Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Durkin Tactical Franklin Armory
User Panel

Page / 6
Next Page Arrow Left
Link Posted: 5/13/2022 5:47:38 PM EDT
[#1]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By T45IP2SWA:
We’ll, since charts are showing up, here’s one applicable to OP.
View Quote

Now do the GE engine.

They fly Block 40s at Kunsan.
Link Posted: 5/13/2022 10:11:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Mach] [#2]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2A373:


Do you remember how the acft was configured? Pylons and any external tanks?

When I is was at SJ we would send our E models (P&W -220 engines) to Robins for depot completely stripped clean of anything hanging off of them. I got to go down to Robins once to inspect my jet prior to depot paneling it back up when they were close to finishing their maintenance on it. To my surprise I discovered a write up in the forms by the pilot that flew it there for a fuel caution/warning light coming on at mach 2.3 and then going out once he slowed down to mach 2.0. I was surprised it went that fast because we were having problems getting our E models to go fast enough (1.5) to test the rudder limiter during OCFs with CFTs and wing pylons installed.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 2A373:
Originally Posted By Mach:
such drama.

I had the Eagle at 1.8 at 55,000 feet

there was no drama, it just went fast like it is supposed to do, no shaking, no noises, just going fast.

PSA. Bailing out at 600 knots or mach 2 isn't going to make much of a difference, your pretty much dead no matter what, same if you hit the ground, or the thing comes apart.

It's a risky game, either enjoy it or get the fuck out.


Do you remember how the acft was configured? Pylons and any external tanks?

When I is was at SJ we would send our E models (P&W -220 engines) to Robins for depot completely stripped clean of anything hanging off of them. I got to go down to Robins once to inspect my jet prior to depot paneling it back up when they were close to finishing their maintenance on it. To my surprise I discovered a write up in the forms by the pilot that flew it there for a fuel caution/warning light coming on at mach 2.3 and then going out once he slowed down to mach 2.0. I was surprised it went that fast because we were having problems getting our E models to go fast enough (1.5) to test the rudder limiter during OCFs with CFTs and wing pylons installed.


I don't, it was a long time ago, and most of those brain cells are dead, but it was during a flag, so I am guessing probably just centerline tank, because there was no fighting with wing tanks, and I am sure I wassn't clean.
Link Posted: 5/13/2022 10:14:11 PM EDT
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:

We used it on the ground the the Superhornet. Only time it was needed. I’d be surprised if the Eagle prohibited it but who knows.

You’d get a windshield hot caution if you left it on too long. Or maybe that was something else. Old age is getting to me.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:
Originally Posted By Mach:


I am pretty sure ( though it has been a very long time ) that the use of the rain removal system was prohibited on the ground.

and airborne, the canopy was always hot to the touch. I never saw a cold soaked canopy due to high altitude.

The window heat in an airliner is to make it more pliable below 10,000 feet in case of bird impact, has nothing to do with cold soaked windows at altitude.

We used it on the ground the the Superhornet. Only time it was needed. I’d be surprised if the Eagle prohibited it but who knows.

You’d get a windshield hot caution if you left it on too long. Or maybe that was something else. Old age is getting to me.


we had a windshield hot caution light but IIRC it only activated when the air was too hot, there were a few cases that melted the windshield and IIRC, TAC prohibited it's use. It was not prohibited when I got into the jet, but some years later it was.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 12:53:06 AM EDT
[#4]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:

It’s fast for any fighter. The published numbers on all the fighters are mostly bullshit. Mig-25 is different though.
View Quote


I'm nothing but a laymen rube when it comes to stuff like this, but I would love for you to expand on your post if you have the time?

How "off" would you say the published numbers are for the four main teen series fighters?

Thanks in advance!
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 6:39:16 AM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SkilletsUSMC:


I'm nothing but a laymen rube when it comes to stuff like this, but I would love for you to expand on your post if you have the time?

How "off" would you say the published numbers are for the four main teen series fighters?

Thanks in advance!
View Quote

The F16 has been around forever and is one of the most common Gen4 fighters in the world.  The performance is common knowledge and no longer anywhere near classified.

