Carl - I thought those unit usage went out when I graduated, I hate trying to get units right. The nice thing about working in the industry today is that everything is computerized and automatically spits out the right answers (if the inputs are the same).

With out models the inertias are so small and control power so large that we start out with excess almost. The servos do increase the inertias but a fraction of a degree of control throw more gives the same roll acceleration. Where inertias start to be a problem is in the full size heavy lifters with engines in pods and fuel everywhere. There rolling takes an appointment. Fighters like the F-15 are of course better but when they are loaded down with external fuel tanks and bomb racks it can slow them down some also. Our models make things a lot easier.

The lifting contests that Paul is involved with can have a lot of problems involved with inertias and control but apparently the biggest problem is in the design teams and student pilots.

Andyede - you have pretty close to the right concept just the wrong terms (at least to me who speaks aerodynamics. What I said in my comment a couple of replys above is the same thing. Between your two extremes is a varying acceleration that is dependent on the roll rate of the airplane.

When you say - the wing will no longer create any lift at all - isn't right. To roll all you have to do is create an imbalance between the two wings. Whether or not the wing goes to no lift depends on the roll rate and initial angle of attack - it takes a lot of roll rate to drive the wing to zero lift. What actually is happening is that the acceleration being produced by the aileron is = to the deceleration due to the roll rate (that angle of attack thing which is called Clp - roll damping due to roll rate). That can occur any time depending on control deflection and does not depend on the wing going to zero lift.

The drag hitting the wings you mention is the Clp term. You actually get to the steady state roll condition very quickly with our models. When looking at anything aerodynamic concerning controls you have the control deflections - da - delta aileron, the efficiency of the controls - Clda - rolling moment due to aileron, damping coefficients - Clp as defined above, and the dynamic pressure due to velocity. You multiply the whole mess together to get the rolling moment in ft-lbs. That moment into the rolling inertia gives the rolling acceleration. The airplane can be analyzed the same way in pitch and yaw. It is all moments, inertias and angular accelerations. In the linear directions it is simpler, you just have the lift, drag and side forces operating thru the mass of the airplane. Do all six at once and you can do a time history of how the airplane should fly. There are short cuts to get to some of the results but to be entirely accurate you need to do the whole ball of wax.

Keep in mind most of the terms are dependent on the geometry of the airplane and mass distribution. Roll inertias won't have an effect of maximum roll rate but weight of the airplane will. I think you meant roll inertia in that comment. Weight will cause a variation in angle of attack - the control effectiveness is a function of angle of attack and the way the airplane rolls depends on the orientation of the roll axis with respect to the airplane velocity vector.

More than you wanted to know?? You have done a reasonably good job of analysis, you just need to convert to our terms :-)