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

Turning performance of SEA fighters



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 14th 04, 01:48 AM
Andy Bush
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Easy question but no easy answers.

Turn performance is going to depend on gross weight, configuration, and
density altitude. It all boils down to drag and engine performance...so
clean configurations, low fuel weights, and low density altitudes are
required to get max performance.

Unfortunately, we seldom had these when turn performance counted...we were
usually heavy and relatively high...so much of this is just an academic
discussion.

As Ed pointed out, corner is the most g for the min speed. I might add that
there is no "one" corner speed. Corner varies with the three variables I
mentioned above. Most of our energy maneuverability (EM) diagrams were
based on optimistic conditions (relatively clean and 1/2 internal fuel).
From these, here are some generalizations.

1. Corner velocities varied from the high 300s to the high 400s (indicated
airspeed...we didn't think in terms of TAS or mach, again as Ed said)...and
this varied with aircraft type, weight, and altitude.

2. Max g in the F-4 was 8.5...but you had to be running practically on fumes
to be able to get there without over-g'ing the jet.

3. A slatted F-4 at about 420KIAS could hit a little over 20 degrees per
second in instantaneous turn rate...but could not sustain this. A relatively
clean F-4E(S) at 39000+ lbs and 5000' MSL could sustain about 7.5 g's...but
had to be at about 525KIAS to do this. Sustained g in the lower 400s dropped
off to around 6g for these conditions.

4. I haven't flown the F-8 but I would imagine its numbers would be similar
but attained a slightly slower speeds.

5. An interesting comparison is the F-104G. Under similar conditions, the
Zipper had a lesser instantaneous g capability...about 15 dps (lower placard
g limit) but a higher sustained capability (around 10-12dps, depending on
which EM diagram you want to believe). Corner for the 104 was about 420KIAS
under 10,000'MSL and best 0 Ps was at about 500KIAS or so.

These numbers and observations come from personal experience in the jets and
moldy old EM diagrams!

Andy Bush


"Wolfhenson" wrote in message
om...
I have recently red that instantenious rate of turn of Vietnam vintage

supersonic
fighters is less than 15 deg/sec. What are the excat figures for F-4,

F-105 and
F-8? Please include speed and altitude.


Nemanja Vukicevic
student of aircreft engineering



 




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
B-17s Debut, RAF Wellingtons Bomb & Fighters Sweep at Zeno's Video Drive-In zeno Instrument Flight Rules 0 October 30th 04 06:20 PM
B-17s Debut, RAF Wellingtons Bomb & Fighters Sweep at Zeno's Video Drive-In zeno Home Built 0 October 30th 04 06:19 PM
Why was the Fokker D VII A Good Plane? Matthew G. Saroff Military Aviation 111 May 4th 04 05:34 PM
US (Brit/Japanese/German/USSR) Use of Gun Cameras in Fighters?? ArtKramr Military Aviation 3 July 17th 03 06:02 AM
CUrtiss Hawk 75 performance debate Jukka O. Kauppinen Military Aviation 3 July 16th 03 10:45 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:11 PM.


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