Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student,rec.aviation.piloting
Path: news.jprc.com!dca1-feed2.news.digex.net!dca1-hub1.news.digex.net!digex!netnews.com!ix.netcom.com!mmallory
From: mmallory@netcom.com (Mark Mallory)
Subject: Re: 17 misconceptions - The Flight Test
Message-ID: <mmalloryF4B9xL.Kx7@netcom.com>
Followup-To: rec.aviation.student,rec.aviation.piloting
Organization: ICGNetcom
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <73slvn$5b2$1@news.monmouth.com> <VA.000006ca.003319ce@hbmltd>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 10:46:33 GMT
Lines: 11
Sender: mmallory@netcom16.netcom.com
Xref: news.jprc.com rec.aviation.student:42648 rec.aviation.piloting:30319

Dave Mould (davem@airstrip.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: The g was not nearly as high as in Hilton's experiment or the theory predicts. 
:  So - what was the difference in my experiment?  The trim tab is conventional, 
: though is also a balance tab (moves with elevator so as to reduce forces).

Suspect that your initial trim setting was affected by power (you said 
you were *climbing*); propwash over the tail causing the trim to be set to a 
more "nose down" setting than would otherwise be the case.  Perhaps 
setting trim in an 80 kt *descent* (reduced or no power) would result in 
a more "nose up" setting, giving greater acceleration at the higher speed.

