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 |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message ... On 4/7/04 12:05 PM, in article , "Tarver Engineering" wrote: SNIP I did not comment on your ability to operate the F-18 wood man. You insutled me in assuming that because you do not know something that I could not know it. What we have here is... Failure to communicate. I never made that assumption... At least not publically. Sure you did. It is very insulting for you to ask me to admit I am wrong when i am correct and you just don't know. You come off as a prick, instead of that big dick F-18 thing, same for little blo monkey. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 00:49:00 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal"
wrote: On 4/7/04 10:52 AM, in article , "Mary Shafer" wrote: This discussion is going round and round, but my point is... that the stick forces do not change whether in CAS, MECH or DEL--i.e. any "break out" force in the cockpit is incidental to what the pilot normally experiences when pulling on the pole. I thought the feel system changed in the spin recovery mode, with more surface deflection per inch of stick displacement, but there's a good chance that was either a non-standard F-18 or some other airplane. I mean, I could have been thinking of the F-16 deep stall recovery mode, you know. Don't get me started on stick force shaping, as I spent some serious flight time and money looking at a variety of schedules for pilot cueing. I can probably tell you more than you want to know about how pilots perceive the cues, although the most interesting part is how they can fail to consciously notice a major cue, even when it affects their technique. I wouldn't dare even attempt to discuss it with you, Mary unless I were in receive only mode. |:-) Did you know, for example, that you have a different tolerance for time delay in the feel system than you do for time delay in the flight control system? If asked, you probably don't even know you can tell the difference, but you can. Keep it that way. The Plastic Bug flies miserably in MECH. It was a big deal when they finally trapped in MECH, in fact. Before that, it had meant diverting to land. When Tom McMurtry had to land one of ours in MECH he cheerfully declared it to be one of the worse control modes he'd ever flown, not counting those he'd flown for me when we were doing the PIO work. That's what I've heard. I had no idea that a trap in MECH had actually occurred. It must have been MECH in one axis only. Eh? Sea story? I honestly don't know if it was one axis or more. It's not a sea story, because we got the notification from the class desk (or whatever they call it). You know the thing I mean, the telex to all F/A-18 squadrons and Dryden, with time-critical information. I thought DEL was a reversionary mode for more than spin recovery, though. Doesn't the Bug drop into DEL when the MC faults? It's the spin recovery mode that overrides the surface limits for spin recovery when the yaw rate goes over some limit (40 deg/sec, maybe?), isn't it? It is. You are correct that's DEL, but the only time *I'VE* ever experienced flying in DEL is when I do Spin Recovery Mode (SRM) checks on FCF's (only on the A profiles now). The way I had it explained to me years ago (by some dude at China Lake) is that SRM is a subset of the DEL mode (with the LEF's at 33-34 degrees and the TEF's at 0 +/- 1 degree). The nose gets a bit "slicy" coming out of 30K in with SRM engaged, and the AOA must be kept between 10-20 degrees (although I know from personal experience that the jet won't explode if you fall outside of that limit for transitory periods). I think this is all exactly right, except that my crummy memory for numbers means I can't say about them. I don't think you can get the jet to explode on transient excursions outside the limit, although I know that no one should ever underestimate the fleet pilots, but you can get it to depart again if you botch the recovery (usually by being a little too enthusiastic too soon). If you do it just right, you can get it to depart into a worse mode, like oscillatory instead of flat. I'll give you my standard stall-departure-spin warning, which I give to every fighter pilot and test pilot I know. Be careful if you're flying a two-seat version with a centerline tank. It will depart and spin much more easily than a single-seat jet or a clean jet. You're not guaranteed to depart and spin, of course, but you're at greater risk. It also probably won't recover as well or as quickly and it may have more spin modes. I used to have a couple of plots that really made this point clear, but I left them with one of the flying qualities engineers when I retired. I wasn't sure if all the data was generally available. It's kind of a squirrelly deal to fly in. Nauga, where are you? They're all squirrelly in stall-departure-spin. Maybe it's because it's all forebody flow so there's a lot of moment arm or something. The F-16 deep stall procedure is odd, to say the least, because you get out of the stall by pulling up the nose and increasing the stall angle before you push over and "rock" the airplane out of the stall. Yo, Nauga, over here! Mary -- Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
On 4/8/04 12:17 AM, in article ,
