BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Aug 2022, 20:12

wingloading (actual, rather than max) is key, but is it the only factor for determining turbulence at any speed in any weather? I've read high-aspect wings give a worse ride if all else is equal. That surprises me, I'd have thought a longer wingspan would integrate over a greater distance so would absorb smaller eddies - big ships bob less than small boats.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Aug 2022, 14:50

Someone mentioned AP.

We went from Mirage to C421 the 421 was more stable but my wife hatted it. We upgraded the AP to new digital and totally different experience and she loved it. It's possible that the AP is making the bumps worse. The PA46 is more stable IMO than the Cirrus.

But then we went to 501sp Eagle II and it's a different world. Not only more stable but you are only in the bumps for a few minutes as you climb at 4K fpm. We fly through the bumps not in them now.

Mike

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Aug 2022, 15:18

Username Protected wrote:

wingloading (actual, rather than max) is key, but is it the only factor for determining turbulence at any speed in any weather?

Wing loading by far the dominant factor in riding out turbulence.

It translates into higher AOA and higher AOA smooths out bumps. That is why going slower (which requires higher AOA) helps with bumps.

Quote:

I've read high-aspect wings give a worse ride if all else is equal. That surprises me, I'd have thought a longer wingspan would integrate over a greater distance so would absorb smaller eddies - big ships bob less than small boats.

The size of turbulent air bubbles are much larger than wingspans, so it makes little difference. Long aspect ratio wings typically operate at lower AOA (more efficient at generating lift) which is why they are bumpier.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 22 Aug 2022, 21:50

Username Protected wrote:

Someone mentioned AP.

We went from Mirage to C421 the 421 was more stable but my wife hatted it. We upgraded the AP to new digital and totally different experience and she loved it. It's possible that the AP is making the bumps worse. The PA46 is more stable IMO than the Cirrus.

But then we went to 501sp Eagle II and it's a different world. Not only more stable but you are only in the bumps for a few minutes as you climb at 4K fpm. We fly through the bumps not in them now.

Mike

Glad you're enjoying your new jet Mike, but believe me, there are bumps out there as high as a jet can fly, so know your turbulence penetration speed. :cheers:

The 747 was easy; cruise at Mach.84, Turbulence Penetration Speed Mach.84 at altitude.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 23 Aug 2022, 00:54

Take more luggage.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 24 Aug 2022, 12:28

Username Protected wrote:

My ex-wife really hated turbulence and flying in general, but loved going places. The thing that really helped is I took her out and let her fly the plane up down in turns power up power down. Once she realized that the plane only did what you commanded it to do she only had me to be worried about. ;-)

. Well, she got tired of me and now I have a girlfriend that loves to fly. The divorce cost me a Pilatus and a light jet, but in the end was worth it. :scratch:

"My ex-wife hated turbulence and flying in general but loved to go places."

Get her a transporter. Beam her up, Scotty.

Am I a Weenie, or do I need a new plane?