Me-262, NOT Bell X-1 Broke SB First

(Harry Andreas) wrote:

The Macair guy claimed they used this profile because it kept the aircraft
noise over the airport and didn't disturb the neighbors as much.
He kept a straight face while he said it, too.
I admired him for that.

Once, at Geoge AFB, we had a couple of F-15s refueling while we were
prepping a cross-country flight of F-4Es. The F-15s did a "haul ass ten
feet off of the runway, pull the gear, go straight up while rolling
until out of sight" moves.

The four F-4Es... sorta slouched off of the ground and headed the other
way.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 21:56:10 +0100, Ken Duffey
wrote:


As a result, the P-42 was able to gather
speed and break through the sonic barrier when climbing".

It doesn't actually say 'climbing vertically' - but it does say supersonic
whilst climbing.


Which returns (for the very last time, I promise) to my contention.
I've never doubted the ability of the F-15, nor the P-42, nor for that
matter, the F-4E or even the lowly T-38 to "break through the sonic
barrier when climbing".

My argument was purely rhetorical and dealing with the symantics of
accelerating through the mach when vertical. There's a huge difference
between stabilized vertical flight sub-sonic, then selecting full
thrust and achieving supersonic with pure vertical acceleration.

I postulate once mo pick a subsonic speed--I like around 500 kts
indicated. Pull up to vertical--throttle modulation to maintain
airspeed is acceptable. When established vertical, still subsonic,
stabilize pitch (this will require zero G) and accelerate through the
mach.

Factors involved:

Making the initial pitch up at such an indicated airspeed without
climbing through an altitude at which the mach is passed prior to
achieving vertical.

Decrease in thrust as altitude increases. Remember that vaunted
1-to-1 T/W is measured at sea level.

Available altitude before running into service ceiling

Available fuel--while lighter means easier acceleration, fuel
consumption also means running out of fuel.

Temp/altitude changes in relationship of mach to indicated to true.

The simple problem of reliable fuel flow in the unloaded G state
required to maintain vertical.

There's probably more at work, but the problem is complex and neither
the Streak Eagle experience or the Soviet record meet the discussion
criteria.

End of diatribe.

WaltBJ wrote:

SNIP:
Ed Rasimus wrote:
Now, let's put to bed this idea of accelerating through the mach
straight up.
A couple reminders:
1) with a thrust to weight atio of 1.6:1 the Streak Eagle is
distinctly higher powered than anything any of us flew in the service.
2) It's shedding weight in full afterburner during the takeoff and
climb. I don't know what the fuel consumption of an F15 full-out is
but it's certainly over a ton a minute, so the T/W is increasing.

F100-PW-100, 860lb./min. SL static uninstalled, each (probably not with the
VMAX switch). As you say, could be more when they're cooking along.

snip

5) BTW with Jeff Ethell's flying experience and the highly visible
attitude direction indicator in an F15 why question his statement that
they were indeed vertical? Checking a vertical climb on the gyro is no
big deal - and one also looks out at the horizon.

I'm allowing for the possibility that he was a bit overwhelmed by the rate
of data. ISTM that Ethell mainly flew prop a/c; AFAIK he was never a jet
jock by trade. I've got an account from a seasoned RCAF jet jock (Mustang
and Vampire in training, Sabre in Germany) transitioning to the CF-104D,
who says he was way behind the a/c on his first takeoff, which was his
first a/c with A/B.

It seems possible to me that Ethell may have been in the same boat, as
although he'd undoubtedly flown in jet fighters prior to that, he'd never
flown them for a living. Besides, I imagine the seat of the pants
difference between true vertical and 75 degrees or so is pretty small, if
you're not rolling on the way up. But maybe he was staring right at the
HUD ladder the entire time, and they were in fact climbing at 90 deg. I
don't know, I just thought I'd better mention the possibility that they
weren't true vertical.