"Mary Shafer" wrote: On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 00:49:00 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal" wrote: On 4/7/04 10:52 AM, in article , "Mary Shafer" wrote: This discussion is going round and round, but my point is... that the stick forces do not change whether in CAS, MECH or DEL--i.e. any "break out" force in the cockpit is incidental to what the pilot normally experiences when pulling on the pole. I thought the feel system changed in the spin recovery mode, with more surface deflection per inch of stick displacement, but there's a good chance that was either a non-standard F-18 or some other airplane. I mean, I could have been thinking of the F-16 deep stall recovery mode, you know. It may, but I wouldn't know because I never move the stick more than about 1/2 an inch in that mode. I sort of doubt it though because pulling the stick back or cycling it in a cold/dead airplane feels (force wise) exactly the same as moving it around in a live running airplane. I should explain here that the only time I've USED SRM is when I'm doing an FCF A. The SRM check starts at 30K and 200 KCAS. Basically, turn the SRM switch to RCVY, and hold the stick back. Then the aircraft hits the correct numbers (which embarrassingly escape me right now... Circa 150 KCAS), SRM actually engages. You basically hold 10-20 alpha for the rest of the recovery while accelerating through 250 so that SRM will auto-disengage. Basically, we're just diving in SRM in level flight and checking that it engages and disengages when it's supposed to. We used to do these checks on C and A FCF's. Now just on A's. SNIP I wouldn't dare even attempt to discuss it with you, Mary unless I were in receive only mode. |:-) Did you know, for example, that you have a different tolerance for time delay in the feel system than you do for time delay in the flight control system? If asked, you probably don't even know you can tell the difference, but you can. Ow. SNIP I think this is all exactly right, except that my crummy memory for numbers means I can't say about them. I don't think you can get the jet to explode on transient excursions outside the limit, although I know that no one should ever underestimate the fleet pilots, but you can get it to depart again if you botch the recovery (usually by being a little too enthusiastic too soon). If you do it just right, you can get it to depart into a worse mode, like oscillatory instead of flat. The explode thing was a poor attempt at humor. I'll give you my standard stall-departure-spin warning, which I give to every fighter pilot and test pilot I know. Be careful if you're flying a two-seat version with a centerline tank. It will depart and spin much more easily than a single-seat jet or a clean jet. You're not guaranteed to depart and spin, of course, but you're at greater risk. It also probably won't recover as well or as quickly and it may have more spin modes. Concur with the two-seater/single C/L. Departing I have done (single-seat)... Twice. Once was fairly eye-opening. 460KCAS (probably much slower 350 or less when it stopped flying) at 15000 feet with a full load of back stick and a full boot of top rudder--a real ham-fist piece of work. The airplane recovered after disappearing into its own cotton-ball and some real bang-me-up PSG's. I felt pretty sheepish. Jet was just fine. The immediate action procedures (basically let go and wait) worked like a champ. I used to have a couple of plots that really made this point clear, but I left them with one of the flying qualities engineers when I retired. I wasn't sure if all the data was generally available. It's kind of a squirrelly deal to fly in. Nauga, where are you? They're all squirrelly in stall-departure-spin. Maybe it's because it's all forebody flow so there's a lot of moment arm or something. The F-16 deep stall procedure is odd, to say the least, because you get out of the stall by pulling up the nose and increasing the stall angle before you push over and "rock" the airplane out of the stall. Weird. Do those guys still do that with the 25 alpha limiter installed? Yo, Nauga, over here! If he's lurking, this is usually the point where he shows up. --Woody Mary |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message ... On 4/7/04 11:30 PM, in article , "Tarver Engineering" wrote: "Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message ... On 4/7/04 12:05 PM, in article , "Tarver Engineering" wrote: SNIP I did not comment on your ability to operate the F-18 wood man. You insutled me in assuming that because you do not know something that I could not know it. What we have here is... Failure to communicate. I never made that assumption... At least not publically. Sure you did. It is very insulting for you to ask me to admit I am wrong when i am correct and you just don't know. You come off as a prick, instead of that big dick F-18 thing, same for little blo monkey. Okay, I've asked you several questions trying to get answers... About rotary inverters, about Bob and Mary etc... You seem to refuse to answer or to educate, but instead break down to insults. I am sorry that once found clueless, being a prick didn't carry the day for you, wood man. Perhaps in our next encounter you might act in a civilized manner and I may answer your questions. It is you and little blo monkey that are being insulting and that is odd considering the laughable condition of the Canadain military. