kevbot wrote:The Wright brothers only had one instrument on the original Wright Flyer... What was it??

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

https://airandspace.si.edu/exhibitions/ ... ontrol.cfm

A small complement of instruments recorded flight data. A Richard anemometer and a stopwatch were mounted on the front strut to the pilot’s right. They recorded distance through the air in meters and the duration of the flight, readings from which airspeed could be calculated. A Veedor revolution counter was mounted at the base of the engine to record engine revolution.

They also believed (vehemently) in wing warping, but we’re all using ailerons now...

CamTom12 wrote:

kevbot wrote:The Wright brothers only had one instrument on the original Wright Flyer... What was it??

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

https://airandspace.si.edu/exhibitions/ ... ontrol.cfm

A small complement of instruments recorded flight data. A Richard anemometer and a stopwatch were mounted on the front strut to the pilot’s right. They recorded distance through the air in meters and the duration of the flight, readings from which airspeed could be calculated. A Veedor revolution counter was mounted at the base of the engine to record engine revolution.

They also believed (vehemently) in wing warping, but we’re all using ailerons now...

Sure the Wright brothers weren't always so right! But they did do some interesting stuff, and there's been plenty of recent research on wing warping in the past few years anyway - not saying it's gonna be the next sliced bread, but it's another "new" idea that's been around for ages. I'm aware that not all of these features we're even original by the Wrights. Kind of like when there was a canard movement in the industry, seems like we've seen that before?!

But what I was referring to above was their sole flight instrument on the original Wright Flyer - a piece of yarn tethered on a stick out of the LE, to see AoA real time.

I learned about that trick back when I was in high school and decided to strap a ski pole to my struts with some yarn taped to the front. It didn't work nearly as well as I hoped at the time, but that's what experimenting is for, to learn! And I sure learned a lot more about AoA by visualizing it than I did in any of the book learning.

Anyhow, I agree with the above posts, I generally fly by the feeling of the wing and vibrations of the engine, but I sure wouldn't be opposed to an AoA HUD or even better an aural indicator.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

kevbot wrote:

CamTom12 wrote:

kevbot wrote:The Wright brothers only had one instrument on the original Wright Flyer... What was it??

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

https://airandspace.si.edu/exhibitions/ ... ontrol.cfm

A small complement of instruments recorded flight data. A Richard anemometer and a stopwatch were mounted on the front strut to the pilot’s right. They recorded distance through the air in meters and the duration of the flight, readings from which airspeed could be calculated. A Veedor revolution counter was mounted at the base of the engine to record engine revolution.

They also believed (vehemently) in wing warping, but we’re all using ailerons now...

Sure the Wright brothers weren't always so right! But they did do some interesting stuff, and there's been plenty of recent research on wing warping in the past few years anyway - not saying it's gonna be the next sliced bread, but it's another "new" idea that's been around for ages. I'm aware that not all of these features we're even original by the Wrights. Kind of like when there was a canard movement in the industry, seems like we've seen that before?!

But what I was referring to above was their sole flight instrument on the original Wright Flyer - a piece of yarn tethered on a stick out of the LE, to see AoA real time.

I learned about that trick back when I was in high school and decided to strap a ski pole to my struts with some yarn taped to the front. It didn't work nearly as well as I hoped at the time, but that's what experimenting is for, to learn! And I sure learned a lot more about AoA by visualizing it than I did in any of the book learning.

Anyhow, I agree with the above posts, I generally fly by the feeling of the wing and vibrations of the engine, but I sure wouldn't be opposed to an AoA HUD or even better an aural indicator.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I was watching that NASA experiment pretty close for a while but it got quiet and I forgot about it. Any news on that front?

There’s a thing that’ll give you aural AoA, can’t remember what it’s called but I saw it on the van’s site. I’ll see if I can find it.

EDIT: found it: https://youtu.be/-kbA6NxMpmQ

CamTom12 wrote:I was watching that NASA experiment pretty close for a while but it got quiet and I forgot about it. Any news on that front?

There’s a thing that’ll give you aural AoA, can’t remember what it’s called but I saw it on the van’s site. I’ll see if I can find it.

Don't know the status on the NASA project, but they work so slow who knows! I think last I saw any update they we're testing flexible surfaces on the flaps of a Gulfstream?

I think the Dynon units may have the ability to link a digital stall horn to AoA instead of IAS, maybe some of the other EFIS systems are capable of that too? I would like that but anything more than a Garmin G5 isn't in the books anytime soon for my Pacer.

If I wasn't certified and didn't have so many random projects, I think it'd be fun to hookup a 5-hole pitot to a small digital transducer then use a Raspberry Pi to make an aural indicator to input into any intercom. Would be easy to add an LED indicator to velcro on the top of a panel and you could get both alpha and beta.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

If you're going to experiment with something on this front, experiment with TRUE AOA sensors, as in symmetrical sensors, to evaluate what's happening across the span of the wing, NOT just at one point, mid span on one wing.

