Grumman Rules the Sky

[FLS]

Heat limited by the wheel bearings. 

[Karnak]

the conver belt speeds up relative to the planes speed in the opposite direction  as well

Yup, but it doesn't make a difference.  Plane still takes off.  Plane's don't use wheels to accelerate like a care does.

[J.A.W.]

Yup, but it doesn't make a difference.  Plane still takes off.  Plane's don't use wheels to accelerate like a care does.

Depends on the car ( & its wheel bearings) Ask Craig Breedlove..

& the effect of a CV steaming at flank speed into a stiff breeze on aircraft ops is?

What would happen if they tried to fly off in those conditions  - heading off the stern?

Stern consequences? L.O.L...

[kvuo75]

Depends on the car ( & its wheel bearings) Ask Craig Breedlove..

& the effect of a CV steaming at flank speed into a stiff breeze on aircraft ops is?

the reason you take off into wind is to lower ground speed.. since ground is usually limited (cv deck, runway)
once you're off the ground, the wind doesn't matter.

(unless there's wind shear)

in fact, if you were between solid cloud layers without navigation aids, you wouldn't be able to determine the speed or direction of the wind...  the plane flies thru the airmass. that's all it does. it doesn't know or care which direction or how quickly the airmass is moving.. wind is relative to the ground. once you're off the ground there is really no wind as far as the aircraft is concerned..

[J.A.W.]

Unless you are held-up by a headwind, & run out of juice - with no place to land..

Or if your aircraft is a balloon.. or even a Zeppelin..

So wind can often be a flying concern, really..

[kvuo75]

Unless you are held-up by a headwind, & run out off juice with no place to land..

Or if your aircraft is a balloon..

neither of which have anything to do with climb rate which I think you were talking about originally.

[J.A.W.]

No, but the 'Grumman Rules the Sky matter' is 'bout done, anyhow.. ..they don't..

& still only opinions, or empirical views.. ..expressed headwind/climb rate-wise..

 Nothing scientific put up as proof..

&  a dedicated thread would probably be best..
.. - if there was any genuine interest in discussing it..

[Karnak]

No, but the 'Grumman Rules the Sky matter' is 'bout done, anyhow.. ..they don't..

& still only opinions, or empirical views.. ..expressed headwind/climb rate-wise..

 Nothing scientific put up as proof..

&  a dedicated thread would probably be best..
.. - if there was any genuine interest in discussing it..

How the hell is a headwind supposed to help you climb?  Don't even worry about physics, use basic logic.

If you ignore how fast the airplane is moving over the surface of the planet a headwind functionally doesn't exist.  If the aircraft's best climb air speed is 180mph then to get the best climb it will have an airspeed of 180mph.  A headwind of 20mph merely means it attains that 180mph air speed while traveling over the ground at 160mph.  Likewise, a 20mph tail wind means that it attains 180mph air speed while going 200mph over the ground.  (Altitude of course changes the specific relationship of air speed and ground speed)  In all examples the airplane does 180mph air speed and climbs at the same rate.

[J.A.W.]

If you are really interested in the correct answer Knak,

Best start a new thread on the topic,  since - its clouding the thrust of this one..

Tantamount to being ..a bit..  ..hi-jack-wise..

[Brooke]

Anyone with aeronautical knowledge care to discuss the effect on climb rate of
flying into a stiff headwind ?

We already covered that.  It shaves a second off the time to climb.o

[Brooke]

& Ww, the stunt F8F load-out was light, & the WEP fit out was non mil-spec too..

We covered that too. It was not light. Wep usage the way they did it shaves a few seconds off time to climb.

[J.A.W.]

Brooke you've got a head for maths right?

Given the parameters for F8F thrust/weight/lift are available..

& the effects on climb are graphically shown in the `51H climb charts I posted..

It shouldn't take a Cray to compute the climb rate required & thrust/weight necessary
for matching the time to climb stunt, right?

That would sure show load-out/power factors..

& here's a stab at headwind climb assist..

A stiff cold November wind blowing off the flat lake surface could well extend up thousands of feet..

& since climb performance is, obviously thrust/lift related..

Thrust in climb = lift..

& to maintain  climb speed in a headwind you increase Angle of Attack..

The same speed with higher A of A must.. logically.. give a boost in climb rate..

..so time to climb is gonna be measurably less..

Wonder if that cheat complies with FAI record attempt reg's.. I doubt it..

[J.A.W.]

& so to actually generate those Navy time-to-climb figures..

Which are way above the book figures for a mil-spec stocker..

& are close to what a highly modified race-engine powered, stripped-down race-bear made..

The maths cant lie, it had to be a 'perfect storm' type deal..

Tricked up max boost, light load out, hi-density lift/max boost-coolant ambient air temp
 & free lift from headwind..

No wonder they didn't put it forward to the FAI.. since a cheater deal would not fly there..

& if the FAI record scrutineer observers had been there..

No FAI recip mil-spec stocker record ratified/awarded , for sure..

[J.A.W.]

Cool stunt though, & obviously well planned..

Probably stand as a model for a current attempt..

Except for the likely FAI record-conditions-stipulation-compliance-violation..

Wonder if we could apply correction factors, theoretically & see how many seconds would
have to be added for a.. legit' record..

[Brooke]

& here's a stab at headwind climb assist..

Headwind doesn't matter more than a second or two.  We covered that before starting here.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,356037.msg4722504.html#msg4722504

We are going over old ground here.

Once your airplane is in the air, wind no longer matters to your climb rate.