Am I the only one who's missing something?
-
It was a couple of pages ago in this topic, but a 5% slope doesn’t mean it’s 5% all the way (which can’t btw, max is 2%, at least for civil aviation). What it refers to is the difference in altitude between runway thresholds. You could have a constant slope runway with a 2% threshold, and another runway with a lump on the middle of it and it would still be a 2% slope. All that matters is the altitude difference between the thresholds.
I thought BMS was all flat though
-
…a 5% slope doesn’t mean it’s 5% all the way (which can’t btw, max is 2%, at least for civil aviation).
Are you talking about the glide slope, if yes then it’s 3.00% almost exclusively for civi approaches
-
3° is not 3%. Three “per cent” is “per one hundred” so 3/100 (feet, meters, Plank lengths it’s all the same ratio) which is 1.718358001655457147243867810247…°
pina is saying for a regulation runway the grade cannot exceed 5% at any point nor 2% average over its entire length.
The runway grade shouldn’t change the tail-strike clearance because AoA is effectively the difference between the direction of travel and the nose position. On an upslope runway you are rolling a little uphill so you have to lift the nose a little higher relative to the gravity vector but that’s OK for clearance because the jet’s butt is sticking out over lower runway by the same amount. The same is true for downslopes; it cancels so grade is invariant to tail clearance. Of course even extreme runways that any F-16 would operate on are less than a degree.
-
3° is not 3%. Three “per cent” is “per one hundred” so 3/100 (feet, meters, Plank lengths it’s all the same ratio) which is 1.718358001655457147243867810247…°
pina is saying for a regulation runway the grade cannot exceed 5% at any point nor 2% average over its entire length.
The runway grade shouldn’t change the tail-strike clearance because AoA is effectively the difference between the direction of travel and the nose position. On an upslope runway you are rolling a little uphill so you have to lift the nose a little higher relative to the gravity vector but that’s OK for clearance because the jet’s butt is sticking out over lower runway by the same amount. The same is true for downslopes; it cancels so grade is invariant to tail clearance. Of course even extreme runways that any F-16 would operate on are less than a degree.
Correct. 3* GS.
4* to 5* for carrier ops in bad weather. You want to slap that deck hard and catch that hook quick in bad weather on a pitching/bouncing carrier. I have seen the deck pitch up to at least 12 feet during 15 to 20ft swells. That’s enough to send a jet bouncing right back into the air without much to keep that jet airborne. Tricky business.
-
Bloody hell. You all are going the right way to get voluntold for some mandatory pie…
Anyway. Not referring to glideslope. The discussion - meandering as it is, akin to a delta perhaps - was referring to the slope of the runway on non level ground. The reason that was brought up at all in the first place was because people were pointing out that when travelling downhill, the position of the gun cross does not accurately indicate the AoA and therefore how close to a tailstrike you are.
The original topic is FM errors in landing. Mookar has already indicated he is open to take any such discussion to PM - either start a thread if you want to lambast him publically, or take him up on his offer if not.
At the present rate of topic drift, I predict discussion of planetary destruction within 5 pages…
-
Read my final words about this subject in the thread “For anyone who plays”.
This thread replies mainly refer to flyin corpses and flyin coffins doin “IT” -
@Faman:
Read my final words about this subject in the thread “For anyone who plays”.
This thread replies mainly refer to flyin corpses and flyin coffins doin “IT”For crying out loud dude. Get over yourself already.
I know first hand BMS is installed on several pc’s in the Belgian Air Force. Not for official training but certain stuff can be done with it (think about fam training of certain parts for example). I also know of at least 2 active F-16 pilots who’ve tried BMS and confirmed flight model is about 99,99% accurate, aerobraking & yaw performance is dead on.
Of course, if you also consider combat ready F-16 pilots also flying corpses and coffins, please buy Tom Clancys Hawx and play some arcade… -
@Faman:
Read my final words about this subject …
Thank **** for that…
-
If you put that attitude in learning the sim, you would be able to aerobrake like a pro by now
Just read the BMS-Dash1 manual in your docs folder, page 155 explaines it pretty well
-
ok, can we just eat that pie now? could i have that small piece over there, please.
coffee anyone?
-
standing by for closure ….
i’ve had enough of the bs going in this thread. first & last warning -
Trying to be constructive…
Two old videos of F-16 doing aerobraking, although for a short time…
Compare to your BMS and you will observe that the speed drop that you see in the HUD of these videos is exactly the same as in BMS.
REAL F-16
BMS 4.32
Look from 17:00min on….
-
@Faman:
Read my final words about this subject in the thread “For anyone who plays”.
This thread replies mainly refer to flyin corpses and flyin coffins doin “IT”On both of your thread, you demonstate a bad attitude and a great misunderstanding of aerodynamics.
As for everybody bitching about the realism of BMS’s flight model, I advise you to read all the FM articles in the front page. Yes, its a long read. But that’s just how much thought the BMS team (here, Mav-JP, mostly) put into the advanced flight model.
Until you do that, everything you can say does not have the slightest value.
-
Just ban him for life.