Aircraft manoeuvring

forces

Revision 72 — page content was last changed

15 August 2012
Groundschool — Theory of Flight

Tutorial Search

The performance of an aircraft in the hands of a competent pilot — at

a given altitude — results from the sum of power, angle of attack,
attitude and configuration. Power provides thrust and consequently
contributes to acceleration, airspeed, lift, drag and radius of turn.
The angle of attack dictates the dimensions of the lift force and the
induced drag and contributes to airspeed; also the angle of attack is
a significant contributor to the aircraft attitude. Attitude is the angle
the aircraft longitudinal axis subtends above or below the
horizon (usually called the 'pitch' which has another meaning
associated with propellers) plus the angle of bank and the degree
of slip. Attitude dictates the direction of the lift, thrust and drag
vectors and, consequently, converts power into velocities and
accelerations in the three planes. Configuration relates to the
deployment of lift/drag changing devices.

Airspeed is dependent on power, angle of attack, configuration and

attitude — under any given set of conditions — and attitude in flight
is readily checked by reference to the horizon. The lift, thrust and
drag forces produce manoeuvring loads on the aircraft structure,
generally expressed in terms of 'g', that must be kept within defined
limits. There is a fourth performance factor — energy management —
which is an art that supplements attitude plus power plus height to
produce maximum aircraft performance. The epitome of such an art
is demonstrated by air-show pilots who produce extraordinary
performances from otherwise relatively mundane aircraft.
 Content
 1.7 Cruise performance
 Cruise speed options
 The power required curve
 Power available
 Speed, power and altitude
 Power required vs power available

 1.8 Forces in a climb

 1.9 Forces in a descent

 1.10 Turning forces

 Centripetal force
 Turn forces and bank angle
 Manoeuvring loads
 Increasing the lift force in a turn
 Wing loading — W/S

 1.11 Limiting loads and ultimate loads

 Manoeuvring loads and gust induced loads
 Airworthiness certification categories

 1.12 Conserving aircraft energy

 Energy available
 Kinetic energy measurement
 Momentum conversion

 Abridged trigonometrical tables

 Things that are handy to know

1.7 Cruise performance

Cruise speed options

When an aircraft is cruising, flying from point A to point B, the pilot has
several options for setting cruise speed:

 One choice might be to get there as soon as possible, in which case

the pilot would operate the engine at the maximum continuous power
allowed by the engine designer. The recommended maximum
continuous power is usually around 75% of the rated power of the
engine and provides performance cruise.

 Another choice might be to get there using as little fuel as possible

 but in a reasonable time, in which case the pilot might choose a 55%
power setting to provide aneconomy cruise airspeed. Or the pilot
might choose any power setting, in the usual engine design range,
between 55% and 75%; refer to cruise speeds in the 'Airspeed and
properties of air' module.

The power required curve

In level flight at constant speed thrust power is required to balance

induced and parasite drag. Power is the rate of doing work, so power (in
watts) is force (newtons) × distance (metres) / time (seconds).
Distance/time is speed so power required is drag force (N) × aircraft speed
(m/s). Thus, if we use the expression for total drag from section 1.6 and
multiply it by V we get:

(Equation #1.3) Power required for level flight [watts] = CD × ½V³ ×

S (note V cubed).

The total drag curve can be converted

into a 'power required' diagram — usually
called the power curve — if you know
the total drag at each airspeed between
the minimum controllable speed and the
maximum level flight speed. It is a
different curve from that for total drag,
because the power required is
proportional to speed cubed rather than
speed squared. This means that (ignoring
the related CD change) if speed is
doubled, drag is increased four-fold but power must be increased eight
times — which indicates why increasing power output from, say, 75%
power to full rated power, while holding level flight, doesn't provide a
corresponding increase in airspeed.

The diagram above is a typical level-flight power curve for a light aircraft.
The part of the curve to the left of the minimum power airspeed is known
as the back of the power curve— where the slower you want to fly, the
more power is needed, because of induced drag at a high angle of attack.
The lowest possible speed for controlled flight is the stall speed, which is
discussed in the 'Airspeed and properties of air' module. Two aerodynamic
cruise speeds are indicated — the speed associated with minimum drag
(the point on the curve where the drag force factor has the lowest value)
and the speed associated with minimum power (the point on the curve
where drag force × speed has the lowest value). To maintain level flight at
speeds less than or greater than the minimum power airspeed, power
must be increased.
Power available

The engine provides power to the propeller. The propellers used in most
light aircraft have a maximum efficiency factor, in the conversion of engine
power to thrust power, of no more than 80%. (Thrust power = thrust ×
forward speed.) The pitch of the blades, the speed of rotation of the
propeller and the forward speed of the aircraft all establish the angle of
attack of the blades and the thrust delivered. The in-flight pitch of ultralight
and light aircraft propeller blades is usually fixed (though many such types
are adjustable on the ground) so that the maximum efficiency will occur at
one combination of rpm and forward speed — this is usually in the mid-
range between best rate of climb and the performance cruise airspeeds.
Propeller blades are sometimes pitched to give the best efficiency near
the best rate of climb speed (climb prop), or pitched for best efficiency at
the performance cruise airspeed (cruise prop). The efficiency of all types
of propellers falls off either side of the optimum; one with a too high pitch
angle may have a very poor take-off performance, while one with a too low
pitch may allow the engine to overspeed at any time.

