Am I the only one who's missing something?
-
I usually do, but this time the nose ran away from me….in both directions
Jp has the mg-WoW switch close when aerobraking under 90knt (depending on GW). In WoW on, the FLCS goes from landing gains to ground gain. Pitch rate control is replace with manual control with pitch rate dampening. So the stick become really pitchy.
-
@mwd:
FAman brother…in the words of my mentor…CHECK YOUR FIRE!!!CHECK YOUR FIRE!!!..Sound like your coming in to hot….
FYI what i do: start at ramp load up some JUDAS PRIEST…hit the throttle fly like hell has no bound and land like ya mean it.
short and hard…ho ya the best of RAM-it-Down…1998…peace out…NEVER SATISFIED track work toooo…:shock:
-
he works with his wife… there r always some more bad when u think u r on the downside… :lol:
-
At what AoA will you get a tail strike? It’s obviously over 13 degrees…if it said somewhere in one of the manuals i dont remember reading it.
I’ve never had a tail strike on landing but i did once on take-off when i managed to ham-fist the stick back too quickly lol (yes, i’m a dumb ass).
-
I think it’s 15* for a tail strike.
-
Unconfirmed:
I have a feeling your grossweight influences the angle at with you get a tail strike.
The heavier, the earlier. -
Unconfirmed:
I have a feeling your grossweight influences the angle at with you get a tail strike.
The heavier, the earlier.That doesn’t make sense unless the tail is not in line with the nose, in which case you would have bigger problems to worry about… unless the main gear flexes that much under weight (I thought the F-16 had exceptionally stiff landing gear?) and if that flex is even modeled in BMS.
-
I discovered this aerobraking after a week or so and i love it! Real smooth and effective.
-
That doesn’t make sense unless the tail is not in line with the nose, in which case you would have bigger problems to worry about… unless the main gear flexes that much under weight (I thought the F-16 had exceptionally stiff landing gear?) and if that flex is even modeled in BMS.
gear is on hydraulic suspension, no?
its 4:30 am, I cant be bothered checking the dash…
-
Whatever suspension it’s on, it’s still stiff enough to cause bounce/wobble on touchdown.
-
Good discussion overall.
But this part still stays from jinro’s post:
@jinro88:I figured elevator authority would be zero at 85kts….
85kts is indeed slow, and I would guess the same. Shouldn’t elevator be quite sluggish at that speed, no matter what gains?
-
Good discussion overall.
But this part still stays from jinro’s post:
85kts is indeed slow, and I would guess the same. Shouldn’t elevator be quite sluggish at that speed, no matter what gains?
well this is the point.
At 13 deg AOA during Aerobraking, the F16 is very close (0.5 deg close) to the unstability point.
If you dont have enough speed so that the FLCS manages the instability, you will end up in tail strike everytime.
The WOW switch is positionned so that it can not happen, i.e. the noze is relaxed before 85kt and this is why procedure says let the nose drop aroun 100 kt …
But in light weight situation, if the pilot breaks the rules and tries to stay nose up at 85 kt, the WOW switch may not trigger soon enough and the FLCS may loose noze authority which could end in a tail strike…
FOLLOW PROCEDURES
-
But in light weight situation, if the pilot breaks the rules and tries to stay nose up at 85 kt, the WOW switch may not trigger soon enough and the FLCS may loose noze authority which could end in a tail strike…
I was in a heavy-weight situation (F-16I CFT) and did not break any procedure. Started to ease the nose down at around 100kts but it wouldn’t go down. Then once I hit 90~85kts or so the nose wanted to slam down so I pulled back on the stick, apparently overcorrecting, and quickly ended up with a tail strike. I have frequently encountered situations where the nose does not want to go down at 100kts, but this is the first time such an incident resulted in a tail strike. I guess for the sake of procedure I should just let the nose gear take a beating.
-
I was in a heavy-weight situation (F-16I CFT) and did not break any procedure. Started to ease the nose down at around 100kts but it wouldn’t go down. .
that is because you didnt perform the aerobraking at 13 deg AOA but at 11 or below
i didnt check the f-16CFT though as this is not original AFM included in BMS stock package
-
Probably 12*. Many times when I try to do a 13* aerobrake I can’t keep it steady and it bounces between 11* and 13*.
-
Probably 12*. Many times when I try to do a 13* aerobrake I can’t keep it steady and it bounces between 11* and 13*.
mhhh ? bad GC positionning on the F16 I CFT ?
did you try with a block30 or 52 ?
-
Come to think of it, maybe that is it. I usually only notice it with the F-16I CFT. I’ve flown Block 40s, 50s, and 52s recently and haven’t had that problem with those Blocks.
-
I thought the gun cross wasn’t supposed to exceed 12 deg on the ground, whatever AOA was. You aren’t landing on a carrier - naval craft have the super stiff gear due to that controled crash. Depending on the model 16 the struts IN REALITY may be stiffer on some, but that was due to the addition of the extra equipment carried, i.e. targeting pod mounting point strengthening, bigger under nose ducting …
But that is why you have a crew of mechanics- they are supposed to inspect the suspension, engine, wheels, batteries, etc. Every time you land your wheels go from 0 to 1xx in under a second - they scuff something beautiful - but the air pressure supporting the tire [nitrogen, whatever] help to act as part of the suspension, cushioning a little bit too. My thought is don’t worry much about slamming the nose down, the crew chief will give you a talking to if you are abusing it too badly.
-Babite
(Edit: It looks like I’m saying the pressure in the tire is acting as suspension. I mean to say the pressure gives support to the rubber tire, which acts like another piece of the suspension. Without it you’d have flat rubber smooshed against the hard ground under {X}tons of weight. Sorry about that mistake.) -
That is AoA, however we aren’t using the gun cross to determine AoA, but the AoA bracket. FPM in the middle of the AoA bracket = 13*.
-
Are you measuring this on runway, or still airborne? If in air nevermind. The origional manual stated 11deg aoa @ 160kts, then flare at 100’ above the runway to 13 deg aoa GENTLY, keeping airspeed at 130kts until touchdown, with speed brakes still fully open. If you exceeded 15 aoa the speedbrakes would scrape. It was also stated to pull the gun cross to the 10 deg pitch line on the hud to aero brake, as the FPM got unreliable once on ground (weight on wheels). I know stuff has changed since that was written, the speed brake retracts some now with gear down. But you will still scrape the can reguardless of AOA if your a/c pitch on ground is above say 12 deg’s. Let the nose come down around 110 kts while you can still control the nose. Again, I realize pre-touchdown you use the bracket in the hud, but once the wheels are on the ground and your speed is slower the bracket becomes unreliable. I’m not trying to argue with your in-air procedure, just pointing out that with WOW you can only maintain so much pitch before you do dammage, the cross is more relavent on the ground to me. In theory it is where the nose is pointed - keep it as a reference. Again, appologies if I’m coming off as hostile or arrogant, not my intent. I don’t know the fall off point of the fpm on the ground, but the gun cross is constant, and AOA is a direct relationship between the two, if I recall correctly.