"Pedal turn" versus "Conventional turn"

New and old developments in aviation technology.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2317
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post05 Jan 2019, 13:08

Where have you guys been for the last 30+ years? The Hornet has always been a formidable bfm machine — in fact, game changing when it first showed up — and progressively upgraded over time.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1730
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post05 Jan 2019, 14:42

quicksilver wrote:Where have you guys been for the last 30+ years? The Hornet has always been a formidable bfm machine — in fact, game changing when it first showed up — and progressively upgraded over time.


Agreed.
It's not by "random chance" that when LM designed the F-35 it terms of agility, the goal was to obtain the combination of the Hornet's agility (High AoA) with the F-16 agility (Energy), a goal which was clearly achieved.
A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2317
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post05 Jan 2019, 19:57

From para 8 of the document passage that spaz cut and pasted above, a key element of the process of designing, building, and testing/delivering ‘capability’ to the warfighters — “Design engineers must realize that what they think is important is not always what a pilot thinks is important. Case in point, if the engineers think it is a great idea to design an airplane to be flown with "reckless" abandon by providing superior departure resistance in the flight control system automatically, they may actually (and probably will be) taking away some of the tactical utility of the aircraft. There was (and is) a lot of truth to the fighter pilots view of the world that you have to fly "to the edge of the envelope", the point just prior to a departure, in order to maximize the effectiveness of your aircraft in combat.”

There is an F-35 video from a few years ago that was produced during hi-alpha testing at EDW. I think it’s called ‘F-35 Hi-AOA Testing’. Contained in it are on-camera quotes from a test pilot (Doc Nelson) and an engineer that (unintentionally) illustrate this point. The pilot talks about a desire to go right to the edge of the envelope/limits— and if exceeded — let there be ease of recovery; the engineer talks about ‘not letting the aircraft exceed the limits.’ (or something to that effect). It is the essence of the constructive friction that helps get us a jet that flies like F-35. I’ll see if I can find it.

Here it is — https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aWji8AcOYGA
Offline

crosshairs

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 41
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2018, 19:03

Unread post06 Jan 2019, 02:31

Why are the weapons doors open during the maneuvers? Seems like a rather drag inducing thing to do while maneuvering. Not to mention what it does to rcs.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 22090
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post06 Jan 2019, 02:38

These are test flights. All kinds of weird things are 'tested' in test flights. Seen F-35B STOVL Mode 4 - wheels up - in flight?
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2317
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post06 Jan 2019, 02:50

spazsinbad wrote:These are test flights. All kinds of weird things are 'tested' in test flights. Seen F-35B STOVL Mode 4 - wheels up - in flight?


x2
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2624
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post07 Jan 2019, 13:18

quicksilver wrote:Where have you guys been for the last 30+ years? The Hornet has always been a formidable bfm machine — in fact, game changing when it first showed up — and progressively upgraded over time.


It definitely has been, agree with that wholeheartedly. I just wanted to point out that there seems to be the pretty widespread misconseption among the public that Hornet has poor performance. I think it's mostly because older models using F404-GE-400 had fairly low T/W ratio and thus had some performance issues.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2692
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post07 Jan 2019, 16:12

hornetfinn wrote:
quicksilver wrote:Where have you guys been for the last 30+ years? The Hornet has always been a formidable bfm machine — in fact, game changing when it first showed up — and progressively upgraded over time.


It definitely has been, agree with that wholeheartedly. I just wanted to point out that there seems to be the pretty widespread misconseption among the public that Hornet has poor performance. I think it's mostly because older models using F404-GE-400 had fairly low T/W ratio and thus had some performance issues.


Are all legacy USN/Marine Hornets now flying with the uprated F-404 motors?

I'm one who always lamented the fact it was underpowered. Would feel better knowing all (or at least most) legacy Hornets had the extra "umph" afforded by more powerful engines... :)
Offline

strykerxo

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 426
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2008, 04:40

Unread post08 Jan 2019, 00:10

hornetfinn wrote:
quicksilver wrote:Where have you guys been for the last 30+ years? The Hornet has always been a formidable bfm machine — in fact, game changing when it first showed up — and progressively upgraded over time.


It definitely has been, agree with that wholeheartedly. I just wanted to point out that there seems to be the pretty widespread misconseption among the public that Hornet has poor performance. I think it's mostly because older models using F404-GE-400 had fairly low T/W ratio and thus had some performance issues.


My main point, knowing the legacy F-18 had great handling at AOA, was that I / we have rarely seen the preformance that was on display by the Swiss at Sion. For decades in the US, the F-18 demos were conservative, even the Canadians CF-18 demo is mild comparatively. Upgraded FCS and engines are typical, US demo and Swiss demo are night and day, like an entirely different plane. Makes me wonder what else is out there, that we don't know.