With the advent of higher-powered four-stroke light engines, such as the

Jabiru 3300, there has been a corresponding increase in the availability of
more advanced light-weight propeller systems, providing maximum
effective power utilisation during all stages of flight. For more information
refer to the 'Engine and propeller performance' module.

Speed, power and altitude

At sea-level, an aero-engine will deliver

its rated power — provided it is in near-
perfect ex-factory condition, properly
warmed up and using fuel in appropriate
condition. However, because air density
decreases with increasing altitude, and
an engine's performance depends on the
weight of the charge delivered to the
cylinders, then the full throttle power of a
non-supercharged four-stroke engine will
decrease with height. So, at about 6000–
7000 feet above mean sea-level the
maximum power available at full throttle
may drop below 75% of rated power. At
12 000 feet full throttle power may be less
than 55% of rated power. Thus, as altitude increases, the range of cruise
power airspeeds decreases. For best engine performance, select a cruise
altitude where the throttle is fully open and the engine is delivering 65% to
75% power.

A couple of points to note from the speed-power diagram above:

 As air density, and consequently drag, decreases with height, then

airspeed, from a particular power level, will increase with height; e.g.
the airspeed attained with 65% power at sea-level is 90 knots
increasing to 100 knots at 10 000 feet.

 At sea-level, an increase in power from 75% to 100% only results in

an increase in airspeed from 100 to 110 knots. This is the norm with
most light aircraft — that last 33% power increase to rated power only
provides a 10% increase in airspeed.

Power required vs power available

In the 'power available' diagram at left,

power available curves have been added
to the earlier 'power required' diagram.
The dashed red curve indicates the rated
power — that is, the full throttle engine
power delivered to the propeller over the
range of level flight speeds at sea-level.
The upper green curve — maximum
thrust power, is that engine power
converted by the propeller after allowing
for 80% maximum propeller efficiency.
The lower green curve is the propeller thrust power available with the
engine throttled back to 75% power at sea-level, or if flying at an altitude
such that full throttle opening will only deliver 75% of rated power. The
intersection of those power available curves with the power required curve
indicates the maximum cruise speed in each condition.

The region between the maximum thrust power curve and the power
required (to maintain level flight) curve indicates the excess power
available at various cruise speeds — this excess power is available for
various manoeuvres if the throttle is fully opened. The simplest use would
be a straight unaccelerated climb, in which case the maximum rate of
climb would be achieved at the airspeed where the two curves are furthest
apart. It can be seen that the best rate of climb speed is around the same
airspeed as the minimum drag airspeed shown in the earlier powered
required diagram.
The rate of climb will decrease at any speed either side of the best rate of
climb speed because the power available for climb decreases. The rate of
climb (metres/second) = excess power available (watts)/aircraft weight
(N).

For example, lets assume the preceding diagram is representative of an

aircraft fitted with a 100 hp engine, and at the best rate of climb speed the
engine/propeller has 25 hp (18 600 watts) of excess thrust power available. The
aircraft weight is 4000 N so the rate of climb = 18 600/4000 = 4.65 m/s. To
convert metres/second to feet/minute, multiply by 200 = 930 feet/minute as the
maximum rate of climb.

One thing to bear in mind is that we have assumed the aircraft's

aerodynamic shape — its configuration is constant. However if the
aircraft is fitted with flaps, high lift devices or spoilers the pilot is able to
change its configuration and consequently its performance. Thus
performance is dependent on power, plus attitude (pitch, bank,
sideslip and aoa) plus configuration.

1.8 Forces in a climb

When cruising, the difference between the current power requirement and
power available — the excess power — can be used to accelerate the
aircraft or climb, to accelerate and climb, or perform any manoeuvre that
requires additional power. For instance if the aircraft has potential power
available and the pilot opens the throttle, the thrust will exceed drag and
the pilot can utilise that extra thrust to accelerate to a higher speed while
maintaining level flight. Alternatively the pilot can opt to maintain the
existing speed but use the extra thrust to climb to a higher altitude.
The rate of climb (altitude gained per minute) depends on the amount of
available power utilised for climbing, which depends in part on the
airspeed chosen for the climb. There are other choices than the best rate
of climb speed available for the climb — for example, the best angle of
climb speed (which is around the same as the speed for minimum power)
or a combination enroute cruise/climb speed. The climb speed chosen
depends on terrain, weather, cloud cover and other operating variables.

