Kip Powick Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 The long hanger at Willow Run, Michigan has a 90 degree turn in it so Henry Ford would not have to pay taxes in the next county. That short end is being saved and restored today as a museum. The big hanger doors are still operational after all these years. This is one of the best and most informative clips about a great American accomplishment, thanks to the Ford Motor Company during WWII. A Ford Airplane! AMAZING!Production began here 6 months BEFORE Pearl Harbor! Henry Ford was determined that he could mass produce bombers just as he had with cars, so he built the Willow Run assembly plant and proved it. This was the world's largest building under one roof at the time. This film will absolutely blow you away -- one B-24 every 55 minutes! -- and Ford had its own pilots to test them. And no recalls! http://www.youtube.com/embed/iKlt6rNciTo?rel=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 Beautiful, Kip, thks! Lotsa sites to get more info - just google it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 Older Military jet but: This awesome video comes to us from a Turkish aerobatic team called SoloTürk who fly the world famous F-16s. For this demonstration, they mounted a camera right in the back of the cockpit to show us a really great view out of the front of the canopy. Then, the pilot pulled some Gs and spun around like hell! As for this pilot, his name is Erhan Günar. A 2nd demo pilot and 1st Lieutenant, he’s a 32 year old who graduated from the Air Force Academy in 2005. Proving himself an extremely capable and ambitious pilot, he got himself a spot on this team. The rest, is Youtube history (at least for us!) The SoloTürk demonstration team was established in 2009 by the Turkish Air Force. Their goal was to make known the capabilities of the F-16, something we in the U.S. know much about. Fast, maneuverable and deadly, F-16s have been around since 1974 with no end of service in sight. As of today, it’s actually the second most commonly used military aircraft in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted April 2, 2016 Author Share Posted April 2, 2016 He did a few rolls while gaining altitude with a half roll and pull through at the top which enabled him to do rolls downward and head for the airfield, then a "split S" to align with the runway, up into the start of a Cuban eight, rolls on the way up, and then a 1/2 roll and pull through to go back down the runway....Pulls up again , probably to complete the Cuban 8 .....but the video ceases. .....so much fun !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 1 hour ago, Rich Pulman said: Sounds kinda like my "aerobatic sequence" during training at The Big 2. Sounds like one of my disastrous simulator rides! (...there was just one...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted April 2, 2016 Author Share Posted April 2, 2016 2 hours ago, Rich Pulman said: Sounds kinda like my "aerobatic sequence" during training at The Big 2. What year(s)?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 I like the stick. Watch the right hand as he throws it into the roll. The stick does not move. Pressure only and not "Throw" like in an airbus or the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 1 hour ago, boestar said: I like the stick. Watch the right hand as he throws it into the roll. The stick does not move. Pressure only and not "Throw" like in an airbus or the like. That'd be the designed inherent instability of a fighter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 not following your logic. the stick in the f-16 doesn't actually move by design Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted April 4, 2016 Author Share Posted April 4, 2016 43 minutes ago, boestar said: not following your logic. the stick in the f-16 doesn't actually move by design . Inherent stability is the tendency of an aircraft to return to straight and level flight, when the controls are released by the pilot. Most aircraft are designed with this in mind and are said to be "inherently stable." High-performance aircraft, such as fighter planes and aerobatic aircraft, often have little or no inherent stability and when the pilot releases the controls, the aircraft may bank or pitch in one direction or another. These aircraft take much more skill and concentration to fly safely, while the most sophisticated aircraft are computer controlled. Most civilian aircraft are designed to provide a high amount of inherent stability. ...That being said ...then the F-16 has been designed with inherent instability . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blues deville Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 On April 2, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Rich Pulman said: I've been known to loop and roll the A320 & A330 in the simulator just to demonstrate that the airplane can be flown quite well without the normal "protections". (Assuming of course that the fidelity of the simulator is a reasonable proximity to the real aircraft! ) How do the owners of those simulators feel about your aerobatics? We would normally turn off the motion to demo or practice jet upsets. You can really screw up a full motion sim if you get to "Yeagery" in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted April 7, 2016 Share Posted April 7, 2016 On April 4, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Kip Powick said: . Inherent stability is the tendency of an aircraft to return to straight and level flight, when the controls are released by the pilot. Most aircraft are designed with this in mind and are said to be "inherently stable." High-performance aircraft, such as fighter planes and aerobatic aircraft, often have little or no inherent stability and when the pilot releases the controls, the aircraft may bank or pitch in one direction or another. These aircraft take much more skill and concentration to fly safely, while the most sophisticated aircraft are computer controlled. Most civilian aircraft are designed to provide a high amount of inherent stability. ...That being said ...then the F-16 has been designed with inherent instability . my point being that the stick itself has no movement. In an Airbus, for example, one must move the stick to make an input to the flight control system. The F-16 stick does not move at all to make an input to the flight control. The stick relies on