Aircraft Overstressing
-
I was responding to Delta558 who was asking about documented references to limits, and trying to illustrate that design specification limits exist outside of the PoH.
As has already been mentioned in previous replies, the negative limit specified by governing bodies for aircraft in this category is -1.52g with a 1.5x safety factor ensuring no structural failure below that.
Perhaps I should have included this excerpt (although I think it's already been quoted more or less) also from CS 23.337:
"(b) The negative limit manoeuvring load
factor may not be less than –
(1) 0·4 times the positive load factor
for the normal, utility and commuter
categories"@ShadowSix , Thanks for this info... Based on this I would agree that the negative G limit should be set to 3.8 * 0.4 = -1.52 to meet the certification authority requirements. When combined with the existing "load_safety_factor =1.2" this should be sufficient to resolve the problem of overstressing in rough air.
-
@ShadowSix , Thanks for this info... Based on this I would agree that the negative G limit should be set to 3.8 * 0.4 = -1.52 to meet the certification authority requirements. When combined with the existing "load_safety_factor =1.2" this should be sufficient to resolve the problem of overstressing in rough air.
@RetiredMan93231 That works for me
Thanks to all for the input on this thread.For further information, this is the load_safety_factor line from the Bonanza flight_model.cfg file:
load_safety_factor = 1.5 ; Flap negative load limit when down. Same dimension as gravity vector FEET/SECONDS^2
If this is correct it appears from this that the load_safety_factor line only applies when the flaps are down, which further justifies changing the negative G limits in the Piper Arrow file rather than change the load_safety_factor.