The avionics are classified in some cases and vary between customers with some adding their own beeps and squeaks. Tactics are even more closely held along with weapons capabilities.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 6:56:27 AM EDT
[#6]
Talk to me when he has gone 1.9 Mach at 500 feet AGL.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 7:18:42 AM EDT
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sparkvark:
Talk to me when he has gone 1.9 Mach at 500 feet AGL.
View Quote


that is damn fast.

fastest low altitude I ever did was 1.2 at 500 feet over the water and blew over the top of some boats in international waters.

Then there was the time I came in 1 knot below mach along side a soviet AGI, let's just say I can't say I flew over it because I was below the deck. and 3 feet off it's stern was a USCG boat.

That was a kick, I can't imagine 1.9 at 500 feet.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 8:01:11 AM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Mach:


that is damn fast.

fastest low altitude I ever did was 1.2 at 500 feet over the water and blew over the top of some boats in international waters.

Then there was the time I came in 1 knot below mach along side a soviet AGI, let's just say I can't say I flew over it because I was below the deck. and 3 feet off it's stern was a USCG boat.

That was a kick, I can't imagine 1.9 at 500 feet.
View Quote


Might have done something like that in the past.  When you got the IAS above 1100 knots you had to watch the skin temperature because you could damage the leading edge of the wings.  It would burn the paint off the plane.  BTW I'm in Amsterdam on my first IOE.  Flying the 350 is a blast.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 8:39:06 AM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By KA3B:


I did not know that.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By KA3B:
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:
He's banned, unfortunately. Good dude seemed to be having a tough time.


I did not know that.

I didn't realize he was banned either. He would rage pretty hard on here the last few times I remember reading his posts though. I think he had a really hard time after he lost his wife. It seemed he only came on the forum after he was totally sauced toward the end. He used to provide a lot of good insight and info on F-16's but man he started just going batshit on people that would make fairly innocent statements or questions. I remember at least one thread where people were telling him to just log off and chill because he was just completely apoplectic.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 10:17:45 AM EDT
[#10]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RattleCanAR:

The F16 has been around forever and is one of the most common Gen4 fighters in the world.  The performance is common knowledge and no longer anywhere near classified.

The avionics are classified in some cases and vary between customers with some adding their own beeps and squeaks. Tactics are even more closely held along with weapons capabilities.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RattleCanAR:
Originally Posted By SkilletsUSMC:


I'm nothing but a laymen rube when it comes to stuff like this, but I would love for you to expand on your post if you have the time?

How "off" would you say the published numbers are for the four main teen series fighters?

Thanks in advance!

The F16 has been around forever and is one of the most common Gen4 fighters in the world.  The performance is common knowledge and no longer anywhere near classified.

The avionics are classified in some cases and vary between customers with some adding their own beeps and squeaks. Tactics are even more closely held along with weapons capabilities.


OK, show me where I can find the real data? Google is useless for that. It’s almost all ads.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 11:23:43 AM EDT
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MudEagle:

Now do the GE engine.

They fly Block 40s at Kunsan.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MudEagle:
Originally Posted By T45IP2SWA:
We’ll, since charts are showing up, here’s one applicable to OP.

Now do the GE engine.

They fly Block 40s at Kunsan.


Attachment Attached File

Link Posted: 5/14/2022 11:31:27 AM EDT
[#12]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SkilletsUSMC:


OK, show me where I can find the real data? Google is useless for that. It’s almost all ads.
View Quote

"Wikipedia" type numbers need to be taken with a block of salt.

Usually, when they list "Mach 2.0," or whatever, that's for a clean aircraft, and at precisely 36,000 feet, an air temperature of -70°F, and so forth.  Usually.

In general, even if an aircraft can achieve 2.0M at 36k, it will be limited to 1.1 or 1.2M on the deck.  It's just how aero performance is.  In general.  But, it depends.  The SR-71 wasn't even allowed to go that fast on the deck, iirc.  Forget administratively,l in nature, it may have exceeded engineering margins.

"Supercruise." That's another one.  And so forth.

MIT.  Seriously.  They tend to offer an array of course lectures on a wide variety of topics, and this may be one of them.  But, even at lower tier schools, engineering undergrad students are cranking out general bounding parameters like this.  The advancement in readily accessible codes is mind boggling compared to even twenty years ago.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 11:33:58 AM EDT
[#13]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By L_JE:

"Wikipedia" type numbers need to be taken with a block of salt.

