-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Blues to Get Supers?
- Thread starter Hopeful Hoya
- Start date
Not intended as an affront, but based on what? The gov't evidently awarded Boeing a modification contract per the OP, so someone somewhere disagrees with you on that.
Just my opinion. I can't imagine a Navy where the Blues have newer jets than the last 5 Hornet squadrons.
But Brett is right. At some point the unicorn will appear and somewhat mitigate the fighter gap.
Will the Blues still need to do the "40 pound spring" thingie with the stick?
I was under the impression that the 40-pound spring was born of the idea that it's better to have one obnoxious trim setting for all speeds then to try to constantly re-trim whilst flying 36 inches from your buddies. Don't the Thunderchickens also run the trim full forward? Thought I heard that somewhere.
Contract is only to examine modifying, so no airframes are actually going to get transitioned yet. Could just be a hedge in case Hornet maintenance becomes completely unsustainable or could be the first step in an actual transition.
It seems like that technique would be a disaster in a Viper, given its rate (rather than displacement) flight control laws. You see the difference a lot when trying to precisely roll the jet. In the F/A-18, you just throw in some lateral stick, and then back it off to capture the roll rate you want. In the Viper, if you use this technique too aggressively, it will result in some pretty intense ratcheting as the flight control computer can't figure out if you want to stop the roll or just ease the rate. I'd *guess* this would be exaggerated when constantly trying to fight an off trim jet. Maybe the resident VFA TPS grad above can weigh in in a more informed manner though.
Last edited:
Jublov
Play Top Gun Til' the VHS breaks
I'm gonna miss the F/A-18C "Legacy Hornet"
You've got 15 years before you need to worry about that.I'm gonna miss the F/A-18C "Legacy Hornet"
Just kidding, you never need to worry about that.
Interesting. I read an interview with another Viper driver, and he said something similar, to the effect of new Viper pilots have a tendency to over-rotate the first coupe of times they take off because the flight control logic is so different to anything else in a front line fighter today.
I never found that specific problem to be the case, but that was probably 1) because I had read that exact thing before, and 2) I have never really moved the stick on takeoff in the Hornet……..you might kind of influence it at about rotation speed, but it is a very very small amount of stick movement. If anything, my initial error during takeoff in the F-16 was under-rotating. You have to more positively rotate the Viper or else it will just stay on the ground straight through max gear speed………the same amount of back pressure used in the Hornet will not even lift the nose off the ground. After you actually get the nose moving at planned rotation speed, you then just have to hold it steady while it lifts off and then settles a little (not uncommon for the mains to hop a little in the process), making the whole thing feel a little bit less graceful than the Hornet. Just a random data point that is neither here nor there.
FIFY.
OK, I'll bite. [nerdjack] That's not a bad explanation from a pilot's perspective (obviously you fly both), but you're confusing things a bit between the type of controller (stick) in the jet and the type of response the jet gives you. Roll is a rate command in both aircraft, but the difference you refer to lies in the way commands are made by the pilot. In the F-16, the stick is a force controller, i.e., how much lateral force you put on the stick is how much roll input goes to the flight control computer, but the stick barely moves. This is tricky, because there is very little tactile feedback to the pilot, which is what leads to the over controlling tendency everybody notices the first time they fly an F-16. The original F-16 stick didn't move at all- they changed it early in the program to reduce the ratcheting/overcontrolling tendencies, especially in roll & initial rotation (the first high speed taxi test of the '16 resulted in an inadvertent rotation and getting airborne with ugly results). The F-16 stick now moves about 1/8 of an inch or so, which evidently reduces that tendency, since the jet can be flown very precisely.
The F-18 stick is a displacement controller, i.e. how much you move the stick away from neutral controls how strong of a signal is sent to the FCC for pitch and roll. This is a much more "user friendly" feedback system for pilots, as human beings usually find it easier to develop positional muscle memory, and it's a closer match to how control inputs work in most aircraft. Interestingly, the F-18 was originally designed to have a force controller similar to the F-16 but was changed early in the program. The displacement of the stick you use in the Hornet today actually gets converted into a force signal to the FCC.
The Blues use a spring on their stick during airshows in part to eliminate the feeling of a neutral "dead band" in the middle which could lead to porpoising/overcontrolling the jet for the precise form they fly. Sounds counterintuitive, but it's easier to precisely control force (for example) between 38 and 42 pounds than it is to vary between 2 pounds forward and 2 pounds aft. It is, however more fatiguing. The spring can be unhooked for enroute or other flights where they aren't flying show formation.
I'm not sure what the T-birds do, or whether its any different than a "fleet" F-16. The intentional off-trim thing sounds suspect though- I think that would make it more difficult to fly form with a force controller.
[/nerdjack]