BAe 146-200.... wtf???

[Jackal]

i recently flew a hop in a BAe 146-200, paris to hamburg. the flight was great until finals. i landed the plane on visual approach to runway
5, however it was extremely difficult to do. the plane kept rocking left to right and this was more exaggerated the slower i got,
compounded by the less control i had thanks to the decreased airflow over my ailerons. it's been a few years since my aerodynamic
schooling lol... but if i remember correctly, the anhedral wing arrangement, as is exhibited on the BAe 146-200, makes for a more stable
aircraft than the regular anhedreal. is this correct or have i got it muddled up??? cos this was the worst handling aircraft i've flown on
approach. the other option, of course, is that it's just a poor model of a good plane. any help or input is much appreciated.

[alphaone]

How slow are you going?

[Jackal]

well the approach i conducted went from about 160 knots slowing to a Vref or ~120 knots. the rocking motion was present throughout the approach but became worse the slower i got. admitadly, i know very little about the operational speeds and such of this aircraft so i was using what i estimated to be a fair approach speed for an aircraft of that size and weight. i didnt stall or anything like that and the fact it occued at reasonably high speeds made me believe it was an aerodynamic thing as opposed to a ... im not flying it properly thing. lol. as i said initially, it could just be a not-so-great model of an otherwise good plane.



Post Edited ( 01-05-06 08:06 )

[Jackal]

either way, unless someone can tell me that i was flying it incorrectly and where i went wrong, i certainly wont be rushing back into
the cockpit of any BAe146s anytime soon

[jboweruk]

Are these freeware or payware? The 146 is a sweet bird normally and has to be stable by nature, look at the airports it can go into such
as London City. To get into there you need a stable plane. I found the payware Aerosoft model to be pretty decent although dated it only
has a 2D cockpit, the only payware one with a VC is the Abacus Commuter Xpress but frankly it handles like a slug. Nice model but very
slow roll/turn rates, kind of like you'd expect a fully laden WWII bomber to handle.

[Jetflyer]

Perhaps it's time for another lesson on aerodynamics....the BAe 146 was TOO stable as a result of its weight being slung underneath its
high wing, so the anhedral on the aircraft is therefore to counteract its over-stability and make it more controllable. I fly this plane
occaisonally and it isn't the easiest to handle on approach, 737's are easier. It takes practise, practise, practise. The boring three things it
takes a lot of. Otherwise, get some performance charts for the plane and make sure your flap speeds and weights are correct and it
might be easier to control.

[Jackal]

This aircraft is freeware... so i shouldn't really complain lol. not that i really am, just curious. Thanks for your responses guys... as you can
tell I am pretty rusty at the old aerodynamic lessons... the high wing anhedral and all that.. the balance between controlability and stablity
and all that jazz. I basically only flew it on this occasion to try something new. I'm usually a Boeing 737 NG PMDG regular and think i may
just stick with what i know lol

[olseric]

Freeware...prolly the Mike Stone model then...it's not bad but it takes getting used to.

Slow down, more flaps, etc, etc. Turn your weather off too for a test flight to make sure it wasn't wind shears. And yes, it does take the
entire state of Rhode Island to make a 180 if you don't have rudder pedals.

I have an Avroliner on my fleet as well...I can sustain 120 kias with a 2000 fpm descent using full flaps...and that is to land at Aspen, CO
from the "wrong way."

Keep playing with it and I'm sure you will get the hang of it. Just remember what it was designed to do: get into and out of difficult
airports with steep approaches.