If an aircraft is maintained in a continuous full-throttle climb, at the best

rate of climb airspeed, the rate of climb will be highest at sea-level; it will
decrease with altitude, as engine power decreases. The aircraft will
eventually arrive at an altitude where there is no excess power available
for climb, then all the available power is needed to balance the drag in
level flight and there will be only one airspeed at which level flight can be
maintained. Below this airspeed the aircraft will stall. This altitude is the
aircraft's absolute ceiling. However, unless trying for an altitude record,
there is no point in attempting to climb to the absolute ceiling so the
aircraft's service ceiling should appear in the aircraft's performance
specification. The service ceiling is the altitude at which the rate of climb
falls below 100 feet per minute; this is generally considered the minimum
useful rate of climb.

This diagram of forces in a climb and the

subsequent mathematical expressions,
have been simplified, aligning the angle of
climb with the line of thrust. In fact the line
of thrust will usually be 4 to 10° greater
than the climb angle. The climb angle (c)
is the angle between the flight path and
the horizontal plane.

The relationships in the triangle of forces

shown are:
Lift = weight × cosine c
Thrust = drag + (weight × sine c)

In a constant climb the forces are again in equilibrium, but now thrust + lift
= drag + weight.

Probably the most surprising thing about the triangle of forces in a straight
climb is that lift is less than weight. For example, let's put the Jabiru into a
10° climb with weight = 4000 N. (There is an abridged trig. table at the end
of this page.)

Then, Lift = W cos c = 4000 × 0.985 = 3940 N

It is power that provides a continuous rate of climb, but momentum may

also be used to temporarily provide energy for climbing; see 'Conserving
aircraft energy' below. It is evident from the above that in a steady climb,
the rate of climb (and descent) is controlled with power, and the airspeed
and angle of climb is controlled with the attitude and particularly the
included angle of attack. This is somewhat of a simplification, as the pilot
employs both power and attitude in unison to achieve a particular angle
and rate of climb or descent.

The angle of attack in a climb is the pitch attitude minus the angle of climb
being achieved plus the wing incidence.
A very important consideration, particularly when manoeuvring at low level
at normal speeds, is that the steeper the climb angle the more thrust is
required to counter weight. For example, if you pulled the Jabiru up into a
30° 'zoom' climb the thrust required = drag + weight × sine 30° (= 0.5) so
the engine has to provide sufficient thrust to pull up half the weight plus
overcome the increased drag due to the increased aoa in the climb.
Clearly, this is not possible, so the airspeed will fall off very rapidly and will
lead to a dangerous situation if the pilot is slow in getting the nose down to
an achievable attitude. Never be tempted to indulge in zoom climbs —
they are killers at low levels.

1.9 Forces in a descent

If an aircraft is cruising at, for instance, the maximum 75% power speed
and the pilot reduces the throttle to 65% power, the drag now exceeds
thrust and the pilot has two options — maintain height, allowing the
excess drag to slow the aircraft to the level flight speed appropriate to
65% power; or maintain the existing speed and allow the aircraft to enter a
steady descent or sink. The rate of sink (a negative rate of climb, or
altitude lost per minute) depends on the difference between the 75%
power required for level flight at that airspeed and the 65% power utilised.
This sink rate will remain constant as long as the thrust plus weight, which
are together acting forward and downward, are exactly balanced by the lift
plus drag, which are together acting upward and rearward. At a constant
airspeed, the sink rate and the angle of descent will vary if thrust is varied.
For example, if the pilot increased thrust but maintained constant
airspeed, the rate of sink will decrease — even becoming positive; i.e. a
rate of climb.

If the pilot pushed forward on the control column to a much steeper angle
of descent, while maintaining the same throttle
opening, the thrust plus weight resultant vector
becomes greater, the aircraft accelerates with
consequent increase in thrust power and the
acceleration continues until the forces are again
in equilibrium. Actually, it is difficult to hold a
stable aircraft in such a fixed angle 'power dive'
as the aircraft will want to climb — but an
unstable aircraft might want to 'tuck under'; i.e.
increase the angle of dive, even past the
vertical. We discuss the need for stability in
the 'Stability' module.

When the pilot closes the throttle completely,

there is no thrust, the aircraft enters a gliding descent and the forces are
then as shown in the diagram on the left. In the case of descent at a
constant rate, the weight is exactly balanced by the resultant force of lift
and drag.

From the dashed parallelogram of forces shown, it can be seen that the
tangent of the angle of glide equals drag/lift. For example, assuming a
glide angle of 10° (from the abridged trigonometrical table below, the
tangent of 10° is 0.176), the ratio of drag/lift in this case is then 1:5.7
(1/0.176 =5.7).
Conversely, we can say that the angle of glide depends on the ratio of
lift/drag [L/D]. The higher that ratio is, then the smaller the glide angle and
consequently the further the aircraft will glide from a given height.

For example, to calculate the optimum glide angle for an aircraft with a L/D
of 12:1.
Drag/lift equals 1/12, thus tangent = 0.08 and, from the trigonometrical
table, the glide angle = 5°.

