2 hours ago, Rimshot said:

Well...

Exactly. And indeed they are most severe at v1 rotate speed I suppose, but already building up during the take off roll albeit not very strong. Whatever, I assume the development team has done extensive research to get this right and what we see in the video isn't something they just pulled out of a hat.

What on earth does v1 have anything to do with Wingtip vortices? 
 

 

I feel like I'm reading an earnest conversation.About how many angels can dance on the edge of a pin.

6 hours ago, ahsmatt7 said:

What on earth does v1 have anything to do with Wingtip vortices? 

Because at that speed the wings have generated enough lift for the plane to take of and therefor the vortices are very strong?

Calling people who see things differently, right or wrong, a 'pedantic crowd'? Ok then... 🙄

Edited October 21, 20241 yr by Rimshot

On 10/18/2024 at 1:58 AM, Krakin said:

Yeah I'm definitely dropping my Navigraph sub. The default planning tool is looking incredible.

I'm not going to leave Navigraph at this point in time. Maybe later will wait and see... 

Edited October 21, 20241 yr by virtualstuff

12 hours ago, Rimshot said:

No, no, ChatGPT is my friend 😁😜

Your plastic pal who's fun to be with!

 

With a nod to Douglas Adams 😉

3 hours ago, Rimshot said:

Because at that speed the wings have generated enough lift for the plane to take of and therefor the vortices are very strong?

But the aircraft is not yet flying?
I've been taught that amplitude of the wake is proportional to amount of lift generated. So during ground roll the net AoA on the wing is rather small, thus the strength of these vortices should also be "small" (not saying they do not exist)?

24 minutes ago, virtualstuff said:

I'm not going to leave Navigraph at this point in time. Maybe later will wait and see... 

Navigraph is getting expensive, but the built in EFB is not the solution except for those who just fly heavies.

I watched this video the other day. I've never used Navigraph for VFR before, and I had no idea you could do stuff like using motorway junctions as visual reference points and  use them to create a flight plan. For the price of a coffee and bun every month, I think the cost is justified. I also fly PMDG and soon Fenix so I won't be giving mine up.

 

 

I am a bit puzzled about this debate regarding wake turbulence. Isn't the wing generating lift as soon as the aircraft starts to accelerate down the runway? It's just that it is not enough to overcome the weight of the aircraft until rotation speed has been reached. Another key factor seems to be that any wingtip vortices that are created when the aircraft is still on the ground are quickly dissipated when they make contact with the runway, so the effect is negligible.

39 minutes ago, SAS443 said:

But the aircraft is not yet flying?
I've been taught that amplitude of the wake is proportional to amount of lift generated. So during ground roll the net AoA on the wing is rather small, thus the strength of these vortices should also be "small" (not saying they do not exist)?

Indeed, the aircraft is not yet flying. That's why I stated earlier the vortices are not very strong on the take off roll compared to when the plane actually takes off. See the video below; the Cub has already landed, the AoA is minimal, speed is low. But still we see the wingtips creating vortices. I can imagine a large jet building up speed during the ground roll would produce some amount of vortices as well.

Again, I trust the folks at Asobo have done their research and tried their best to implement jetblast and wake turbulence correctly.

 

Edited October 21, 20241 yr by Rimshot

I was playing golf with my dad many years ago (it would have been around 1990) at Auchmill golf course in Aberdeen, Scotland. This is directly underneath the approach to runway 34 at the airport. A Bac 1-11 passed very low over the top of us, and I remember hearing the "swooshing" sound of the wake turbulence a few seconds later.

3 hours ago, Rimshot said:

Again, I trust the folks at Asobo have done their research and tried their best to implement jetblast and wake turbulence correctly.

I'm sure as it happened in France, dev at Asobo are aware of this Robin DR400 accident taking off behind an Antonov-2 and the experimentation done after it.

 

Good video testing C172 power-off and power-on stalls in the tech alpha plus some other aspects of mountain flying

 

9 hours ago, Rimshot said:

Because at that speed the wings have generated enough lift for the plane to take of and therefor the vortices are very strong?

Calling people who see things differently, right or wrong, a 'pedantic crowd'? Ok then... 🙄

Wrong. V1 doesn’t determine lift. V1 can wildly change based off runway length and condition. It’s a speed that determines whether or not it’s safe to reject a takeoff. Not whether the airplane can fly. 
 

5 hours ago, Rimshot said:

Indeed, the aircraft is not yet flying. That's why I stated earlier the vortices are not very strong on the take off roll compared to when the plane actually takes off. See the video below; the Cub has already landed, the AoA is minimal, speed is low. But still we see the wingtips creating vortices. I can imagine a large jet building up speed during the ground roll would produce some amount of vortices as well.

Again, I trust the folks at Asobo have done their research and tried their best to implement jetblast and wake turbulence correctly.

 

That video is inconclusive at best.

one can see the wake form in the fog when the plane is still above the ground. Meaning it’s flying. Then when the airplane is one the ground, those wakes that were already produced are behind the airplane doing there thing in the fog. You can see when the airplane touches down. There are no more wakes being formed. It’s clear the airplane is past the fog when on the landing roll.

 

 

Edited October 21, 20241 yr by ahsmatt7