If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#171
|
|||
|
|||
Why does the shuttle throttle on ascent?
MichaelJP wrote:
Thanks Pat - the ME-163 is modelled in the superb combat flight sim IL-2, trying it last night they must have modelled this aircraft quite nicely as I found it very difficult to bleed off enough speed in the hold-off, exactly as you said above. Landing on the grass the skid dug in and certainly a real aircraft would have been destroyed. Obviously somebody did their research when writing the program for it. It might have something to do with the fact tat the ailerons also serve as its elevators. Does the simulator have the spoilers on it? The controls for them are located just to the left of the control stick. There's a manual pump mechanism handle with a ball top, and to the rear of it the actual flap control lever. On the actual aircraft you turn the control handle 180 degrees, then pump the pump handle six times to put the flaps fully down. Don't think so, but it does have landing flaps. IL-2 is pretty good as a simulator but it models 100's of different aircraft and variants so it has to make compromises and not all the subtleties are there. Amazing value though for the price. Difference is I could reset for another go Doing some other testing I found it impossible to recover from a spin entered from a slow-speed stall. Wonder if that's correct? It's supposed to have a very abrupt and severe stall according to Eric Brown's flight notes; he states it goes into a steep spiraling dive, but you can recover from it in a "straightforward" manner. I don't know it that means you turn into the spin and convert it into a dive or what. BTW, he was able to get the one he was flying up to 440 mph in _gliding_ flight in a dive, which gives you some idea of just how aerodynamic this little thing was. He wrecked his Komet by doing progressively faster and faster ballasted landings as tests for a British high speed research aircraft that the RAF was planning, till the skid finally came through the floorboard of the cockpit after a landing at 158 mph. Pat Interesting, what's your source for the Eric Brown story, I'd like to read more. |
#172
|
|||
|
|||
Why does the shuttle throttle on ascent?
MichaelJP wrote: Interesting, what's your source for the Eric Brown story, I'd like to read more. Eric Brown wrote a series books about the 487 types of planes he flew in his career as a test pilot. The one I have is "Wings of The Luftwaffe"(all the titles have "Wings" in them). Each aircraft type has both a cutaway of the whole aircraft, and a detailed drawing of the cockpit from the pilot's perspective with everything labeled. He gives an overview of all the handling characteristics of each type: http://www.amazon.com/Wings-Luftwaff.../dp/0385135211 In another book, "Wings of the Weird and Wonderful" he actually flew one of these: http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/bv141.html Pat |
#173
|
|||
|
|||
Why does the shuttle throttle on ascent?
wrote in message oups.com... The shuttle actually throttles back twice during ascent. The first time is at max Q. This is not a 3 G situation for the vehicle. After the solids are dropped, the shuttle again throttles back in the last 30 seconds or so before main engine cut-off, so as to not exceed 3 G's of forward acceleration when the fuel is almost gone. Whether this is due to a structural or other reason, I'm not sure. But structural makes the most sense for several reasons, weight being the primary one. Bud The answer is: So Navy fighter pilots can fly the shuttle :-) Danny Deger snip |
#174
|
|||
|
|||
Why does the shuttle throttle on ascent?
Danny Deger wrote: wrote in message oups.com... The shuttle actually throttles back twice during ascent. The first time is at max Q. This is not a 3 G situation for the vehicle. After the solids are dropped, the shuttle again throttles back in the last 30 seconds or so before main engine cut-off, so as to not exceed 3 G's of forward acceleration when the fuel is almost gone. Whether this is due to a structural or other reason, I'm not sure. But structural makes the most sense for several reasons, weight being the primary one. Bud The answer is: So Navy fighter pilots can fly the shuttle :-) Danny Deger snip |
#175
|
|||
|
|||
Why does the shuttle throttle on ascent?
I read that. Nice double meaning. However I think Navy pilots get to 9
G's like AF Raptor pilots do. I was just explaining to the ones that thought the max Q issue was 3 G's, which it is not. Bud Danny Deger wrote: wrote in message oups.com... The shuttle actually throttles back twice during ascent. The first time is at max Q. This is not a 3 G situation for the vehicle. After the solids are dropped, the shuttle again throttles back in the last 30 seconds or so before main engine cut-off, so as to not exceed 3 G's of forward acceleration when the fuel is almost gone. Whether this is due to a structural or other reason, I'm not sure. But structural makes the most sense for several reasons, weight being the primary one. Bud The answer is: So Navy fighter pilots can fly the shuttle :-) Danny Deger snip |
#176
|
|||
|
|||
Why does the shuttle throttle on ascent?
wrote in message ups.com... I read that. Nice double meaning. However I think Navy pilots get to 9 G's like AF Raptor pilots do. I was just explaining to the ones that thought the max Q issue was 3 G's, which it is not. This is true. Two different times to throttle on ascent for 2 different reasons. Danny Deger |
#177
|
|||
|
|||
Why does the shuttle throttle on ascent?