To me, that's what's lacking in the existing systems for light GA aircraft.

And, the sensors, at least the one on my airplane, look remarkably like a pitot mast from a Cherokee......duh.

MTV

If you can still see the landing area over the cowling and the rate of descent is acceptable you're ok for a landing.

Gary

Three years ago I bought a 185 with a Alpha Systems Lift Reserve indicator already installed. It was the original one with the big round gauge mounter right on top of the glare shield. I didn't like the location. After flying her I realized I did not even see it during an approach. Trying to incorporate it into my scan took some time. Now it is my primary instrument of approach and landing. It is not calibrated as per the manual as its a bit on the safe side but for now it suites my needs very well.

albravo wrote:Larry,

Per our phone conversation, I'm pretty keen on adding an AoA system to my plane.

I went to the Alpha Systems website (http://alphasystemsaoa.com) to try and better understand the product. What is going on with the HUD on the video on their front page of the plane landing in a crosswind? It goes from one bar to full bars and back to one. It turns on and off. I wouldn't want that type of visual distraction on short final. As marketing videos go, it is one of the worst I've seen.

When I watch your video the progression of lights is much more helpful and the ability to see out the windscreen helps picture when and how the tool is useful.

I think you could put together a much better video for them.

Allan

I think the lights going on and off its an effect of the video, I have seen that in some of mine too.
I mounted my AoA indicator backwards, reds at the bottom (it just made more sense to me) If Alpha Systems show my install and operation can be confusing for customers, because it will show the lights upside down.

I calibrated mine with full flaps, around Vso 1.3 ,a bit less (was at slow flight of 50mph IAS , stalls at about 40 mph IAS) I wanted to learn short field landings and full flaps was the most important for me, since I was learning all this on my own.
So for short field operations I approach with the blue light on, at the flare loose 2 reds , so touch down at 4 lights on (stall is 3 red lights).

I look at the ASI on long final, to compare with GPS ground speed and see what the winds are doing.
Also the ground speed will give me an idea of my ground roll after landing, and if have enough to land or not, and how much braking I will need.

I am trying to use the minimum amount of braking when landing on gravel bars, because hard braking throws rocks in the air and then comes the horizontal hitting them.

On the CJ6 Nanchang I calibrated it as per the instructions with no flaps,(its only a 2 kt difference anyways) I approach with 2 yellow lights on
short final and plan to touch down with the blue light or all reds on at the flare (stalls at 4 red lights) which means no float, no sink and a slow touch down.(its actually easier to land than the C 182).

Just adding a little. When I calibrated mine, per the instructions that came with it, I flew at the slowest level speed possible while still being able to maintain full control, without any flaps. That is the "alpha angle", and the needle on mine is supposed to rest on the line between red and yellow at that point. Mine took quite a bit of adjusting to get it to that point. The stall occurs a few needle widths into the red zone. With flaps, since the instrument doesn't compensate for flap deployment, the needle will go well into the red, almost to the bottom of the red, before a stall. So there's lots of margin for safety, calibrating it for no flaps and then landing with flaps.

I am confused now. I thought this instrument measured lift and thus the flap setting would not make a difference in the instrument data. The flap deployment would only increase the lift and thus push the AOA reading away from red and yellow. Does adding flaps just allow greater operating into the red?

Josh

Dog is my Copilot wrote:

Just adding a little. When I calibrated mine, per the instructions that came with it, I flew at the slowest level speed possible while still being able to maintain full control, without any flaps. That is the "alpha angle", and the needle on mine is supposed to rest on the line between red and yellow at that point. Mine took quite a bit of adjusting to get it to that point. The stall occurs a few needle widths into the red zone. With flaps, since the instrument doesn't compensate for flap deployment, the needle will go well into the red, almost to the bottom of the red, before a stall. So there's lots of margin for safety, calibrating it for no flaps and then landing with flaps.

I am confused now. I thought this instrument measured lift and thus the flap setting would not make a difference in the instrument data. The flap deployment would only increase the lift and thus push the AOA reading away from red and yellow. Does adding flaps just allow greater operating into the red?

Josh

An AoA gauge measures the angle of attack of the wing by measuring the angle of the relative wind with respect to the wing. Deploying flaps (and changing nothing else) increases the AoA of the wing by altering the chord line, but does not change the angle of the relative wind so the AoA gauge wouldn't see anything different.





The AoA system would need to be calibrated for all wing configurations and told which configuration the wing was currently in.

But with flaps deployed that portion of the wing has more lift and generally stalls at a lower angle of attack. I guess a new instrument calibration is needed for that configuration (?).

