A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

How indicative of agility are max G numbers?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old November 21st 03, 04:47 AM
Dudley Henriques
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...
There's a mix here involved. Max G available, G onset (how fast can
you load it up) and corner velocity - the minimum speed do you need to
generate the lift necessary attain max G. A lot of limitations pop up
now. Higher the G, teh stronger tha irplane must be, and therefore the
weight goes up, so the wing has to be bigger. Also to sustain the G
you need more thrust because induced drag (drag due to generating
lift) goes sky-high.
Generally the design working G limit has been either 7 1/2 or 9 - and
with a 50% safety factor that means the structural yield limit ( bent
and won't 'unbend' either 11 1/4 or 13.5 G. Human G tolerance depends
a great deal on training fitness and 'want to'. I have seen 10.5 on a
G-meter whena student 'dug in' an F4 decelerating through the Mach -
my forward push stopped it from going even higher. My G tolerance came
from flying the F102 sans G-suit and hasseling with anything that came
along. It could pull 3G at 200 KIAS, 7G at about 325, though not for
long (delta wing at airspeed!) FWIW I have a friend who was conscious
and talking to the doctors on USC's centrifuge at 11 G sustained. He
is about 6-2 and 180. Also, I know of two incidents were the pilots
recovered their aircraft pulling 12 (F106) and 13 G (F86D)
respectively after getting the nose buried close to the ground. Yes,
the aircraft were severely bent, but the pilots survived. Adrenalin is
a wonder drug in these cases - special cases of 'want to'.
Walt BJ


Yeah, it's a multiples thing all right, especially if you throw corner in
there . Below corner you're aerodynamically limited and above you're
structurally limited; go high enough and you're thrust limited as well......
but just considering g alone which was his question, and forgetting rate and
radius, you can pull max g all the way out to the right side of the envelope
until either you or the airplane starts complaining :-)
But I agree with you. You can't even begin to discuss fighter performance
using a one aspect only condition. There's just too much involved, and the
whole thing has to be integrated into the discussion for anything to make
sense at all.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Old Plans, New Part Numbers [email protected] Home Built 3 December 16th 04 10:25 AM
NACA Numbers??? c hinds Home Built 3 October 11th 04 09:40 PM
Press fit numbers? Boelkowj Home Built 1 April 29th 04 06:51 PM
Any Canadians Who Can Provide Numbers on a Champ, Taylorcraft, or Luscombe with Warp Drive Propeller? Larry Smith Home Built 7 December 21st 03 09:39 PM
Darpa contract numbers - = krusty = - Home Built 9 July 23rd 03 03:22 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.