spectre
F-106 Qualified
Currently: Offline
Posts: 10
Location:
Joined: November 2014
|
Post by spectre on Nov 30, 2014 6:07:59 GMT 9
According to an F-106 chart in the flight manual, at sea level the Six can enter her 7 G envelope at about 364 knots. Let's say a pilot is flying a clean F-106 at sea level. He is going 550 knots. He rolls over and pulls back on the stick, performing a level turn. If the pilot performs a 7 G turn, how fast would he bleed his speed down? Would he bleed down to below 300 knots? Lets see, I am confused: a rolling maneuver (neutral stick fore and aft) tends to loose some altitude (putting him in the water because he is at sea level or flying in Death Valley), pulling back on the stick will tighten turn. The greater the airspeed on entering the turn and the tighter the turn (inducing a greater G load) the faster airspeed is lost....... Go to MEMBERS, then go to page 8 and click on Lt Col M. Ross Shulmister and read all of his post. He can even tell you how long he kept a six airborne after Fuel Level Low Light came on........... Anyone notice a similarity in this and the AC posting and someone from a long time ago?? Perhaps Lorin can solve his problem..... The Old Sarge Let's say that instead of pulling a 7 G turn, he performed a 5 G turn. At 5 G's, would the F-106 still bleed her speed down very rapidly, falling below 300 knots? Thanks, Spectre
|
|
|
Post by Mark O on Nov 30, 2014 16:35:55 GMT 9
I'm not blowing smoke here as I was a C-130 Instructor Flight Engineer, and know a thing, or two about flying, and aircraft performance -- albeit not specifically about the F-106 other than what I've read in the manuals -- but have spoken to pilots, and maintainers about the Six. I respect your devotion in finding the answer to your question, but seriously. Is there an absolute, definitive, no-questions-asked answer you are looking for? Think about what simulators can, and cannot do. Do you remember United Flight 232 that crashed in Sioux City, IA? They put all the factors they could in the sim to match the situation the actual crew faced, and not one crew could duplicate what those men did on July 19, 1989. I also recall reading about the MiG-25 when Victor Belenko defected. They put all the information they could into the sim to simulate several MiG-25s at the 6 o'clock high advantage against a single, F-15, and the F-15 shot them all down. Really? In every situation? I'm reminded of the line in one of the Star Trek movies delivered by Scotty. "If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon." I hate what-ifs. I crashed the hell out of C-130s in the sim, and I also flew under, and through bridges in the same sim. Go figure. It's all about training, and experience. And programming, as far as sims are concerned. Mark O Edit: Here's the Wiki article on United 232. Plenty of good links at the bottom. We studied this crash very much when I was a crewmember in the USAF. Incidentally, I also knew a fellow comrade of my VFW post in Colorado that lost his wife in this crash. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_232
|
|
|
Post by LBer1568 on Dec 1, 2014 0:55:14 GMT 9
In my past life in USAF I was assigned to the Flight Training Devices System Program Office at WPAFB. I was the C-130 Flight Simulator/Visual Systems Test Manager on Acquisition Team. I probably have over a thousand hours in the various C-130 Simulator Versions as well as about 20 hours of actual flight time. I was the C-130 Simulator Branch Chief at McChord AFB WA prior to WPAFB. I also had over 15 years of total Flight Simulator OPs/Maint in F-111/F-4/C-130/C-141/C-5/F-15/F-16 simulators.
Simulation is based upon available and/or computer generated flight characteristics. The most reliable is data gathered by instrumented aircraft in controlled situations. But I can say this. They have never gathered enough test data to completely simulate all flight conditions. There is simply not enough time/money to gather all data so they concentrate in typical flight parameters. I would place a bet that there was never any flight data recorded at any extremes of six flight profile. Take most flight data curves and put a box around about the center 30% of chart. That would probably reflect the actual data recorded and the rest is computer generated. Modern computer simulation is great, but back n six time frame very limited. Computer time was expensive and less capability than a Commodore 64. Remember the computer power on moon shot was about the power to a Commodore 64 with 3 of them used for redundancy. if there was a difference in the 3 computer solutions they used the majority answer.
The biggest drawback to true simulation is stick feel under varying flight parameters. That is something that is subjective and hard to record.
