User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/13/2022 5:47:38 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We’ll, since charts are showing up, here’s one applicable to OP. Now do the GE engine. They fly Block 40s at Kunsan. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2022 10:11:11 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2022 10:14:11 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 12:53:06 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It’s fast for any fighter. The published numbers on all the fighters are mostly bullshit. Mig-25 is different though. 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! |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 6:39:16 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 6:56:27 AM EDT
[#6]
Talk to me when he has gone 1.9 Mach at 500 feet AGL.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 7:18:42 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Talk to me when he has gone 1.9 Mach at 500 feet AGL. 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 8:01:11 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 8:39:06 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I did not know that.  Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: He's banned, unfortunately. Good dude seemed to be having a tough time. I did not know that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 10:17:45 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 11:23:43 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Now do the GE engine. They fly Block 40s at Kunsan. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: We’ll, since charts are showing up, here’s one applicable to OP. Now do the GE engine. They fly Block 40s at Kunsan.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 11:31:27 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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 -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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 11:33:58 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: "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. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 11:35:59 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 11:37:38 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 11:37:39 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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! 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 11:39:06 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 11:40:18 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 11:42:17 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. Fence check? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 11:46:47 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Fence check? Making sure your shit worked. |
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 2:10:38 PM EDT
[#22]
So...
Would that trchnically be considered annealing aluminum if you are heating it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 2:20:49 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. Did the EF-111 retain any terrain following ability or all of that was removed ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2022 5:04:13 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Making sure your shit worked. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Fence check? Making sure your shit worked. Fuel Engines Navigation Comms Electrical |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2022 9:14:47 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Fuel Engines Navigation Comms Electrical Lol, I must’ve completely brain flushed that acronym |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2022 6:49:29 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lol, I must’ve completely brain flushed that acronym Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2022 9:22:45 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/16/2022 2:50:43 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It is both...the mnemonic "FENCE" was developed to fit the term. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 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. |
|
|
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.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
