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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Navy Struggles With 'Fighter Gap'
IIRC, There was a specific non-combat maneuver which, when removed from the
pilot's repertoire, cut the accident rate in half, for both models. It was called, among other names, "bow to the crowd". It was done in a hover, and was a tip the nose down and return maneuver that accentuated some instability in the hover, and caused several crashes over the years. YMMV. Dave in Sandy Eggo |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Navy Struggles With 'Fighter Gap'
SNIP a lot
Ouch. Do you have any idea How Dangerous those things (AV-8B) are to OUR guys? Dan Oops. I forgot a couple of words. Dan No more dangerous than the F4U, F7U or F8 were back in the day. Hard to fly, but the rep is overblown. There have always been birds that tend to get that dangerous label. You may want to look at the safety records before you make such statements... Dan While the F4U had problems initially with carrier landings (over the nose visibility and strut bounce), I don't think it ever had a rep for mishaps. The F7U was quite notorious, earned several monikers (Ensign Eater was one) but I have no data. The F-8 had the highest mishap rate of any carrier aircraft in the modern (angled deck) era. AIRPAC, never competitive with AIRLANT in mishap rate, started publishing two numbers: Mishap Rate, and Mishap Rate less F-8's (AIRLANT got out of the F-8 business several years ahead of AIRPAC). R / John |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Navy Struggles With 'Fighter Gap'
"Dave" wrote in message ... IIRC, There was a specific non-combat maneuver which, when removed from the pilot's repertoire, cut the accident rate in half, for both models. It was called, among other names, "bow to the crowd". It was done in a hover, and was a tip the nose down and return maneuver that accentuated some instability in the hover, and caused several crashes over the years. Seems to me there was also a problem with "weathervaning" under certain wind conditions that caused instability and loss of control. I've seen a couple of mishap videos where "airshow" type manuevers caused losses. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Navy Struggles With 'Fighter Gap'
Dave wrote:
: :IIRC, There was a specific non-combat maneuver which, when removed from the ilot's repertoire, cut the accident rate in half, for both models. It was :called, among other names, "bow to the crowd". It was done in a hover, and :was a tip the nose down and return maneuver that accentuated some instability :in the hover, and caused several crashes over the years. : There were several flight regimes where overly-close tolerances between the turbine blades would lead to a flameout of the engine. When you only have one, that sort of sucks. I'm only aware of one 'bow' crash and it didn't look like it was caused by instability. It looked like an engine casualty, with a big gout of flame and the aircraft shooting down into the water. I have no idea if they still do this at air shows or not, but I wouldn't be surprised if they do. -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Navy Struggles With 'Fighter Gap'
"williamjkambic" wrote in news:1207884859_83242
@news.newsville.com: "Dave" wrote in message ... IIRC, There was a specific non-combat maneuver which, when removed from the pilot's repertoire, cut the accident rate in half, for both models. It was called, among other names, "bow to the crowd". It was done in a hover, and was a tip the nose down and return maneuver that accentuated some instability in the hover, and caused several crashes over the years. Seems to me there was also a problem with "weathervaning" under certain wind conditions that caused instability and loss of control. I've seen a couple of mishap videos where "airshow" type manuevers caused losses. I recall at least three Harrier crashes from the "bow to the crowd" (one over water, and two over land), and when I left AD (1989), it was no longer a permitted maneuver. They may have relented on that since then. The weathervaning may have been contributory to those crashes, Dave in Sandy Eggo |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Navy Struggles With 'Fighter Gap'
"Dave" wrote in message ... IIRC, There was a specific non-combat maneuver which, when removed from the pilot's repertoire, cut the accident rate in half, for both models. It was called, among other names, "bow to the crowd". It was done in a hover, and was a tip the nose down and return maneuver that accentuated some instability in the hover, and caused several crashes over the years. YMMV. Dave in Sandy Eggo AIUI; the 'harrier' a/c balances itself on four 'legs' of thrust; two from the front of the engine and two from the back of the engine. The front thrust legs are cold air while the rear thrust legs are hot exhaust gases. The 'hover' methodology works fine when the a/c is 'horizontal' ; pitch and roll axes = zero; but is prone to the phenomena of 'hot gas re-ingestion' when the pitch is positive as the rearward hot plumes may be reflected up and the engine ingests hot air into the compressors - leading to lack of thrust and lift becoming less than weight. Early models (GR1/AV8A/Matador) had an analogue JPT gauge where the tell-tale rise in JPT -indicating to the pilot that hot gases were being ingested and thrust was about to diminish - was a mere needles width (and almost impossible , given the pilot's workload, to detect) A very early 'mod' into USMC service was to replace these gauges with a 'Digital JPT Gauge - in this case the term 'digital' actually meant a 'odometer style ' set of digit wheels- this made it much easier for the pilot to notice that hot gas re-ingestion was occurring and gave advance warning permitting him to adapt the pitch angle prior to losing thrust. The later a/c incorporated a 'Stability Augmentation System' which has finer control of the pitch. roll, yaw axes thrusters than a 'mere' human -not that any pilot will admit to that . -- Brian |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Navy Struggles With 'Fighter Gap'
williamjkambic wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message ... IIRC, There was a specific non-combat maneuver which, when removed from the pilot's repertoire, cut the accident rate in half, for both models. It was called, among other names, "bow to the crowd". It was done in a hover, and was a tip the nose down and return maneuver that accentuated some instability in the hover, and caused several crashes over the years. Seems to me there was also a problem with "weathervaning" under certain wind conditions that caused instability and loss of control. I've seen a couple of mishap videos where "airshow" type manuevers caused losses. The problem is/was it is a horribly delicate piece of machinery to take out to dangerous conditions, let alone war. Evidently, after a large fraction of the fleet was scrap, people started realizing that it wasn't all pilot error, and so design, maintenance, & training were improved to the point that it is a reasonable craft. Unlike the FBW craft, where it was realized that the weak point was the wetware behind the stick, restraints weren't never put in place to keep the inherently unstable vehicle within its operational envelope under emotionally charged situations. Imagine an F-117 without computer control... Dan |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Navy Struggles With 'Fighter Gap'
On Apr 10, 10:43*pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Dave wrote: : :IIRC, There was a specific non-combat maneuver which, when removed from the ilot's repertoire, cut the accident rate in half, for both models. It was :called, among other names, "bow to the crowd". It was done in a hover, and :was a tip the nose down and return maneuver that accentuated some instability :in the hover, and caused several crashes over the years. : There were several flight regimes where overly-close tolerances between the turbine blades would lead to a flameout of the engine. When you only have one, that sort of sucks. I'm only aware of one 'bow' crash and it didn't look like it was caused by instability. *It looked like an engine casualty, with a big gout of flame and the aircraft shooting down into the water. I have no idea if they still do this at air shows or not, but I wouldn't be surprised if they do. There was a Harrier in the show here Saturday (Thunder Over Louisville) and I don't believe it bowed. The hover portion of the routine was biased towards the crown on the other side of the river though, so I may simply have not noticed it. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Navy pilots thank plant with tours of fighter jets | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | November 13th 05 01:50 AM |