Although there is no thrust associated with the power-off glide, the power
required curve is still relevant. The minimum drag airspeed shown in that
diagram is roughly the airspeed for best glide angle and the speed for
minimum power is roughly the airspeed for minimum rate of sink in a glide.
This is examined further in the 'Airspeed and the properties of air' module.

It may be useful to know that in a glide, lift = weight × cosine glide angle
and drag = weight × sine glide angle. There is further information on glide
angles and airspeeds in the lift/drag ratio section of module 4.

1.10 Turning forces

Centripetal force

When an aircraft turns in any plane, an additional force must be

continuously applied to overcome inertia, particularly as an aircraft's
normal tendency is to continue in a straight line. This is achieved by
applying a force towards the centre of the curve or arc — the centripetal
force — which is the product of the aircraft mass and the acceleration
required. Remember that acceleration is the rate of change of velocity —
either speed or direction, or both.

The acceleration, as you know from driving a car through an S curve,

depends on the speed at which the vehicle is moving around the arc and
the radius of the turn. Slow speed and a sweeping turn involves very little
acceleration. But high speed and holding a small radius involves high
acceleration, with consequent high radial g or centripetal force and
difficulty in holding the turn. Even when an aircraft enters a straight climb
from cruising flight, there is a short transition period between the straight
and level path and the straight and climbing path, during which the aircraft
must follow a curved path — a partial turn in the vertical plane.

An aircraft turning at a constant rate turn is continuously accelerating

towards the centre of the turn. The acceleration towards the centre of the
turn is V²/r m/s². The centripetal force required to produce the turn is m ×
V²/r newtons, where m is the aircraft mass in kilograms and r is the turn
radius in metres. Note this is aircraft mass, not weight.

Turn forces and bank angle

The diagram below shows the relationships between centripetal force,

weight, lift and bank angle.

In a level turn, the vertical component of the lift (Lvc) balances the
aircraft weight and the horizontal component of lift (Lhc) provides the
centripetal force.

(Note: in a right-angle triangle the tangent of an angle is the ratio of the

side opposite the angle to that adjacent to the angle. Thus, the tangent of
the bank angle is equal to the centripetal force [cf] divided by the weight —
or tan ø = cf/W. Or, it can be expressed as tan ø = V²/gr . In the diagram,
I have created a parallelogram of forces so that all horizontal lines
represent the centripetal force or Lhc and all vertical lines represent the
weight or Lvc.)

Let's look at the Jabiru, of mass 400 kg, in a 250 m radius horizontal turn at a
constant speed of 97 knots or 50 m/s:
 Centripetal acceleration = V² / r = 50 × 50 / 250 = 10 m/s²
Centripetal force required = mass × V² / r = mass × 10 = 400 × 10 = 4000 N

The centripetal force of 4000 N is provided by the horizontal component of

the lift force produced by the wings when banked at an angle from the
horizontal. The correct bank angle depends on the airspeed and radius;
think about a motorbike taking a curve in the road. During the level turn,
the lift force must also have a vertical component to balance the aircraft's
weight, in this case it is also 4000 N. But the total required force is not the
sum of 4000 N + 4000 N = 8000 N; it is less and we have to find the one
— and only one — bank angle where Lvc is equal to the weight and Lhc is
equal to the required centripetal force.

What then will be the correct bank angle (ø) for a balanced turn? Well, we
can calculate it easily if you have access to trigonometrical tables. If you
haven't then refer to theabridged version below.

So, in a level turn requiring 4000 N centripetal force with weight 4000 N, the
tangent of the bank angle = cf/W = 4000/4000 = 1.0, and thus (from the table)
the angle = 45°. Actually, the bank angle would be 45° for any aircraft of any
weight moving at 97 knots in a turn radius of 250 metres — provided the aircraft
can fly at that speed, of course.(Do the sums with an aircraft of mass 2500 kg,
thus weight = 25 000 N.).

Now, what total lift force will the wings need to provide in a level turn if the actual
weight component (aircraft plus contents) is 4000 N and the radial component
also 4000 N?

Resultant total lift force = actual weight divided by the cosine of the bank angle
or L = W / cos ø. Weight is 4000 N, cosine of 45° is 0.707 = 4000/0.707 = 5660
N.

The load on the structure in the turn is 5660/4000 = 1.41 times normal, or 1.41g.
Alternatively the 'load factor' = 1/cosine (bank angle); so, cosine 45° is 0.707 =
1/0.707 = 1.41g.

Manoeuvring loads

In aviation usage, the lowercase 'g' denotes the acceleration caused by

the force of gravity. When an aircraft is airborne maintaining a constant
velocity and altitude — the total lift produced equals the aircraft's weight
and that lift force is expressed as being equivalent to a '1g' load. Similarly,
when the aircraft is parked on the ground, the load on the aircraft wheels
(its weight) is a 1g load.
Any time an aircraft's velocity is changed, there are positive or negative
acceleration forces applied to the aircraft and felt by its occupants. The
resultant manoeuvring load is normally expressed in terms of g load,
which is the ratio of all the aerodynamic forces experienced during the
acceleration to the aerodynamic forces existing at the normal 1g level
flight state.