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message ... On 4/8/04 12:17 AM, in article , "Mary Shafer" wrote: On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 00:49:00 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal" wrote: On 4/7/04 10:52 AM, in article , "Mary Shafer" wrote: This discussion is going round and round, but my point is... that the stick forces do not change whether in CAS, MECH or DEL--i.e. any "break out" force in the cockpit is incidental to what the pilot normally experiences when pulling on the pole. I thought the feel system changed in the spin recovery mode, with more surface deflection per inch of stick displacement, but there's a good chance that was either a non-standard F-18 or some other airplane. I mean, I could have been thinking of the F-16 deep stall recovery mode, you know. It may, but I wouldn't know There is your problem, wood man. Next time you want to be a prick, let it be about something you know; instead of making such a fool of yourself and your Nation. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message ... On 4/7/04 10:52 AM, in article , "Mary Shafer" wrote: On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 02:22:48 GMT, "Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal" wrote: There is no difference in stick forces or "break out" as you're calling it between CAS, DEL, or MECH modes. Perhaps you're talking about the feedback force that is added when the stick is displaced from its neutral position? That is certainly not a "break out." That is, too. That's the definition of break out force, the force you have to overcome to leave the deadband. What do you think break out force is? The way he seems to be describing it there is an additional force imparted beyond the normal feedback when the stick is displaced from neutral. Of course, I've got no formal training in TPS terms, so perhaps I misunderstand. You didn't know, so you assumed I must not know. The only misunderstanding here is your confucion at why being a dick didn't work for you. That is a very common practice amoung pilots with more ego than knowledge. In the past I would have just walked away and left you to your ignorance, but I have learned over my years on usenet that walking away will only embolden you to be even more of a prick, wood man. (see Weiss' posts) This discussion is going round and round, but my point is... No it isn't, you have allready spun into the ground wood man. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ...
"Mike Kanze" wrote in message ... Let us agree that I know where the F/A-18 stick breaks out at (20#) and that you and monkey are clueless. Once again, the Tarverbot shows his OWN cluelessness. Not me. It is unsafe for the operator.............. Snip mmm lets look at a tarver quote from the archives.... Newsgroups: alt.disasters.aviation Subject: Southwest skids another one off the runway Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 10:05:37 -0800 "Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message ... Bwawhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahhw! So, Splaps boy, wanna tell me how an autothrottle is going to slow an airplane down? Retarding the throttles will cease the engines from adding thrust, my silly rodent. Reducing pilot workload gives the Operator more time to deploy Spoiler Flaps into a Speed Brake configuration. Not like your Piper at all. John |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
"Doug \"Woody\" and Erin Beal" wrote in message ...
On 4/6/04 8:11 PM, in article , "Tarver Engineering" wrote: "Mike Kanze" wrote in message ... Let us agree that I know where the F/A-18 stick breaks out at (20#) and that you and monkey are clueless. Well, THAT was an insult. Nice work. Once again, the Tarverbot shows his OWN cluelessness. Not me. It is unsafe for the operator to not know that the stick breaks out to activate the mechanical backup. There is no guarantee the failure of the electric controls will cause the force transducer to deactivate. Once agian a pilot is so ignorant as to believe they know more about how an airplane works than a systems engineer for that airplane. This is NOT a safety of flight issue, and you couldn't possibly be a systems engineer for the Hornet. Tarver's engineering capabilities are predominantly associated with repairs of the domestic toaster. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
geezzz-since you two are so busy wacking each other, I'll ask again. Does the
F-18 have a means to provide trons to the flight controls with a flameout, ala the hydrazine generator like the F-16?? Or a RAT, or APU, or what. We practiced flameout approaches in the F-16.. P. C. Chisholm CDR, USN(ret.) Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
RAF Blind/Beam Approach Training flights | Geoffrey Sinclair | Military Aviation | 3 | September 4th 09 06:31 PM |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
us air force us air force academy us air force bases air force museum us us air force rank us air force reserve adfunk | Jehad Internet | Military Aviation | 0 | February 7th 04 04:24 AM |
12 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 12th 03 11:01 PM |
Sim time loggable? | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | December 6th 03 07:47 AM |