Pedal turn vs. conventional turn is all about getting your nose on the target. Spherical SA and missile coverage do not negate energy maneuvers, only adds to the lethality of the combat aircraft. Combined with stealth, speed and altitude make for a total package, and if adversarial AC are lacking better create themselves a no fly zone.
You can't shot what you can't see - Unknown
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2317
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post08 Jan 2019, 04:28

My main point, knowing the legacy F-18 had great handling at AOA, was that I / we have rarely seen the preformance that was on display by the Swiss at Sion.“

So you say. In the real world where bfm training goes on every day, Hornets have demonstrated this ability for decades.

Makes me wonder what else is out there, that we don't know.”

Air shows are about perception (image) and entertainment, not combat.

Pedal turn vs. conventional turn is all about getting your nose on the target.

Sometimes.

Spherical SA and missile coverage do not negate energy maneuvers.

Actually they do, just not automatically nor always.
Offline

strykerxo

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 426
  • Joined: 21 Mar 2008, 04:40

Unread post08 Jan 2019, 04:55

quicksilver wrote:My main point, knowing the legacy F-18 had great handling at AOA, was that I / we have rarely seen the preformance that was on display by the Swiss at Sion.“

So you say. In the real world where bfm training goes on every day, Hornets have demonstrated this ability for decades.

Makes me wonder what else is out there, that we don't know.”

Air shows are about perception (image) and entertainment, not combat.

Pedal turn vs. conventional turn is all about getting your nose on the target.

Sometimes.

Spherical SA and missile coverage do not negate energy maneuvers.

Actually they do, just not automatically nor always.


Right, airshows are for public consumption and though the anouncers say "the routines are representative of BFM in the military". F-22/35 and SH are flying high alpha post-stall maneuvers but say we don't want to get low and slow, speed is life. That being said if the legacy hornet can fly like the SH why haven't we been able to witness it at a show?

The pilot I talked to said this:
"That Sion demo was awesome! To answer your questions, the F18 has always had the ability to fly like this. Thrust vectoring is defiantly an advantage in a close BFM fight, however there is a weight penalty for it. The Hornet is excellent at post stall AOA maneuvering. We actually never teach any kind of stall recovery when learning to fly it like you would in a traditional airplane. The Mig and SU are capable fighters, the pilot makes the biggest difference in any engagement. The Legacy demo in the US was controlled by the Navy. Naval leadership sets the guidelines to what types of maneuvers and the routine that the demo pilots will fly."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zamyPclcyZ4&t=256s

point on the energy maneuvering it is all useful, Stealth, speed, altitude etc. negates maneuvering too but who wants to fly without them.
Last edited by strykerxo on 08 Jan 2019, 05:04, edited 1 time in total.
You can't shot what you can't see - Unknown
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 771
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post08 Jan 2019, 05:02

mixelflick wrote:
hornetfinn wrote:
quicksilver wrote:Where have you guys been for the last 30+ years? The Hornet has always been a formidable bfm machine — in fact, game changing when it first showed up — and progressively upgraded over time.


It definitely has been, agree with that wholeheartedly. I just wanted to point out that there seems to be the pretty widespread misconseption among the public that Hornet has poor performance. I think it's mostly because older models using F404-GE-400 had fairly low T/W ratio and thus had some performance issues.


Are all legacy USN/Marine Hornets now flying with the uprated F-404 motors?

I'm one who always lamented the fact it was underpowered. Would feel better knowing all (or at least most) legacy Hornets had the extra "umph" afforded by more powerful engines... :)


I think you mean F404-GE402

All exported C/D hornets are using 402. US navy started implementing 402 engine since 1992 but I don't know how many have been installed
Last edited by gta4 on 08 Jan 2019, 05:52, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 771
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post08 Jan 2019, 05:52

And my personal opinion, USAF and USN lack good airshow "directors". They seldom use smokers which could make trajectory more noticeable. They don't know they could roll the aircraft during energy recovery which does not affect acceleration that much but could cover the dumb level flight (this is frequently used in Rafale or EF2K demos).
Offline

tailchase

Banned

  • Posts: 35
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2018, 12:47

Unread post08 Jan 2019, 15:04

gta4 wrote:And my personal opinion, USAF and USN lack good airshow "directors". They seldom use smokers which could make trajectory more noticeable. They don't know they could roll the aircraft during energy recovery which does not affect acceleration that much but could cover the dumb level flight (this is frequently used in Rafale or EF2K demos).


Heh, i know a Rafale demonstrator pilot then coach that juste resigned (Cne Ruet). :P
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2317
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post08 Jan 2019, 15:12

"That being said if the legacy hornet can fly like the SH why haven't we been able to witness it at a show?"

Because the juice is not worth the squeeze. Apart from interweb warriors and people who are trying to sell/buy aircraft, few really care about something that a jet does at an airshow.
PreviousNext

Return to Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest