You are right to make it look the same YOU
will loose airspeed due to the higher G load. It is not the wind causing it it is your desire to MAKE
the turn look a certain way. Part of being a good pilot is knowing your planes, and your own, limitations. If, in your desire to make your ground track look perfect, you stall/crash you have nothing and no one to blame but yourself. Not the wind, not inertia, not gremlins.
Finally, we get all theÂ*posturing andÂ*condecention out of the way and get down to the point!Â* Different perceptions of the same facts!Â* Â*Yes, I totaly understand that for a pilot who does not care about his ground track, a turn down wind is no different than any other. But, for a pilot who is concerned with nothing else
but his ground track, crashing in a down wind turn is not a myth!
Thanks for helping me articulate whatÂ*I have been struggling with. Â*If this does notÂ*clear it up for everyone else who has berated and belittled those who didn't percieve the argument the same wayÂ*, then my Cub is waiting and theÂ*offer for dinner still stands.Â*Â*Â*cfircav8r,Â*should you ever make it down my way, your dinner is waiting for having patience with me thru this discussion instead of trying to bully me into submission ![img][/img]
Did anyone ever say ''crashing in a downwind turn is a myth''??? NO, THATS NOT THE MYTH. The ''myth'' refers to the ERRONEOUS REASONS people posit for their downwind crashes. It's important because the myth IS a myth, and leads people to make the wrong (or at least not the best) compensation for the very real problem of downwind crashes.
Is ANYONE really that concerned with ground track being exactly the same as in dead calm? Even in competition/pattern flying, when you have to maintain ground track by crabbing into the wind, do the judges really take points off for having a longer radius on the downwind turns? I've never flown patterns, but that seems awfully hard to see or judge anyway. Furthermore, in your original dinner challenge, did you specify that the ground track and turn radii remain the same as in dead calm? I don't think so. You are now re-framing your challenge and your argument because you now know your original concept was somewhat in error. You might benefit from accepting that, and I'm calling you on it (not belittling you).
The problem is not so much that pilots try to maintain a ''perfect'' rectangular ground track, but that they try to maintain steady ground SPEED. If you try to keep your visually apparent speed (ground speed) looking the same as on a calm day, then yes, you will definitely lose airspeed on the ''downwind'' turn and gain airspeed going upwind. That is bad and that's no myth.
If you expect and allow the plane to have different ground speeds upwind vs. downwind, then you usually stay out of trouble. If you allow for this different visual ground speed appearance in the different directions of flight, then even if you DO try to maintain ground track by constantly crabbing into the wind, I doubt the loss in airspeed caused by the longer (greater than 90 degree) turn would be very significant. The point of this thread is that you should not attempt to do this at the same radius as upwind anyway. THAT IS THE LESSON, not ''add throttle''. If you keep your stick movements gradual and similar to what you do on a calm day, and let the downwind turn ''elongate'' and let the plane appear to accelerate in the down wind direction, YOU WILL NOT LOSE AIRSPEED ANY MORE THAN YOU DO ON YOUR UPWIND TURNS... and you will not crash. No throttle needed.
You may consider this a trivial or semantic point, but it's important. Most airspeed loss from turning downwind is NOT due to the trivial fact that such turns may be more than 90 degrees. Most of the airspeed loss is due to the pilot MAKING the plane lose airspeed by being unaware of the invisible wind direction, underestimating wind affect on ground track and ground speed, and by FORCING the plane to make turns that look the same downwind as upwind. In short, pilot mistakes ground speed for airspeed. Pilot error, NOT AERODYNAMICS. ''Add throttle'' is not the correct cure for this error.