Guy

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
. ..
(Harry Andreas) wrote:


Once, at Geoge AFB, we had a couple of F-15s refueling while we were
prepping a cross-country flight of F-4Es. The F-15s did a "haul ass
ten
feet off of the runway, pull the gear, go straight up while rolling
until out of sight" moves.

The four F-4Es... sorta slouched off of the ground and headed the
other
way.


I was on a civilian firefighting helicopter based at George in 1981.
We were on the edge of transient parking past Chopper Ops and near the
California Air National Guard hanger. A few times we got to see the
Delta Darts go chase a blip. They would roll out of the hanger two at
a time and go vertical ASAP - very cool.

- cj

From: John Halliwell

B2431
writes
It's basic calculus.

I'm not too sure if 'basic' and 'calculus' sit too well together

Compared to what I learned, and have since forgotten in calc 2 and 3 it is
basic. If you want to see a course that makes sanity seem like an illusion try
one in imagionary variables.

Algebra is when you stop counting on your fingers and start using your toes.
Calculus is when you tie those toes in knots. Differential equations is when
you start learning you are now different..........etc.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

(Harry Andreas) wrote in message ...
SNIP
I watched F-15s do this at St Louis airport back in the 80's.
What did they call it? A "Trojan takeoff"?

The Macair guy claimed they used this profile because it kept the aircraft
noise over the airport and didn't disturb the neighbors as much.
He kept a straight face while he said it, too.
I admired him for that.
ADDED:
In one of MacAir's monthly mags for pilots and mechanics they
stated that the vertical departure out of Lambert Field was also for
air traffic control reasons - a 'quick climb' gets you up where you
belong very quickly. I remember asking for and receiving a 'quick
climb' out of Little Rock once while bringing a 102 back home to RG
AFB from MOAMA. Also, the Jax ANG used to depart Homestead that way
when they were pulling ADC alert down there. Miami traffic is bad
enough so Miami ARTC was very happy to ahve the Six at altitude 5 or 6
miles out of HST.
Walt BJ

On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 22:20:04 GMT, "cj" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
...
(Harry Andreas) wrote:


Once, at Geoge AFB, we had a couple of F-15s refueling while we were
prepping a cross-country flight of F-4Es. The F-15s did a "haul ass
ten
feet off of the runway, pull the gear, go straight up while rolling
until out of sight" moves.

The four F-4Es... sorta slouched off of the ground and headed the
other
way.


I was on a civilian firefighting helicopter based at George in 1981.
We were on the edge of transient parking past Chopper Ops and near the
California Air National Guard hanger. A few times we got to see the
Delta Darts go chase a blip. They would roll out of the hanger two at
a time and go vertical ASAP - very cool.

- cj

None of which is impressive compared to a cat launch :-)

Al Minyard

"Alan Minyard" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 22:20:04 GMT, "cj" wrote:

I was on a civilian firefighting helicopter based at George in
1981.
We were on the edge of transient parking past Chopper Ops and near
the
California Air National Guard hanger. A few times we got to see
the
Delta Darts go chase a blip. They would roll out of the hanger two
at
a time and go vertical ASAP - very cool.

- cj

None of which is impressive compared to a cat launch :-)

Al Minyard

I don't doubt that!

I didn't go everywhere at George (especially immediately after the
Gulf of Sidra showdown when the nice folk with the blue uniforms and
white gloves started wearing camo and carrying automatic weapons), but
I don't seem to recall seeing a catapult there.

However, there were some arrest cables on the runway - they didn't get
used much.

-cj

None of which is impressive compared to a cat launch :-)

Al Minyard


You put cats in a trebuchet? Do they always land on their feet?

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Saw the remark on a cat launch. FWIW at the Logan drags last weekend
the fastest quarter mile time was 4.524 seconds which comps out to
about an average 4.03 G and a top speed of around 315 mph. Let's see
now, if I took my 99 Honda Civic and put in a . . . .
Walt BJ