Usually, when they list "Mach 2.0," or whatever, that's for a clean aircraft, and at precisely 36,000 feet, an air temperature of -70F, and so forth.  Usually.

In general, even if an aircraft can achieve 2.0M at 36k, it will be limited to 1.1 or 1.2M on the deck.  It's just how aero performance is.  In general.  But, it depends.  The SR-71 wasn't even allowed to go that fast on the deck, iirc.  Forget administratively,l in nature, it may have exceeded engineering margins.

"Supercruise." That's another one.  And so forth.

MIT.  Seriously.  They tend to offer an array of course lectures on a wide variety of topics, and this may be one of them.  But, even at lower tier schools, engineering undergrad students are cranking out general bounding parameters like this.  The advancement in readily accessible codes is mind boggling compared to even twenty years ago.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By L_JE:
Originally Posted By SkilletsUSMC:


OK, show me where I can find the real data? Google is useless for that. It's almost all ads.

"Wikipedia" type numbers need to be taken with a block of salt.

Usually, when they list "Mach 2.0," or whatever, that's for a clean aircraft, and at precisely 36,000 feet, an air temperature of -70F, and so forth.  Usually.

In general, even if an aircraft can achieve 2.0M at 36k, it will be limited to 1.1 or 1.2M on the deck.  It's just how aero performance is.  In general.  But, it depends.  The SR-71 wasn't even allowed to go that fast on the deck, iirc.  Forget administratively,l in nature, it may have exceeded engineering margins.

"Supercruise." That's another one.  And so forth.

MIT.  Seriously.  They tend to offer an array of course lectures on a wide variety of topics, and this may be one of them.  But, even at lower tier schools, engineering undergrad students are cranking out general bounding parameters like this.  The advancement in readily accessible codes is mind boggling compared to even twenty years ago.
Another fun way is playing Kerbel Space and over accelerating your rocket in the atmosphere. You learn real quick when and where you want MaxQ. Faster isn't always better.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 11:35:59 AM EDT
[#14]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Mach:


that is damn fast.

fastest low altitude I ever did was 1.2 at 500 feet over the water and blew over the top of some boats in international waters.

Then there was the time I came in 1 knot below mach along side a soviet AGI, let's just say I can't say I flew over it because I was below the deck. and 3 feet off it's stern was a USCG boat.

That was a kick, I can't imagine 1.9 at 500 feet.
View Quote

I was flying by myself in the Persian Gulf and saw about 30 Iranian FAC/FIAC just sitting in a big circle. Descended to about 200’ and snuck up on them from the sun side and dropped flares over them. I’d have gotten in deep shit if anyone found out but I took the chance they weren’t going to say anything. Fuck those pussies.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 11:37:38 AM EDT
[#15]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:

I was flying by myself in the Persian Gulf and saw about 30 Iranian FAC/FIAC just sitting in a big circle. Descended to about 200' and snuck up on them from the sun side and dropped flares over them. I'd have gotten in deep shit if anyone found out but I took the chance they weren't going to say anything. Fuck those pussies.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:
Originally Posted By Mach:


that is damn fast.

fastest low altitude I ever did was 1.2 at 500 feet over the water and blew over the top of some boats in international waters.

Then there was the time I came in 1 knot below mach along side a soviet AGI, let's just say I can't say I flew over it because I was below the deck. and 3 feet off it's stern was a USCG boat.

That was a kick, I can't imagine 1.9 at 500 feet.

I was flying by myself in the Persian Gulf and saw about 30 Iranian FAC/FIAC just sitting in a big circle. Descended to about 200' and snuck up on them from the sun side and dropped flares over them. I'd have gotten in deep shit if anyone found out but I took the chance they weren't going to say anything. Fuck those pussies.
Do they not care about expending flares? I'd imagine someone would have asked why you didn't come back with as many as you left with?
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 11:37:39 AM EDT
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SkilletsUSMC:


I'm nothing but a laymen rube when it comes to stuff like this, but I would love for you to expand on your post if you have the time?

How "off" would you say the published numbers are for the four main teen series fighters?

