Talk:Pylon turn

Untitled
hmm, so did it originate in WWII or in plane racing? This article is quite contradictory 64.90.193.188 (talk) 16:44, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

delivery?
Could someone please explain how, exactly, it could be used to "deliver messages or packages by plane without needing to land", (using) "a bucket on a line"? I can see that if you somehow materialise a bucket on a line at the location of the virtual pylon, it will stay more-or-less in situ, depending on the weight of the bucket, air resistance of the line, and accuracy with which the pilot executes the turn. What I cannot see is how you get the bucket into this desirable location in the first place.

If you lower the bucket whilst already performing the turn, centrifugal acceleration will cause the line to stretch outward, away from the "pylon", and once it reaches the ground, it will be whirling around in a large circle at a velocity considerably higher than the aircraft itself, doing untold damage to jungle huts and amazed natives. (If we ignore the mass and air resistance of the line, and say the plane is orbiting with radius r, velocity v and height h, then the velocity and orbital radius of the bucket are both increased by a factor 1/(1-hv²/gr²); for, e.g. v = 100 kts, h = 3,000 ft and r = 500 m, the factor is 14.7 and the bucket is whirling around a 7.3 km radius circle at 1,470 knots or about Mach 2.2)

On the other hand, if you lower the bucket whilst flying straight and level, it will be dragged along the ground at high speed, and only become the centre of a pylon turn if the pilot is able to instantaneously switch into the turn at some point where an interposing object has brought the bucket to rest. An interesting exercise for the reader is to determine what happens if the bucket manages to wedge in a large tree and turn into an anchor whilst performing this already impossible manoeuvre.

I am just unable to envisage a manoeuvre that results in the metastable configuration of a stationary bucket in the centre of turn of the aircraft. -- 202.63.39.58 (talk) 14:13, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Picture the aircraft first flying over and dropping the bucket at the center of the circle it is to perform; if given enough slack (length=radius), it can continue to the edge of the circle while the bucket remains still, and then (turning sharply) begin to follow the circular path all while the bucket remains stationary. However for other reasons, I believe this section needs to be cleaned up. I really didn't expect in-depth details of a speared missionary in an article about aircraft maneuvers.76.67.111.164 (talk) 18:42, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I removed the WAY OFF TOPIC stuff about the killing, etc. There's no doubt it needed to go. I can't believe it's been around for at least 2 years. Sheesh.

The maneuver (and the killings etc.) is depicted in the film "The End of the Spear". The film is a true(ish) story, but the maneuver is dubious, very Hollywood, definitely not a reliable reference. The feasibility of the maneuver is very questionable, there is no reliable reference, so it calls for simply deleting it. I would delete it viciously, but I do find the tale compelling. I'll do some checking into it's reality first.

108.7.161.187 (talk) 08:42, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I cleaned up a lot of the problems with this tale. I specified that it was depicted in a movie (which we did have a ref to), and carefully did not say that it was fact. We do have that one sentence remaining that claims it as fact. I put a "dubious" tag on that.

I'm an Aeronautical Engineer BTW and I am finding this problem compelling. Is it really possible? I am beginning to suspect that it might be, but that it wouldn't be with an actual pylon turn, but maybe something like it but highly modified. Still thinking about it.... It's weird. :-)

108.7.161.187 (talk) 09:25, 7 February 2012 (UTC)


 * In the book "The Gooney Bird," by William C. Anderson, this was noted as the spark which led to the development of the AC-47, and was the reason that the guns pointed downward from the windows of the plane. An Australian pilot (whose name was given, but I have forgotten) was cited as having developed the maneuver, delivering and picking up mail by lowering a bucket and orbiting the position rather than using the time and fuel needed to land and take off again.  As the novel was published in 1969, written by a USAF colonel who had known (been involved with) the weapons development people, I consider this a definitive answer to the question.


 * As a pilot, I see how this would be done. At first, the bucket will be traveling at the same airspeed as the plane, but as the plane circles and line is paid out, drag will slow the bucket into a smaller and smaller circle.  As the bucket loses speed and energy, it will drop to the ground, at which point the plane continues to orbit, paying out more line to keep from pulling on the bucket.  Once the mail is swapped, the pilot simply stops orbiting and drags in the bucket.  And yes, it's a standard pylon turn, at a constant airspeed, altitude and rate-of-turn.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.210.235.22 (talk) 07:49, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

I found good source for this manuever also see and   obviously not possible to put in the Artikle but still interesting. --Saehrimnir (talk) 13:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Not pylon turn, but extremely compelling and definitely needs its own article
Wow! That is one excellent source you found there, Saehrimnir (the USAF ref you added to the article). I'm converted. The thing is real and we have a definitive reference. The ref even gives nine of it's own refs we can track down.

The maneuver is related to pylon turns in that the speed and turning radius of the airplane is part of the mechanics, and it deserves a mention in the PT article. But, it doesn't look like it's actually a Pylon Turn, the altitude doesn't need to be the particular altitude required of a PT. The maneuver is so compelling (and definitely notable!) that I think it calls for its own article as a distinct maneuver.

The word "pylon" appears three times in the reference -- in the phrase "on-pylon turn". The words suggest a pylon turn is required, but I question that. From what I can tell, in the context of gunships, being strictly on-pylon-altitude isn't required and the phrase "on-pylon turn" in the ref allows for varied altitude. That would explain the use of the term in the ref for something that isn't actually a pylon turn. That's my best guess at least.

108.7.161.187 (talk) 23:48, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pylon turn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110711121145/http://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/Publications/fulltext/gunships.pdf to http://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/Publications/fulltext/gunships.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:57, 26 January 2018 (UTC)