Gary

Dog is my Copilot wrote:

Just adding a little. When I calibrated mine, per the instructions that came with it, I flew at the slowest level speed possible while still being able to maintain full control, without any flaps. That is the "alpha angle", and the needle on mine is supposed to rest on the line between red and yellow at that point. Mine took quite a bit of adjusting to get it to that point. The stall occurs a few needle widths into the red zone. With flaps, since the instrument doesn't compensate for flap deployment, the needle will go well into the red, almost to the bottom of the red, before a stall. So there's lots of margin for safety, calibrating it for no flaps and then landing with flaps.

I am confused now. I thought this instrument measured lift and thus the flap setting would not make a difference in the instrument data. The flap deployment would only increase the lift and thus push the AOA reading away from red and yellow. Does adding flaps just allow greater operating into the red?

Josh

This is why I calibrated mine with full flaps in the 182.

The newer AoA s from Alpha systems you can buy a flap detector device so it detects the flaps deployment, and you dont have to memorize how many lights stalls flaps on or flaps off.

Hawk Kit
Kit Features

The Hawk kit has a electronic servo needle gauge display. Fits a standard 2-1/4" round flush panel mount. 3-1/8" adapter plate is avaliable for additional purchase.

Instantaneous Angle of Attack Indication.
Three point calibration process, programmed on the display to the aircrafts specific lift curve.
Display has an imbedded photocell for daytime/nighttime brightness settings, choice of which is programmed on the display by you.
Audio output, tied to existing audio input on audio panel by others.
4 different audio options to choose from, choice of which is programmed on the display.
Audio mute switch with amber LED indicator located on the display.
12-28 VDC input, draws less than 0.250 Amps at full brightness.

Product #:DSTR-AOA-9800K

Thanks for the Clarification Larry. I get it now the flap setting is just calibrated to the relative wind/chord line. The delta difference will be changed per flap setting and is thus adjusted with a calibration setting. It looks like there are 3 settings. I would have mine set up with full flaps as a default but the other advantage I see to having the AOA is best lift during climb out or a potential engine out. Probably not a bad idea to have it calibrated for this setting too. I guess the third setting could be for a 20 or 30 degree flap setting.


Josh

I'm looking forward to the flap calibrated version. Most utility will come with full flaps during landing but I take off with 20 flaps and will be very interested in that data too. I think of an AoA as another tool to ensure I don't "moose turn", regardless of flap setting.

I know I could memorize different lights for different flap settings, but that seems a recipe for disaster with my aging memory.

Albravo,

The energy management turn is the safer low altitude turn regardless of flap setting or airspeed. Less airspeed, however, means less kinetic energy to convert, in a zoom climb, to potential energy of altitude, to convert to kinetic energy airspeed in the dive. All this energy management while making a 1g turn regardless of bank.

Using flaps and slower airspeed to hunt moose would require a bit more starting altitude because of the less kinetic energy to start with.

Flat turns are safer with flaps, but energy management turns are safer than flat turns with flaps.

Contact

Vx and Vy do actually change independently of the AoA. They both change with wing loading for a given airplane. But an AoA gets you very, very close, closer than gross weight book speeds will.

Here is an explanation by Alpha System owner, Mark korin.



https://www.facebook.com/AlphaSystemsAO ... 515488617/

Thanks, motoadve, for the excellent video explanations of how the heads up AOA display works. An actual gauge showing where stall, out of ground effect, will occur should give pilots confidence in their ability to slow up on short final a bit. Only this allows true short field work where the limiting factor is not the pilot.

We who have felt it on slowly and softly on the numbers regularly have not stalled on short final, but we have wondered about it. We realize the airspeed we are shooting for at touchdown is stall speed in one inch ground effect. But we see, hear, and feel the nearness of Vso out of ground effect on short final. Now we can see it.

Delete

Seat of the pants is just fine with me in the airplanes I fly regularly. If it is something I am new to then give me airspeed but it still does not take long to have a feel for the attitude needed to fly that airplane. If I have never flown an airplane before I like to take it up to 3 or 4 thousand feet and play with it slow. You learn a lot about what attitude to fly that airplane at for landing.

Bushwacker 2.0 is new to me but I already know what angle of attack I land at, in just a few hours that was learned. I could land at a higher angle of attack and get even slower but now I give up forward visibility and I am going to hit tailwheel first which for me landing off airport I don't want to do. So my angle of attack sets up my airspeed for landing.... I am sure if I had a gauge for this it would read the same every landing.

Early on I played with home made angle of attack indicators but they really did not tell me anything I did not already know (seat of the pants). I gave up on them fairly quickly and the more time I had the less I thought I needed something like that. Maybe certain aircraft benefit from these gadgets so I will leave room for others to be convinced they work.