You will come across terms such as '2g turn' or 'pulling 2g'. What is being
implied is that during a particular manoeuvre the lift force is doubled and
a radial acceleration is applied to the airframe — for the Jabiru a 2g load
= 400 kg × 20 m/s² = 8000 N. The occupants will also feel they weigh
twice as much. This is centripetal force and 'radial g'; it applies whether
the aircraft is changing direction in the horizontal plane, the vertical plane
or anything between.

You may also come across mention of 'negative g'. It is conventional to

describe g as positive when the lift produced is in the normal direction
relative to the aircraft. When the lift direction is reversed, it is described as
negative g. Reduced g and negative g can occur momentarily in
turbulence. An aircraft experiencing a sustained 1g negative loading is
flying in equilibrium, but upside down. It is also possible for some high-
powered aerobatic aircraft to fly an 'outside' loop; i.e. the pilot's head is on
the outside of the loop rather than the inside, and the aircraft (and its very
uncomfortable occupants), will be experiencing various negative g values
all the way around the manoeuvre.

It can be a little misleading when using terms such as 2g. For instance,
let's say that a lightly loaded Jabiru has a mass of 340 kg, and if you again
do the preceding centripetal force calculation in a 45° banked turn using
340 kg mass you will find that the centripetal acceleration is 10 m/s²,
centripetal force is 3400 N, weight is 3400 N and total lift = 4800 N. The
total lifting force is 15% less than in the 400 kg mass calculation but it is
still a 1.41g turn; i.e. the ratio 4800/3400 = 1.41.

Rather than thinking in terms of ratios, it may be appropriate to consider

the actual loads being applied to the aircraft structures. The norm is to use
the lift load produced by the wing as a primary structural load reference. In
the 400 kg mass calculation the load produced is 5660/8 = 707 N/m²,
compared to the 500 N/m² load in normal cruise. However, even if the total
weight of the aircraft changes, the forces experienced individual structural
items — the engine mountings for example — will vary according to the g
force produced by the wings.

Increasing the lift force in a turn

You might wonder how does the Jabiru increase the lift (or more correctly,
the aerodynamic force) if it maintains the same cruise speed in the level
turn? Well, the only value in the equation — lift = CL × ½V² × S — that can
then be changed is the lift coefficient. This must be increased by the pilot
increasing the angle of attack. (Conversely if CL — the angle of attack — is
increased during a constant speed manoeuvre the lift — and consequently
the aerodynamic load factor — must increase.) Increasing aoa will also
increase induced drag, so that the pilot must also increase thrust to
maintain the same airspeed. Thus, the maximum rate of turn for an aircraft
will also be limited by the amount of additional power available to
overcome induced drag.

The radius of turn = V²/g tan ø metres. For a level turn, the slowest
possible speed and the steepest possible bank angle will provide both the
smallest radius and the fastest rate of turn. However there are several
limitations:

1. When the steepest bank angle and slowest speed is applied

the necessary centripetal force for the turn is provided by the
extra aerodynamic force gained by increasing the angle of
attack ( or CL ) to a very high value. Also due to the lower
airspeed a larger portion of the total lift is provided
by CL rather than V². Consequently the induced drag will
increase substantially — requiring increased thrust power and
there will be a bank angle beyond which the engine/propeller
will not be able to supply sufficient thrust to maintain the
required lift, and thus height in the turn.

2. All aircraft that are not certificated under the utility or

aerobatic categories are limited to bank angles not exceeding
60°. A bank angle of 75° in a level turn would induce a 3.8g
load factor — the load limit for a normal category certification.
Similarly a level turn bank angle of 77° would induce the 4.4g
load limit for an utility category aircraft.

3. The stall speed increases with bank angle, or more correctly

with load factor, thus the lowest possible flight speed
increases as bank in a level turn increases.

4. Turns at high bank angles, near the accelerated stall speed,

with maximum power applied, leaves the aircraft with nothing
in reserve. Any mishandling or turbulence may result in a
violent wing and nose drop with substantial loss of height.

(For more information on turn physics see 'Turning back — procedure and
dynamics'.)

If you consider an aerobatic aircraft weighing 10 000 N and making a turn

in the vertical plane —such as a loop — and imagine that the centripetal
acceleration is 2g; what will be the load factor at various points of the
turn? Actually, the centripetal acceleration varies all the way around
because the airspeed and radius must vary. For simplicity we will ignore
this and say that it is 2g all around. If the acceleration is 2g then the
centripetal force must be 20 000 N all the way around.

