FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1982
1982 - 0067.PDF
braking by keeping the feet firmly on the ground, then let the aircraft roll by lifting them up on to the nose- wheel pedals. The trike surged for ward with the wing held at zero angle of attack, and within 40yd the ASI was indicating in excess of 30 m.p.h. To rotate, the control bar is pushed steadily forward. Increasing force is required to overcome the resistance of the nose trim cord until, at maxi mum extent, about 121b push force has to be exerted. When the wing reaches about 18° nose-up the trike lifts and rotates smartly on the main wheels until it adopts a 15° angle. The ground effect is such that the aircraft leaps off the ground and the bar must then be pulled back to maintain climb speed of 35 m.p.h. with the bar about lOin from the chest. At this weight the climb rate is about 250ft/min—not sparkling but safe enough. Solo, the climb rate is 750ft/min at a high nose-up angle. In the conditions prevailing, the stability was excellent. The weight of the trike and pilots together was 5361b, acting on a wing weighing 801b. As the stability of the aircraft is pendular, the heavier the load, the more stable the aircraft. Turns are initiated by pulling the bar slightly to increase speed, then moving the trike in the required direction of roll, at the same time easing the bar out as roll comes on to stop the nose dropping and tighten the turn. To roll out of the turn, the weight is moved over towards the higher wing and the bar pulled back as the wings come level. It all sounds rather complicated, but is a bit like stirring a pudding. Co-ordinated turns can be achieved with a 3in bar movement and control forces are very light. Because the suspended mass is much greater than that of one person on a hang-glider and it is slung very much lower, the con trolling moment is much greater and smaller movements are required. Dual control—arms crossed. Parking brake on •^•<tjmwi Power is supplied by a 432 c.c. Fuji Robin producing 40 b.h.p. at 5,900 r.p.m. The mahogany propeller is driven via a toothed belt With both hands on the throttle bar rather than on the control frame, and the feet resting on the rudder pedals, the simplicity of weight shift flying can be appreciated. Throttle control consists of twisting the bar with minor wrist movements. There is no throttle friction fitted on the Titan, so the aircraft must be flown "hands on" all the time that power is required. Control by the force of the shoulders and upper arms can become tiring in turbulence, but is not beyond the abilities of any reasonably fit person. With all trim forces balanced on the Titan, it is a very relaxing aircraft to fly in the cruise—rather like flying a sofa. The feet do nothing while the aircraft is in the air unless more drag is re quired in the glide, when the legs can be dangled below the trike. As the thrust line is set very low, the effect of reducing power is to lower the nose of the aircraft, and increasing power causes it to pitch up. Thus there is no need to alter bar position with power adjustments as this is automatically compensated. The aircraft will immediately return to its trimmed speed with no ten dency to oscillate in pitch. At 75 per cent power and at maximum all-up weight we recorded 42 m.p.h. in level flight on the rather crude ASI fitted to the test aircraft. The Titan is by no means a fast aircraft, but it gives the student plenty of time to learn his map reading during cross-country exercises. Achieving a stall was not easy. With the hang point of the trike set well forward within its permissible range, the bar must be pushed fully forward to the limit of its travel. No- one could stall the aircraft inadver tently, especially as he has to over come the full force of the nose trim cord. The aircraft mushes and then produces a clean pitch-down with no tendency to drop a wing. Recovery is instantaneous with or without power. Unlike many other types of micro- light, there are no complications caused by applying power in zero or negative, g configurations. Perform ance in spin recovery has not been evaluated, as it has not yet been found possible to spin the aircraft. Standard spin recovery in weight shift aircraft is to move the weight towards the centre of the spin, thus reducing the spin inertia. On returning to the circuit, we tested roll response. Roll forces are very light, requiring a force of some 2-31b, and roll rate has been measured at 30° per second. On finals, every microlight should be flown at a high airspeed. Higher airspeeds provide greater controlla bility in the rougher air likely to be encountered near the ground, and it FLIGHT International, 9 January 1982 65
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
