure 38.- Concluded.
...-
..— —.- . ..-—- ..—..-.
——
.-—
——
——————
..—
.. ———
- --—- ----
74
NAcATN 2899
0
\
——.
m -
---—A/---’
I
1
I
1
I
\’
1
t
!
I
1
I
,!
?:
30
Elevufor
t
20
t
M
I
I
!
1
I
\i
Elevm%r
/0 -
_-—\
o
I
1
y-
——
1
/>--
~
I
~
J /
I
I
4
Tofu/ Aleron
I
ffuddar
1
.1 ————-. .-— —
0 -“––.–—–––-––—–”–”-
/%o&’”
/1
0
I
,
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
!
,
t
1
~
/0 L
/
I
Time,
stm
Figure39.- Time histo~ of a stall approach in the power-on clean
condition during a low-speed left turn using elevator alone.
Pilot attempted to hold other controb fixed. Center of gratity
at 26.3 percent of the mean aemdynami c chord; gross weight,
12,690 pounds; ~titie, 5,OOO feet.
———.——.—_———
.. ... . . . .. —__
—-.— ~-—
._. —._
—.—..—— . .
,
.
NAC!ATN 2899
75
20 -
Ekvo+or
10 -
1
I
1
1
I
1
I
1
‘:~
/
:
0 >
_——
—————
——
/
1
1
t
I
1
0
i
1
I
I
I
/0 -
2Lu-
=wi=
/60 -
)
1
0
2
4.6
1
1
r
1
8
10
i!!
Time, sec
Figure k3.- Time history of a stall approach in a wind-up left turn in
the landing condition using elevator alone to produce stall. Pilot
attempted to hold ,othercontrols fixed. Center ofgravity at
26.4 percent of the mean aerodynamic chord; gross weight,
12,680 pounds; altitude, 5,0’00feet.
NAcA-L!u@6y -2-27-s2-Iwo
—.—
———.
.
.
Download PDF