A turn in the vertical plane differs from a horizontal turn in that, at both
sides of the loop, the wings do not have to provide any lift component to
counter weight, only lift for the centripetal force — so the total load at
those points is 20 000 N or 2g. At the top, with the aircraft inverted, the
weight is directed towards the centre of the turn and provides 10 000 N of
the centripetal force while the wings need to provide only 10 000 N. Thus,
the total load is only 10 000 N or 1g, whereas at the bottom of a continuing
turn the wings provide all the centripetal force plus counter the weight —
so the load there is 30 000 N or 3g.

This highlights an important point: when acceleration loads are reinforced

by the acceleration of gravity, the total load can be very high.

If you have difficulty in conceiving the centripetal force loading on the

wings, think about it in terms of the reaction momentum, centrifugal
force which, from within the aircraft, is seen as a force pushing the vehicle
and its occupants to the outside of the turn and the lift (centripetal force) is
counteracting it. Centrifugal force is always expressed as g multiples.

Wing loading — W/S

The term 'wing loading' has three connotations. The prime connotation is
the standard expression — design W/S (usually just 'W/S', pronounced
'w-over-s') — which is the ratio of the aircraft designer's maximum
allowable take-off weight [W] to the gross wing area [S]. (There are some
complications when national regulations specify a maximum allowable
weight for an aircraft category that is lower than the design weight of a
particular aircraft type; see the 'Weight and balance' module.) Aircraft with
low W/S have lower stall speeds than aircraft with higher W/S — so
consequently have shorter take-off and landing distances. High W/S
aircraft are less affected by atmospheric turbulence. W/S is expressed in
pounds per square foot [psf] or kilograms per square metre [kg/m²].

The second wing loading connotation is as the operating wing loading; if

the aircraft takes off at a gross weight lower than the designer's maximum,
then the operating wing loading — in level unaccelerated flight — will
also be lower than the design W/S, as will its stall speed.

The third is the load applied by the pilot in manoeuvring flight. As we saw
above, pulling 2g in a steep turn will produce a manoeuvring wing
loading that is double the operating wing loading. So, if a pilot takes off in
an overloaded aircraft (i.e. the aircraft's weight exceeds the design
MTOW) and conducts a 2g steep turn, then that manoeuvring wing
loading will be greater than the designer's expectations.

1.11 Limiting loads and ultimate loads

Manoeuvring loads and gust induced loads

To receive type certification the design of a general or recreational aviation

factory-built aircraft must conform to certain airworthiness standards
among which the in-flightmanoeuvring loads and the loads induced
by atmospheric turbulence, that the structure must be able to withstand,
are specified. The turbulence loads are called the gust-induced loads.
The U.S. Federal airworthiness standards FAR Part 23 are the recognised
world standards for light aircraft certification and the following are extracts
[emphasis added]:
"... limit loads ... [are] the maximum loads to be expected in service (i.e.
the highest load expected in normal operations) and ultimate loads ...
[are] limit loads multiplied by [a safety factor of 1.5 — 1.75 for sailplanes]."
"The structure must be able to support limit loads without
detrimental, permanent deformation. At any load up to limit loads, the
deformation may not interfere with safe operation ... The structure must be
able to support ultimate loads without failure for at least three seconds ..."

Three seconds is not much time, so any inflight excursion above the
ultimate load will probably result in rapid structural failure. The safety
factor of 1.5 applies to fairly new aircraft in good condition; as very light
aircraft age aerodynamic stresses, corrosion, hard landings and
inadequate maintenance contribute to reduction of that safety factor.

Airworthiness certification categories

Light aeroplanes can be certificated in one or more of four airworthiness

categories — 'normal', 'utility', 'acrobatic' and 'light sport aircraft' (LSA).
The minimum positive limit flight load factor that an aircraft in the
normal certification category (at maximum gross weight) must be designed
to withstand is 3.8g positive. The LSA category minimum positive limit
load is 4g. The negative limit flight load factor is –1.5g for the normal
category and –2g for the LSA category. Recreational aviation aeroplanes,
which are limited to banked turns not exceeding 60°, generally fit into
either the normal category or the LSA category. The ultimate loads for the
normal category are +5.7g and –2.25g and, for the LSA category, +6g and
–4g. Amateur builders should aim to meet the same minimum values for
limiting load and ultimate load factors.

The 'utility' category (which includes training aircraft with spin certification)
limit loads are +4.4g and –2.2g while the 'acrobatic' category (i.e. aircraft
designed to perform aerobatics) limit loads are +6g and –3g. Sailplanes
and powered sailplanes are generally certificated in the utility or acrobatic
categories of the European Joint Airworthiness Requirements JAR-22,
which is the world standard for sailplanes; aerobatic sailplanes have limit
loads of +7g and -5g.

The 'flight load factor' calculation is defined as the component of the

aerodynamic force acting normal (i.e. at right angles) to the aircraft's
longitudinal axis, divided by the aircraft weight. A positive load factor is
one in which the force acts upward, with respect to the aircraft; a negative
load factor acts downward. The inflight load factor is a function of wing
loading, dynamic pressure and the aoa, i.e. lift coefficient, but see
the flight envelope.

