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 » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Dead Stick



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old August 2nd 08, 05:44 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Big John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 310
Default Dead Stick


Matt

You can hear very clear he was reported at 7 miles and 9K which in
round figures is 3.5 to 1 needed to make field. Since he made it he at
least made that glide ratio. If he was high when close to field he may
have dumped it and picked up a 1 to 1 to burn off excess altitude???

Bottom line. Excellent job and he made it and saved the Governmet $50
Mil +/-.

Big John

************************************************** ******************
On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 17:31:58 -0400, Matt Whiting
wrote:

Gig 601Xl Builder wrote:
Kloudy via AviationKB.com wrote:
Kloudy wrote:
Big up on that cat. Dang, I wonder what the measured glide is on an
F-16? : - @


Just ask the mighty interwebs.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...12/ai_n6100350

1:1? jeezuz..might as well strap yourelf to a washing machine.


At least it makes the math easy.


There is something funny here. He said he started out at 24,000 feet,
but then later says he established the 1:1 glide 12-15 nm from the
field. A 1:1 glide ratio at 12 nm out would mean he was 12 nm high, or
about 72,000 feet. That 1:1 has to be something other than a
traditional glide ratio.

Matt


  #12  
Old August 2nd 08, 01:57 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
muff528
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 304
Default Dead Stick


"Kloudy via AviationKB.com" u33403@uwe wrote in message
news:8809a1f297c34@uwe...
Matt Whiting wrote:
Big up on that cat. Dang, I wonder what the measured glide is on an
F-16? : - @

[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]

At least it makes the math easy.

That 1:1 has to be something other than a
traditional glide ratio.

Matt


'xactly. didn't make sense to me either.

Oh well.

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200808/1



What I get from that article is not that the F-16 will only glide at 1:1,
but that the pilot "established a 1:1 glide ratio and dropped the nose to
capture my computed FO airspeed" at some point(s) along the approach as may
be required/suggested in the F-16 user's manual in the event of a flameout.

BS, TP


  #13  
Old August 2nd 08, 02:26 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 181
Default Dead Stick

On Aug 2, 8:57*am, "muff528" wrote:
"Kloudy via AviationKB.com" u33403@uwe wrote in messagenews:8809a1f297c34@uwe...



Matt Whiting wrote:
Big up on that cat. Dang, I wonder what the measured glide is on an
F-16? *: - @
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]


At least it makes the math easy.
*That 1:1 has to be something other than a
traditional glide ratio.


Matt


'xactly. didn't make sense to me either.


Oh well.


--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200808/1


What I get from that article is not that the F-16 will only glide at 1:1,
but that the pilot "established a 1:1 glide ratio and dropped the nose to
capture my computed FO airspeed" at some point(s) along the approach as may
be required/suggested in the F-16 user's manual in the event of a flameout.

  #14  
Old August 2nd 08, 03:10 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Blueskies
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 979
Default Dead Stick


"Big John" wrote in message ...

Matt

You can hear very clear he was reported at 7 miles and 9K which in
round figures is 3.5 to 1 needed to make field. Since he made it he at
least made that glide ratio. If he was high when close to field he may
have dumped it and picked up a 1 to 1 to burn off excess altitude???

Bottom line. Excellent job and he made it and saved the Governmet $50
Mil +/-.

Big John


I guess he is lucky he did not drop the tanks on top of someone...

It was a good job but relatively easy with chase, etc...
  #15  
Old August 2nd 08, 03:52 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 181
Default Dead Stick

On Aug 2, 9:26*am, wrote:
On Aug 2, 8:57*am, "muff528" wrote:



"Kloudy via AviationKB.com" u33403@uwe wrote in messagenews:8809a1f297c34@uwe...


Matt Whiting wrote:
Big up on that cat. Dang, I wonder what the measured glide is on an
F-16? *: - @
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]


At least it makes the math easy.
*That 1:1 has to be something other than a
traditional glide ratio.


Matt


'xactly. didn't make sense to me either.


Oh well.


--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200808/1


What I get from that article is not that the F-16 will only glide at 1:1,
but that the pilot "established a 1:1 glide ratio and dropped the nose to
capture my computed FO airspeed" at some point(s) along the approach as may
be required/suggested in the F-16 user's manual in the event of a flameout.


