Jon S Berndt wrote > Sent: 08 July 2004 15:09 > To: FlightGear developers discussions > Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] status of aircraft carrier > > > On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 14:03:14 +0100 > "Vivian Meazza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >Jon Berndt wrote > > > >> Sent: 08 July 2004 13:29 > >> To: FlightGear developers discussions > >> Subject: RE: [Flightgear-devel] status of aircraft carrier > >> > >> > >> > In my day they consisted of a pulley system forcing hydraulic > >>fluid > >> > through orifices. These orifices were adjusted to provide the > >>right > >> > decelerating force for each aircraft type. > >> > > >> > I seem to recall that a disk brake system was proposed. I > >> don't think > >> > that this was implemented in Royal Navy carriers, but may have > >>been > >> > for modern US carriers. > >> > >> An aircraft, upon landing on a carrier, does not appear to > >> slip backwards at all under the force of the arresting wire. > >> It seems like a one-way spring. > > > >A one way spring - a new concept in physics :-). Perhaps more like a > >one way damper on a car suspension. > > > >Seriously - did you mean a linear spring where the force > that stretches > >the spring is in direct proportion to the amount of stretch? > That would > >not be quite correct - the arresting force was constant in the first > >part of the > >pull-out, and I think, but can't quite remember, that the orifices > >closed > >towards the end of the pull-out to provide a soft stop. > > I thought about using a damper, too, but qualitatively that didn't > seem right, either. A spring/damper could probably be made to feel > "close enough". >
Yes, close enough. In real life in mechanical terms it was more damper than spring. In mathematical terms, a spring/damper would be the way to go. Regards Vivian _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