It should not be thought that aircraft structures are significantly weaker in

the negative g direction. The normal level flight load is +1g so with a +3.8g
limit then an additional positive 2.8g acceleration can be applied while with
a –1.5g limit an additional negative 2.5g acceleration can be applied.

The manufacturer of a particular aircraft type may opt to have the aircraft
certificated within more than one category, in which case there will be
different maximum take-off weights and centre of gravity limitations for
each operational category. See weight/cg position limitations.

The sustainable load factors only relate to a new factory-built

aircraft. The repairs, ageing and poor maintenance that any aircraft
has been exposed to since leaving the factory may decrease the
strength of individual structural members considerably. Read the
current airworthiness notices issued by the RA-Aus technical
manager.
1.12 Conserving aircraft energy
Energy available

An aircraft in straight and level flight has:

 linear momentum — m × v [kg·m/s]

 kinetic energy (the energy of a body due to its motion) — ½mv² [joules
or newton metres (N·m)]; remembering that 'm' in the ½mv² term
represents mass
(Note: normally, the newton metre — the SI unit of moment of force — is not used as
the measure of work or energy; however throughout this guide, it is more helpful to
express the kinetic energy in the N·m form rather than joules — the N·m and the
joule are dimensionally equivalent)
 gravitational potential energy — in this case, the product of weight in
newtons and height gained in metres
 chemical potential energy in the form of fuel in the tanks
 air resistance that dissipates some kinetic energy as heat or
atmospheric turbulence.

To simplify the text from here on, we will refer to 'gravitational potential
energy' as potential energy and 'chemical potential energy' as chemical
energy.

We can calculate the energy available to the Jabiru cruising:

• at a height of 6500 feet (2000 m)

• and (air distance flown over time)= 97 knots (50 m/s)
• with mass = 400 kg, thus weight = 4000 N
• fuel = 50 litres.

Then:

• potential energy = weight × height = 4000 × 2000 = 8 million N·m

• kinetic energy = ½mv² = ½ × 400 × 50 × 50 = 500 000 N·m
• momentum = mass × v = 400 × 50 = 20 000 kg·m/s
• chemical energy = 50 litres @ 7.5 million joules = 375 million
joules.

Because it is the accumulation of the work done to raise the aircraft 6500
feet, the potential energy is 16 times the kinetic energy, and is obviously an
asset that you don't want to dissipate. It is equivalent to 2% of your fuel.

It is always wise to balance a shortage of potential energy with an excess of

kinetic energy, and vice versa. For example, if you don't have much height
then have some extra speed up your sleeve for manoeuvring or to provide
extra time for action in case of engine or wind shear problems. Or if kinetic
energy is low (because of flying at lower speeds than normal) make sure
you have ample height or, if approaching to land, hold height for as long as
possible. The only time to be 'low and slow' is when you are about to touch
down.

However, during take-off it is not possible to have an excess of either

potential or kinetic energy; thus, take-off is the most critical phase of
flight, closely followed by the go-around following an aborted landing
approach. Ensure that a safe climb speed is achieved as quickly as
possible after becoming airborne — or commencing a go-around —
and before the climb-out is actually commenced; see take-off
procedure.

Kinetic energy measurement

Kinetic energy is a scalar quantity equal to ½mv² joules if the aircraft is not
turning. The velocity must be measured in relation to some frame of
reference, and when we discuss in-flight energy management, the aircraft
velocity chosen is that which is relative to the air; i.e. the true airspeed. For
a landborne (or about to be landborne) aircraft we are generally concerned
with either the work to be done to get the aircraft airborne or the (impact)
energy involved in bringing the aircraft to a halt. So, the velocity used is that
which is relative to the ground. Ground speed represents the horizontal
component of that velocity, and rate of climb/sink represents the vertical
component.

Kinetic energy, gravitational potential energy and energy conservation are

complex subjects. If you wish to go further, google the search terms 'kinetic
energy' and 'reference frame'.

Momentum conversion

Let's look at momentum conversion. Consider the Jabiru, weighing 4000 N

and cruising at 97 knots (50 m/s) and the pilot decides to reduce the cruise
speed to 88 knots (45 m/s). This could be accomplished by reducing thrust
— below that needed for 88 knots — allowing drag to dissipate the excess
kinetic energy then increasing power for 88 knots. However, if traffic
conditions allow, the excess kinetic energy can be converted to potential
energy by reducing power, but only to that needed to maintain 88 knots
cruise, and at the same time pulling up — thus reducing airspeed but still
utilising momentum — then pushing over into level flight just before the 88
knot airspeed is acquired.
 How much height would be gained?

