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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Phantom flight
Hi all,
I had a great opportunity yesterday. I'm a hornet driver by trade, and got a chance to fly the F-4 on a qual/eval as part of the test pilot school course. After trying to flare on my first several landings like the Air Force IP in the back seat wanted, I planted my last landing pretty firm within the first 100 feet of the runway (no ball to fly though). I have to say I have a lot more respect for anyone who landed that aircraft on a boat. Ray |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Raymond Marshall" wrote in message om... Hi all, I had a great opportunity yesterday. I'm a hornet driver by trade, and got a chance to fly the F-4 on a qual/eval as part of the test pilot school course. After trying to flare on my first several landings like the Air Force IP in the back seat wanted, I planted my last landing pretty firm within the first 100 feet of the runway (no ball to fly though). I have to say I have a lot more respect for anyone who landed that aircraft on a boat. The Phantom was very stable aircraft around the boat. Despite its genuine mach 2 capability (well, maybe not the S model), it was remarkably docile and forgiving throughout its envelope. It had high wing loading and relatively unsophisticated aerodynamics so it couldn't turn (except perhaps compared to a Zipper ... oops, an opening for Walt he'll likely not refuse). Didn't have the sports car feel of some jets ... more like a pickup truck, but a solid and reliable jet. If you get an opportunity to get checked out in the F-8, I recommend you go for it. THAT was an airplane that could enthrall you ... and then bite you on the ass. R / John |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
John Carrier wrote:
The Phantom was very stable aircraft around the boat. Despite its genuine mach 2 capability (well, maybe not the S model), it was remarkably docile and forgiving throughout its envelope. My flight instructor once mentioned that on his first flight in a Phantom, as he got it slowed down for landing, it scared the poo out of him (apparently *felt* like it was in danger of departure, even though it was O.K.). Can any of you experienced Phantom pilots shed any light on this? -- John Miller email domain: n4vu.com; username: jsm(@) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Raymond Marshall wrote:
Hi all, I had a great opportunity yesterday. I'm a hornet driver by trade, and got a chance to fly the F-4 on a qual/eval as part of the test pilot school course. After trying to flare on my first several landings like the Air Force IP in the back seat wanted, I planted my last landing pretty firm within the first 100 feet of the runway (no ball to fly though). I have to say I have a lot more respect for anyone who landed that aircraft on a boat. Ray Well, compared to the Turkey, I say it was much easier as it was so stable on airspeed, to power changes. Get on speed, pull power go down faster, add power, go up faster. It was sometimes said it was so fast that you didn't have time to goon things up when on the ball. I loved it around the boat. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
John Miller wrote:
John Carrier wrote: The Phantom was very stable aircraft around the boat. Despite its genuine mach 2 capability (well, maybe not the S model), it was remarkably docile and forgiving throughout its envelope. My flight instructor once mentioned that on his first flight in a Phantom, as he got it slowed down for landing, it scared the poo out of him (apparently *felt* like it was in danger of departure, even though it was O.K.). Can any of you experienced Phantom pilots shed any light on this? Well, it did get a little 'vague' when you got around 'on speed', and the margin from onspeed to nose wander, wing drop off wasn't that large but ya got used to it. Yopu could do all sorts of things with the stick when really slow, w/o the jet doing anything, since so much of the wing/stab was somewhat ineffective. What was really scary was riding along on a mode 1 at the boat and watching the stick move some vast amounts, w/o the jet really doing anything. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 05:47:41 GMT, Raymond Marshall
wrote: Hi all, I had a great opportunity yesterday. I'm a hornet driver by trade, and got a chance to fly the F-4 on a qual/eval as part of the test pilot school course. After trying to flare on my first several landings like the Air Force IP in the back seat wanted, I planted my last landing pretty firm within the first 100 feet of the runway (no ball to fly though). I have to say I have a lot more respect for anyone who landed that aircraft on a boat. Ray You don't say which model of the F-4 you were flying. Big differences in handling between slatted and hard-wing aircraft. Ditto for long-nose gun-bearers compared to pug-nose varieties. But, having landed C, D and E models on runways for many years without the benefit of a ball, I'll contribute that the Phantom was a pretty easy airplane to land. AOA lights/tone were pretty close to all you need. Set AOA to on-speed, then use the throttle to move your impact point up or down the runway. The nose really doesn't demo a lot of pitch change, but simply rides down the glide path--push some power and you slow your descent and extend the point of touch-down. Hold what you've got until ground effect when the nose will want to drop a bit, but you wind up really holding the pitch attitude rather than flaring. Now, get in the back seat and try the no-flap straight-in. You'll love the part from two miles out until just over the overrun where you can't see the runway at all. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org www.thundertales.blogspot.com |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
If you get an opportunity to get checked out in the F-8, I recommend you
go for it. THAT was an airplane that could enthrall you ... and then bite you on the ass. Not a single one flying anymore... sad... _____________ José Herculano |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Hi John,
