What is the minimum radius of curvature for a pilot flying at 1000 km/h?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Plantatree123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Kinematics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the minimum radius of curvature for a pilot flying at a constant speed of 1000 km/h, considering that the human body can withstand accelerations up to 4g. The initial calculation suggests a radius of 1970 meters, which is deemed reasonable, while a proposed result of 0.25 x 10^11 meters is identified as incorrect. Participants highlight the importance of unit conversion, noting that the workbook may have mistakenly assumed a speed of 1000 km/sec instead of km/h. Additionally, the effects of gravitational forces on the pilot during vertical and horizontal loops are discussed, emphasizing the need for accurate calculations to ensure safety. Overall, the conversation underscores the significance of proper unit handling and the implications of acceleration on pilot safety.
Plantatree123
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The human organism can handle acceleration that is 4 times bigger than gravitational acceleration. What is the smallest radius of curvature that can handle pilot of an airplane that files with constant speed of 1000 km/h?

Homework Equations


This task seems easy but I don't have idea what to do. All I know is if the pilot is flying with constant speed then tangential acceleration is zero and if we are talking about the minimal radius then radial acceleration must be maximal which means that ar=4•g.

The Attempt at a Solution


I tried like this ar= v2/r and then rmin=v2/ar=1966,40m
And the result is 0.25•1011m
There is obviously something I couldn't think of. I'd like someone to give me idea what to do. Thanks :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello 123, :welcome:

Who says the result is 0.25•1011m ?
 
BvU said:
Hello 123, :welcome:

Who says the result is 0.25•1011m ?
Hello writer of workbook This result is in solutions of my workbook
 
The 0.25 x 1011 m is obviously wrong: the radius of the Earth is 6 x 106 m and planes do fly around with such speeds without killing the passengers.

I don't see anything wrong with your 1970 m, except one thing: the Earth keeps pulling with 1 times g as well. So if the loop is vertical, the driver experiences 5 g at the bottom and 3 at the top. Not good. If the circle is horizontal, 1 g and 4 g add up vectorially to √17 times g, also > 4 g. So I would feel safer in your plane if ar = √15 g (But it's a small correction and I wonder if that is asked for in your exercise)

By the way, if your given data is only in one digit, it is better to round off your results a little bit: so 4g corresponds to a circle with a radius of 1970 m
(personally I would even prefer 2 km, but teacher may think different).
 
BvU said:
The 0.25 x 1011 m is obviously wrong: the radius of the Earth is 6 x 106 m and planes do fly around with such speeds without killing the passengers.

I don't see anything wrong with your 1970 m, except one thing: the Earth keeps pulling with 1 times g as well. So if the loop is vertical, the driver experiences 5 g at the bottom and 3 at the top. Not good. If the circle is horizontal, 1 g and 4 g add up vectorially to √17 times g, also > 4 g. So I would feel safer in your plane if ar = √15 g (But it's a small correction and I wonder if that is asked for in your exercise)

By the way, if your given data is only in one digit, it is better to round off your results a little bit: so 4g corresponds to a circle with a radius of 1970 m
(personally I would even prefer 2 km, but teacher may think different).
I like your explanation. :) Thank you
 
BvU said:
Who says the result is 0.25•1011m ?
[exponent restored]

Reverse engineering the claimed result suggests that the workbook assumed 1000 km/sec rather than 1000 km/hour. This demonstrates that units matter.
 
  • Like
Likes BvU
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top