Thanks in advance!
View Quote

Real numbers are way slower because of all the shit that is hanging off the average jet on an average sortie. I think the Janes numbers for an F-18 is 1.8 but no chance. Maybe slick from a dive from 40k’ but I wouldn’t want to guess where to start pulling out of a dive that fast. No dive recovery numbers for that speed.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 11:39:06 AM EDT
[#17]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By crownvic96:
Do they not care about expending flares? I'd imagine someone would have asked why you didn't come back with as many as you left with?
View Quote

We always did items check with chaff and flares as part of our fence checks, completely normal. They were training flares so nobody cared about a few. If it was the whole bucket or the good flares that might have raised eyebrows but even then doubtful.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 11:40:18 AM EDT
[#18]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:

We always did items check with chaff and flares as part of our fence checks, completely normal. They were training flares so nobody cared about a few. If it was the whole bucket or the good flares that might have raised eyebrows but even then doubtful.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:
Originally Posted By crownvic96:
Do they not care about expending flares? I'd imagine someone would have asked why you didn't come back with as many as you left with?

We always did items check with chaff and flares as part of our fence checks, completely normal. They were training flares so nobody cared about a few. If it was the whole bucket or the good flares that might have raised eyebrows but even then doubtful.
Cool :).
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 11:42:17 AM EDT
[#19]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:

We always did items check with chaff and flares as part of our fence checks, completely normal. They were training flares so nobody cared about a few. If it was the whole bucket or the good flares that might have raised eyebrows but even then doubtful.
View Quote


Fence check?
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 11:46:47 AM EDT
[#20]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Grendelsbane:


Fence check?
View Quote

Making sure your shit worked.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 2:05:28 PM EDT
[#21]
The Citations with plastic windshields defog the same way. Bleed blown on the windshield. If we were landing anywhere other than the desert we had to pop the heats open 20 minutes or so before we started down. It was possible to melt holes through the windshield according to FSI.  Don’t know about F-16s but that was the loudest part of what I did. When I was alone in the Bravo or Encore I rolled with the overhead speaker on and used the hand mic until it was time to start the windshield heat.

That said I haven’t flown a Citation in years.

These days I go .81 everywhere. At 40 and 41 and sometimes 43. I’d go faster but it bitches at me so have to pull it back. Last ride would go .81 in cruise but faster for a bit on the way down. Then .82 or .83. Never worried about Mmo in cruise because it would never get there.
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 2:10:38 PM EDT
[#22]
So...

Would that trchnically be considered annealing aluminum if you are heating it?

Link Posted: 5/14/2022 2:20:49 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Shung] [#23]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Sparkvark:


Might have done something like that in the past.  When you got the IAS above 1100 knots you had to watch the skin temperature because you could damage the leading edge of the wings.  It would burn the paint off the plane.  BTW I'm in Amsterdam on my first IOE.  Flying the 350 is a blast.
View Quote


Did the EF-111 retain any terrain following ability or all of that was removed ?
Link Posted: 5/14/2022 5:04:13 PM EDT
[#24]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:

Making sure your shit worked.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:
Originally Posted By Grendelsbane:


Fence check?

Making sure your shit worked.


Fuel
Engines
Navigation
Comms
Electrical
Link Posted: 5/15/2022 9:14:47 PM EDT
[#25]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DimaChado:


Fuel
Engines
Navigation
Comms
Electrical
View Quote

Lol, I must’ve completely brain flushed that acronym
Link Posted: 5/16/2022 6:49:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Mach] [#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:

Lol, I must’ve completely brain flushed that acronym
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FlyNavy75:
Originally Posted By DimaChado:


Fuel
Engines
Navigation
Comms
Electrical

Lol, I must’ve completely brain flushed that acronym


Yeah me too.

I thought it was FENCE as in crossing the fence going to battle.  all I ever checked was Weapons, Radar, TEWS, and counter measures, and those things aren’t even on that list, everything else was checked prior to or while going down the runway.
Link Posted: 5/16/2022 9:22:45 AM EDT
[#27]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Mach:
I thought it was FENCE as in crossing the fence going to battle.
View Quote

It is both...the mnemonic "FENCE" was developed to fit the term.
Link Posted: 5/16/2022 2:50:43 PM EDT
[#28]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MudEagle:

It is both...the mnemonic "FENCE" was developed to fit the term.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MudEagle:
Originally Posted By Mach:
I thought it was FENCE as in crossing the fence going to battle.

It is both...the mnemonic "FENCE" was developed to fit the term.

Yeah I think the term is OBE for what we use it for nowadays but likely originated back in the day.
Page / 6
Next Page Arrow Left
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top