I had the pleasure of flying most all the F4 models made for the Navy at Pax River. Also had one squadron tour in the F4J block 46 and a couple hundred landings. Had many traps in the F8E with more than a few "wet flight suit" traps in the dark. Also had traps in props. I believe I can say without fear of argument from any Phantom that the F4 was the easiest airplane ever built to land, carrier or shore based. For starters, the F-4s were all assigned to the "big" decks. Having grown up on 27 Charlies, the "big" decks were like cheating. Secondly the F-4 dirtied up was ultra-stable. Squeeze a hair of power and the ball went up a hair. First time in my career I ever saw a ball go out the side of the lens. In F-8s you left the ball nearing the ramp and gave it a little high dip to set the hook or it could easily bounce and hook skip the whole speghetti pile. The Phantom just hit the deck and planted itself dowm. Tail hook the size of a plow shear, never heard of one parting. If you did bolt, a rarity, you had enough power to bend it around in a VFR pattern and get back to the groove in about 60 seconds. About the only gripe we had around the boat was fuel consumption was high. Almost as bad as present day F-18s. But our boarding rates were in the 90% range and bolts were uncommon. By far the best carrier plane I personally ever flew. Now in the air in ACM it was a dog and took both hands to pull max G's. Pretty good vertical with it's power and gave you a real edge over guys who didn't like to get their nose up. Nasty and unrecoverable flat spin mode, not as bad as the F-14 but usually resulted in either a punch out or a mort. So you didn't spin it, simple enough. The guy who told you the F-4 was scary dirty must have been a helo pilot or an USAF guy. Not all that analytical for sure. John Miller wrote: John Carrier wrote: The Phantom was very stable aircraft around the boat. Despite its genuine mach 2 capability (well, maybe not the S model), it was remarkably docile and forgiving throughout its envelope. My flight instructor once mentioned that on his first flight in a Phantom, as he got it slowed down for landing, it scared the poo out of him (apparently *felt* like it was in danger of departure, even though it was O.K.). Can any of you experienced Phantom pilots shed any light on this? -- John Miller email domain: n4vu.com; username: jsm(@) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On 26 Mar 2005 14:19:03 -0800, "Bob" wrote:
Hi John, . Now in the air in ACM it was a dog and took both hands to pull max G's. Pretty good vertical with it's power and gave you a real edge over guys who didn't like to get their nose up. Nasty and unrecoverable flat spin mode, not as bad as the F-14 but usually resulted in either a punch out or a mort. So you didn't spin it, simple enough. The guy who told you the F-4 was scary dirty must have been a helo pilot or an USAF guy. Not all that analytical for sure. That's low. Really low. And, notice how I resist saying that USAF guys could pull max G with out using two hands. I just wouldn't say something like that. Of course, if you didn't have to hover on the CAP at "max conserve" orbiting at 250 KIAS to meet cycle time it was a lot easier. Just run around the alloted area a bit above corner velocity and you can grab all the G you want with one hand. Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org www.thundertales.blogspot.com |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Ed Rasimus wrote:
You don't say which model of the F-4 you were flying. Big differences in handling between slatted and hard-wing aircraft. Ditto for long-nose gun-bearers compared to pug-nose varieties. I suppose I really need to elaborate for the group since I haven't been a regular poster here. I flew F-18Cs from Lemoore in VFA-147 for 3 years. Made two cruises and survived a little over 300 traps. I've got about 960 hours in the F-18 and am currently going through the USAF Test Pilot School. As part of the course, I got a single flight qualitative evaluation of the QF-4E. The airplane was from Holloman AFB, serial number 71-087. The jet came complete with a huge auto pilot control panel to enable the drone control station to fly it. Fortunately I didn't get to evaluate that part of the airplane. I did get to fly from the front seat, do everything from start up, taxi and takeoff to 4 landings. I took off, climbed up and looked at the dirty stall characteristics, did some of the advanced handling characteristic maneuvers that were interesting, and also did a couple 30 degree dive bomb runs. I finished the flight with a short low level. I did 2 flap down touch and gos (I think this is what the navy versions of the F-4 called half flaps), a simulated single engine touch and go, and a full flap full stop. I used the drag chute on the full stop which was pretty cool. Now I've got to write a short report on my evaluation of the F-4 and what I learned flying it. Don't get something for nothing... So what did I learn? My first impression was that the pitch control was very sensitive. At higher airspeeds it was very little movements that gave you 5 gs or -1 gs. Rolling in and out of turns really highlighted this to me. At slower speeds the pitch had a lot of lag and my inputs tended to overshoot my desired target. But, having landed C, D and E models on runways for many years without the benefit of a ball, I'll contribute that the Phantom was a pretty As for landings, I found that the jet was very honest with speed changes. It was very easy to set the throttles, and almost instantly speed would be stabilized... it was mushy feeling control wise but I always felt like I had good control. I think the difference was the switch from up and away with pitch so sensitive to small movements, and then in the landing pattern you had to use large movements to make the jet respond. The simulated single engine landing was almost a non event. I really liked the AOA tones, once I had made a couple landings. I could also see how they'd be useful for fighting the jet once you had some experience. Now, get in the back seat and try the no-flap straight-in. You'll love the part from two miles out until just over the overrun where you can't see the runway at all. Funny that you mention that... we had a layer we might have had to fly above and the IP debated putting in the handheld GPS they use with area boundaries because it blocked the only small hole he had to see the runway from the back seat. He said 'I suppose you're not going to kill me are you?' and then put the GPS in. V/r, Ray Marshall |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
CFI without commercial? | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 75 | December 8th 10 04:17 PM |
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 |