Pressure exerted on it to determine what the pilot wants to do. 1 pound of force for example would give a slight deflection of the ailerons but 10 pounds would deflect them to max travel. This departure from movement to pressure is, in part, due to limited space in the cockpit. The inherent instability of the aircraft is why they are fly by wire. I remember seeing video of a damaged aircraft, I forget the type. The outer end of the wingtip was torn off in an air to air collision. The Pilot stated that there was no change to way he flew the plane but the flight controls were moving rapidly to maintain level flight. If it were not a fly by wire aircraft it would have been a hull loss and the pilot would have had to punch out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CD Posted April 7, 2016 Share Posted April 7, 2016 It's happened a few times over the years: Air Force student pilot safely lands F-16 jet - despite losing half a wing in mid-air collision with instructor during mock dogfight How an Israeli F-15 Eagle managed to land with one wing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 16, 2016 Share Posted May 16, 2016 Somewhat on topic (back then). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 I've never flown a point & shoot aircraft. Wouldn't it be more of a wrestling match doing aerobatics with an aircraft designed with inherent stability in mind than one that will remain in the position / direction it's pointed so long as the stick isn't moved / pressured? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 I think that, without computer assistance, it would be a bigger wrestling match to fight an inherently unstable aircraft to line things up in a dog fight while trying to maintain some coherent flight path. Most fighter aircraft today are built unstable to increase maneuverability. But you need FBW systems to make it all possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 I was trying to sat the same thing; i.e., 'point & shoot' = fbw fighter aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 I remember reading or hearing somewhere that the new generation fighters are unflyable without the computer assistance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 Fighters are guided bricks equipped with ejection seats. Inherent stability makes all but a bit of the difference in civilian aircraft designs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 I saw a video of a fighter, can't remember the model, that had lost part of its outboard wing during a training exercise. The pilot stated he would never have know of the issue if he wasnt told as the controls responded as usual. The view from the second aircraft told a different story as the controls were deflected all over the place to keep the plane level. Without the computers it would have been a bail out and total loss as the aircraft was not flyable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acsidestick Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 On April 4, 2016 at 0:47 AM, blues deville said: How do the owners of those simulators feel about your aerobatics? We would normally turn off the motion to demo or practice jet upsets. You can really screw up a full motion sim if you get to "Yeagery" in them. Since AF447, full jet upset scenarios are part of our training, both Boeing and Airbus. I can't speak for the EMJ but it's probably there too. Motion turned off, various breakers get pulled to downgrade contrail laws, PF closes his eyes, PM (PNF) rolls Simulator 180 degrees upside down plus NU, ND, and then PF opens eyes, manipulates thrust as required and rolls to nearest horizon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 Boestar - go to acsidestick If motion is off and the PF's eyes are closed, what's the point of the NU ND inputs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boestar Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 I have see that one before but that is not the one I was thinking of. The video I recall there was discussion of the behaviour of the flight control surfaces compared to what the pilot was seeing in the cockpit. for example he would have the stick straight and level but the flight controls were deflected as if in a turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted May 18, 2016 Author Share Posted May 18, 2016 Yeh, in the Military it is called "Unusual Attitudes" and is demonstrated and taught in every phase of pilot training both VFR and IFR One day the weather was poor, (low ceilings), so one of the QFI's took his student only up to 5000 feet instead of the block 10,000 to 15,000 and commenced an 'under the bag' Unusual Attitude mission. The QFI had the student close his eyes and then the QFI did a bunch of aeros and then gave the student the aircraft slightly nose up, almost level, with airspeed decreasing .The student thought he was upside down, so he rolled inverted, applied full power and pulled and got rather confused and kept on pulling...hard. Pulled in excess of 8G. The QFI blacked out, the student went to mini-tunnel vision with his adrenalin rush and apparently they missed the terra firma by about 400 feet. Aircraft was grounded for an "over G test and that unusual attitude was not to be flown again unless the aircraft was 10,000 + feet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 10 hours ago, Kip Powick said: Yeh, in the Military it is called "Unusual Attitudes" and is demonstrated and taught in every phase of pilot training both VFR and IFR One day the weather was poor, (low ceilings), so one of the QFI's took his student only up to 5000 feet instead of the block 10,000 to 15,000 and commenced an 'under the bag' Unusual Attitude mission. The QFI had the student close his eyes and then the QFI did a bunch of aeros and then gave the student the aircraft slightly nose up, almost level, with airspeed decreasing .The student thought he was upside down, so he rolled inverted, applied full power and pulled and got rather confused and kept on pulling...hard. Pulled in excess of 8G. The QFI blacked out, the student went to mini-tunnel vision with his adrenalin rush and apparently they missed the terra firma by about 400 feet. Aircraft was grounded for an "over G test and that unusual attitude was not to be flown again unless the aircraft was 10,000 + feet And THAT was just one of yer simulator exercises! (Eh Kip?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.