Consider this:

• kinetic energy at 97 knots = ½mv² = ½ × 400 × 50 × 50 = 500

000 N·m
• kinetic energy at 88 knots = ½mv² = ½ × 400 × 45 × 45 = 405
000 N·m
• kinetic energy available = 95 000 N·m
• but potential energy [N·m] = weight × height
• thus height (gained) = energy available divided by weight
• = 95 000 N·m / 4000 N = 24 metres = 78 feet, or 9 feet gained
per knot of speed converted.

If we recalculate the preceding figures — doubling the initial (100 m/s) and
final velocities (90 m/s) — the height gained will increase fourfold to 96
metres, or about 18 feet per knot. Conversely, if we halve the initial velocity
to about 50 knots, the height gained per knot converted is halved, to about 4
feet. Note that as mass appears in both the kinetic energy and the weight
expressions, it can be ignored; thus the figures are the same for any mass.
Sometimes momentum (mass × velocity) is confused with inertia (a
particular quality of mass).

You will come across the expression 'low inertia / high drag' applied to
some recreational light aircraft. This means that although all recreational
light aircraft are low-inertia aircraft, compared to other recreational light
aircraft this minimum aircraft has a relatively low inertial mass combined
with a relatively high parasite drag profile; thus if the thrust is reduced or
fails, the drag reduces the airspeed very rapidly. This is exacerbated if the
aircraft is climbing. An aluminium tube and sailcloth aircraft at one end of the
spectrum may be termed 'low momentum' or 'draggy', while an epoxy
composite aircraft at the other end may be termed 'slippery'; some are very
slippery indeed. The standing world speed record for an aircraft under 300
kg is 213 miles per hour; that amateur-designed and amateur-built aircraft
was powered by only a 65 hp two-stroke Rotax. The handling characteristics
for a low inertia/low drag aircraft differ considerably from those of a low
inertia/high drag (low momentum) aircraft.

( The next section in the airmanship and safety sequence is contained

within section 12.2 'Factors affecting safe landing performance' )
 The next module in this Flight Theory Guide examines aspects of airspeed
and air properties, but you may first wish to read the notes below.

Abridged trigonometrical table

Relationship between an angle within a right angle triangle and the sides:

Tangent of angle=opposite side/adjacent

Sine of angle=opposite/hypotenuse
Cosine of angle=adjacent/hypotenuse

Degree Cosin Tangen Degree Cosin Tang

Sine Sine
s e t s e ent

0.01 0.76
1 0.999 0.017 50 0.643 1.192
7 6

0.08 0.81
5 0.996 0.087 55 0.574 1.428
7 9

0.17 0.86
10 0.985 0.176 60 0.500 1.732
3 6

0.25 0.91
15 0.966 0.268 65 0.423 2.145
9 0

0.34 0.93
20 0.939 0.364 70 0.342 2.747
2 9

0.50 0.96
30 0.866 0.577 75 0.259 3.732
0 6

0.64 0.98
40 0.766 0.839 80 0.173 5.672
3 5

0.70 1.00 infinit

45 0.707 1.000 90 0
7 0 y
Things that are handy to know

 Rated power is the brake horsepower delivered at the propeller shaft of

a direct drive engine, operating at maximum design rpm and best power
fuel/air mixture, in standard sea-level air density conditions. (In a
regulatory sense the definition is a little more complex.) An engine is
only operated at its rated capacity for short periods during flight, usually
during take-off and the initial climb. Rated power for small aero-engines
is usually expressed as brake horsepower rather than the SI unit of
kilowatts. Further discussion is provided in the 'Engine and propeller
performance' module.

 To convert horsepower to watts multiply by 745.7; or to calculate

kilowatts, multiply by 0.75.

 Design W/S is usually between 11 and 22 psf for GA aircraft, and 4 and
12 psf for ultralights. Gross wing area includes a notional extension of
each monoplane wing up to the fuselage centreline but excludes any
fairings at the wing/fuselage junction. For multi-engined aircraft, with the
engines enclosed in wing nacelles, the wing area would also include the
area occupied by the nacelles.

Stuff you don't need to know

 High-performance military aircraft can achieve an aoa exceeding 45°.

 Aerobatic pilots — and combat pilots — use a value termed specific

energy, E or energy height, He. It is the potential energy plus the
kinetic energy per kg of aircraft weight; i.e.
He = mgh/W + ½mv²/W
As W = mg, then the equation can be re-arranged as He = h + V²/2g
where h = height.

What it expresses is the height that could be achieved if all kinetic

energy were transferred to potential energy, but it is of little interest to
recreational aviation.

 The thermal energy content of one litre of avgas is 30 million joules.

With good engine handling by the pilot, that litre can provide 10 million
joules of mechanical energy to the propeller shaft of most engines. The
propeller of the Jabiru is maybe 70% efficient at cruise speed and
provides 7.0 million joules, or N·m, of energy from the litre of fuel.
Roughly how far will that take the Jabiru cruising at 97 knots? Easy!
Drag is 540 N, so 7 000 000 / 540 = 12 965 m or 7.0 air nautical miles.
We specify air nautical miles because wind will affect the distance
travelled over the ground.