I have also participated in testing in simulator following an aircraft crash. Yes we tried to duplicate flight conditions but were never able to duplicate in a simulator. That's why they call them Simulators and not duplicators. I worked with Singer experts in trying to better the F-111E Simulator at RAF Upper Heyford. We used pilots to give us feedback as to actual Aircraft verses simulation. But we could only use them for about 2 hours before they started feeling simulated and forgetting what actual flight felt like. We used the same techniques when we replaced the older C-5 Simulators with state of the art simulators. We also were given accrual instrumented aircraft to fill in some of the major holes in recorded flight data. The old 4950th Test Squadron at WPAFB instrumented and recorded our data. I flew on a couple of those data gathering flights. And the flight recordings were much more accurate that debriefed flight paths.
So all of the flight data charts used in -1 are a composite of actual and computer generates flight characteristics. Back when the six was developed they had good, but not exacting flight data recorders. The pilots were good, but not precision during flight gathering. And they did not have instrumentation to gather all the data they would have liked to have. It was similar to aircrew debriefing for WSEM/MSR certification. The pilots reported flight data prior to firing weapon simulator was close at best and way off on some. The recorded data would show rather large differences in reported data. Upon questioning pilot, most of time he would admit to flying against a passenger jet and not another six as target. Many times the pilot was supposed to fly specific flight parameters and he may have gotten behind power curve and didn't complete intercept so he would catch a Delta flight on way back to base and "fire" off a couple rounds.
I guess the best answer I can give with over 23 years in Flight Simulation and F-106 MA-1 systems is there isn't enough true data to make a true simulation. The F-106 simulator was very crude when it came to actual flight parameters, but was designed back in the 50's. So modern simulation is magnitudes better in all aspects of flight and systems simulation.
Any simulation of the six will be nice, but can never be authenticated as we have no flying sixes left, and those who flew her last are getting up in age. The USAF/Airliners use some awesome simulators now, but the PC based Flight Simulator and other games are a lot better than many of our simulators. And cost a fraction of cost. I still buy a "game" from time to time and it is so realistic, but is still a simulator and not a duplicator.
Lorin
|
|
Jim Scanlon (deceased)
Senior Staff
FORUM CHAPLAIN
Commander South Texas outpost of the County Sligo Squadron
Currently: Offline
Posts: 5,075
Location:
Joined: July 2007
Retired: USAF NBA: Spurs NFL: Niners MLB: Giants NHL: Penguins
|
Post by Jim Scanlon (deceased) on Dec 1, 2014 6:41:24 GMT 9
spectre, hypothetical questions are only going to get hypothetical answers.
Six drivers are the only ones who can give you any substantive answers, based on what they have done, as M. Ross has written.
If you have not read it, you might want to get hold of a copy of "Rupert Red 2", by Col. Jack Broughton.
Jack Broughton was commander of the 5th FIS while I was at Minot.
In his book, he has information about flying the six, including coming close to buying the farm, while attempting to duplicate what caused one our pilots to auger in.
Col. Broughton had a wingman watching every move and warned him before it was too late.
Happy hunting.
Jim Too
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Dec 1, 2014 14:03:24 GMT 9
Man, spell check just wiped out all of my post............................... spectre, your quest for "realism" for the Six game is really an unnecessary effort- flying out to the edge of the envelope, and beyond in real aircraft is rarely done for anything more than finding that envelope and setting up the parameters for SAFE operation of the a/c while in that envelope... Even the LINK TRAINER of the forties, with its attitude gyro (instrument panel mounted), turn and bank indicator, airspeed indicator, altimeter, magnetic compass could be crashed......... As Jim Too has posted concerning hypothetical problems, that is the type of an answer you will get....... All a/c surrender airspeed when making a high speed, high G load turn......... please don't try to impress us by asking questions that have answers that really aren't important...... Mark and Lorin have both given you info, Col Shulmister gave you info concerning "absolute" anything. I indicated a flight that took place 50 plus years ago..... If you have that -1, you should have all the info needed to SAFELY fly your simulator game..... What the 4 of us are saying is, we don't like being taken for fools, we all remember a Robyn who asked similar questions
|
|
|
Post by LBer1568 on Dec 2, 2014 3:11:45 GMT 9
Ah, the notorious Robyn...Hadn't thought of her/him/it in long time. Lorin
|
|
MOW
Administrator
Owner/Operator
Currently: Offline
Posts: 5,821
Location:
Joined: September 2003
Retired: USAF, Civil Service
|
Post by MOW on Dec 4, 2014 8:27:36 GMT 9
Robyn... Geez there's a bad penny from days long gone by. Yea, lets not go down that road again.
|
|