BS, TP


Just looking at how clean that airplane is without the external tanks,
it must have at least a 10 to 1 glide ratio. The shuttle with it's
little wings is not that good, but far from 1 to 1


For what it's worth, at subsonic speeds the shuttle is 4.5 to 1. Not
quite a brick, but close!
  #16  
Old August 2nd 08, 03:57 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 181
Default Dead Stick

On Aug 2, 10:10*am, "Blueskies" wrote:
"Big John" wrote in messagenews:7ko7945tt77e0spq0cjj47t7udhcdr2p3d@4ax .com...

Matt


You can hear very clear he was reported at 7 miles and 9K which in
round figures is 3.5 to 1 needed to make field. Since he made it he at
least made that glide ratio. If he was high when close to field he may
have dumped it and picked up a 1 to 1 to burn off excess altitude???


Bottom line. Excellent job and he made it and saved the Governmet $50
Mil +/-.


Big John


I guess he is lucky he did not drop the tanks on top of someone...

It was a good job but relatively easy with chase, etc...


To say it was relatively easy is one thing, but even if these guys
train for it, a glider doing 250 knots would be a handful. His peers
say he did an excellent job and in my world peer review is pretty much
the defining criteria for measuring performance. The award he got said
it was the best demonstration of airmanship for the year, and he flies
with others who are known to be pretty good.
  #17  
Old August 2nd 08, 09:21 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Blueskies
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 979
Default Dead Stick


wrote in message ...
On Aug 2, 10:10 am, "Blueskies" wrote:
"Big John" wrote in messagenews:7ko7945tt77e0spq0cjj47t7udhcdr2p3d@4ax .com...

Matt


You can hear very clear he was reported at 7 miles and 9K which in
round figures is 3.5 to 1 needed to make field. Since he made it he at
least made that glide ratio. If he was high when close to field he may
have dumped it and picked up a 1 to 1 to burn off excess altitude???


Bottom line. Excellent job and he made it and saved the Governmet $50
Mil +/-.


Big John


I guess he is lucky he did not drop the tanks on top of someone...

It was a good job but relatively easy with chase, etc...


To say it was relatively easy is one thing, but even if these guys
train for it, a glider doing 250 knots would be a handful. His peers
say he did an excellent job and in my world peer review is pretty much
the defining criteria for measuring performance. The award he got said
it was the best demonstration of airmanship for the year, and he flies
with others who are known to be pretty good.


What powers up the hydraulics during an engine out? The whole trick to flying is controlling how quickly you stop ;-)
  #18  
Old August 2nd 08, 10:48 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Vaughn Simon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 735
Default Dead Stick


"Blueskies" wrote in message
...

What powers up the hydraulics during an engine out?


Towards the end of the clip, there was mention of a hydrazine powered APU.

Vaughn



  #19  
Old August 3rd 08, 04:25 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Big John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 310
Default Dead Stick

Any currrent or 'X F-16 jocks that could tell us how the bird is
controlled with engine out? If a hydrazine powered APU how many
minutes will it run? I also heard the hydrazine coment and asking for
fire trucks to handle.

Big John
************************************************** ******

On Sat, 02 Aug 2008 21:48:20 GMT, "Vaughn Simon"
wrote:


"Blueskies" wrote in message
.. .

What powers up the hydraulics during an engine out?


Towards the end of the clip, there was mention of a hydrazine powered APU.

Vaughn



 




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
AUDIO: Bush jewish. Blair jewish. Howard jewish. Sarkozy jewish. 1.2 million muslims dead. Thousands of Americans dead. Trillion$ missing. [email protected] Naval Aviation 0 November 2nd 07 05:56 PM
Big Stick R. J. \(Bob\) Van Horn Piloting 5 September 4th 07 06:54 PM
Dead Stick Landings Gene Seibel Piloting 24 August 1st 03 12:46 AM
Dead stick landings - follow up question John Piloting 3 July 31st 03 10:51 AM
Stick grips John Nicholson Home Built 17 July 23rd 03 10:13 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.