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message ... Henry Spencer wrote: Of course, the crew that *really* didn't want to hear/see anything like that were the folks aboard the Ethan Allen in May 1962, when she did the only US SLBM test ever with a live warhead... Frigate Bird! Hardly anyone knows we ever did that one: http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87...igate_bird.htm Where I'd have been a little queasy about being is on the Carbonero or Medregal at twenty-five miles from the aim point, and thinking to yourself "I sure hope that thing's guidance system works right." :-) I only read about it since someone asked if we had ever done that and I figured I'd look it up. Pat |
#178
|
|||
|
|||
Why does the shuttle throttle on ascent?
Danny Deger wrote:
While in the atmosphere the main engines are throttled back to reduce the maximum aerodynamic pressure. The grain in the SRB is also designed to have them go through a period of reduced thrust at about the same time. Not sure what you mean by "grain in the SRB", but the physical propellant shape is designed the reduce the thrust by approximately a third 50 seconds after lift-off to prevent overstressing the vehicle during maximum dynamic pressure. Hilton |
#179
|
|||
|
|||
Why does the shuttle throttle on ascent?
Pat Flannery wrote:
MichaelJP wrote: I wonder how many found it too much and came to grief - were there any trainer versions of the P51D or was the first flight always the first solo as well? I don't think I've ever seen a trainer P-51, in fact most U.S. WW II fighter didn't have a trainer version. I assume that after you had done enough hours in a Texan trainer they assumed you were ready to take on a Mustang, although I have heard of some pilots training stateside in P-39s before moving up to P-47s or P-51s overseas. (Chuck Yeager for instance) During the war there weren't any 2 chair P-51s (Except a few one-offs like the 2-seat P-51B that was used by Eisenhower for direct recon of Normandy.) There were some TF-51Ds put together after the war by Temco - They can be spotted by their having the bigger F-51H fin & rudder, and a canopy shape that gives a bit more rear headroom. Cavalier made some, as well - including a couple delivered to the U.S. Army in the 1960s for use as chase planes for the AH-56 Cheyenne Compound Helicopter. But, backduring the War, the usual procedure before transitioning to a singe seat fighter was to demonstrate proficiency in landing an AT-6 from the read seat. This gave the same lousy over-the-nose visibility, and the T-6's much snarkier behavior on landing and rollout meant that if you could handle that, you could pretty much handle anything. Figher training (More of less what we'd call LIFT (Lead-In Fighter Training these days) was typically performed in war-weary P-39s or P-40s. It was considered part of the Advanced Single Engine syllabus. The U.S. Aviation Training Programs, both Army and Navy, were some of the most amazing miracles of WW 2. A lot of study went into syllabus and methods - And the result was Pilots coming out of training in with 250-300 hours who could not only fly a fighter, but fly it on instruments, navigate their way from England to Prague and back, and fight the Luftwaffe (or the IJN) to a standstill when they got there. Well, and the U.S. Aviation Industry, that could build fighters that could not only fly from England to Prague, but take on the short-ranged interceptors when it got there, and, if necessary, run them out of gas, and fly home. (The only German fighter pilots who got instrument training were the NachtJagd. This was a factor in choosing bomber pilots to fly the early jets - they could make instrument let-down in the usual crappy German weather. An Me 262 didn't have the fuel on board to stooge around looking for a hole in the clouds to descend through, or a VFR airfield. Pete Stickney Without data, all you have is an opinion |
#180
|
|||
|
|||
Why does the shuttle throttle on ascent?
Peter Stickney wrote: (The only German fighter pilots who got instrument training were the NachtJagd. How would you like to be the pilot of one of those single seat radar equipped FW-190 night fighters? That must have kept one mighty busy. See if you can figure this out BTW; it's a Ba-349 "Natter" control panel: http://www.fantasyofflight.com/Image...er_Cockpit.jpg That thing in the middle with the crosshairs on it has to have something to do with the semi-automated way it was vectored by ground control to the incoming bombers... but how does it work? I don't think the nose was recoverable after being jettisoned, so it has to be cheap, but it looks pretty sophisticated, like something that might have a gyro or cathode ray tube in it. Pat |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How to get maximum height on a winch launch? | Dan G | Soaring | 38 | December 22nd 16 12:29 AM |
NASA: "The Shuttle Was a Mistake" | AES | Piloting | 39 | October 10th 05 01:10 PM |
Is possible to pair a Saitek X35 throttle and a MS Sidewinder Pro? | Riccardo | Simulators | 3 | December 24th 03 06:07 PM |
Boeing: Space shuttles to last into next decade | JohnMcGrew | Piloting | 17 | October 24th 03 09:31 PM |
Cause of Columbia Shuttle Disaster. | Mike Spera | Owning | 2 | August 31st 03 03:11 PM |