Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
A Grateful American |
^^^ Yep. Best "simulation" is to stand looking and pointing at a spot on the wall in front of you from about 10 feet. Quickly turn around one revolution, then close your eyes and walk to the spot and touch it. Then open your eyes. You will be anywhere from a few inches from that spot, to lying on the floor. "the meaning of life, is to give life meaning" ✡ Ani Yehudi אני יהודי Le'olam lo shuv לעולם לא שוב! | |||
|
Member |
True with most small aircraft with a lot of dihedral built into the wings, not necessarily true for higher performance craft. As a very general rule, the more maneuverable an aircraft it is the less stable it will be. "The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people." "Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy." "I did," said Ford, "it is." "So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?" "It honestly doesn't occur to them. They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates the government they want." "You mean they actually vote for the lizards." "Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course." "But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?" "Because if they didn't vote for a lizard, then the wrong lizard might get in." | |||
|
| Member |
A couple of years ago I got badly disoriented during a ferry flight in an Air Tractor 802. Very low visibility, no horizon. Electronic instrumentation, minimal navigation equipment. What did it for me was flying relative to another airplane. I fixated on the other airplane a bit too much, got a little hysterisis going (stare at an object in the dark at it appears to begin to move...it can happen in the daylight too). When instrumentation says one thing and the body perceives another, it can become dangerous. Even in large, stable airplanes I've seen it, and felt it before. About ten years ago on a departure over the persian gulf in a 747, I witnessed a crewmember lose control, and took the aircraft temporarily while he reoriented. A false horizon illusion with stars and fires on oil rigs on the gulf did it. I've seen it in daylight, too in large and small aircraft, fast and slow. Very real. The 178 seconds video, incidentally, has been somewhat debunked, but does still make a valid point. https://youtu.be/b7t4IR-3mSo It's a remake of the original (there are several), but uses the original text. The original exercise was conducted by the University of Illinois in 1954 with 20 subjects who lost control between 20 and 480 seconds, with the average at 178. Each subject was a private pilot without an instrument rating, and was tasked with flying a 180 degree turn. The exercise was done in flight in an airplane. In 1993 the University did the experiment again, but with a simulator, and the subjects had far greater success. In 1954, there was no required instrument training for the private pilot certificate, and the purpose of the study was to induce a loss of control: the exercise was rigged to cause the subjects to fail, because the purpose was to create a baseline to compare a new emergency maneuvering escape syllabus. The video and the text is dramatic, but the loss of control does not happen at nearly that rate today. The point is valid, though the video is deceptive and incorrect. | |||
|
אַרְיֵה |
In the absence of a visual horizon -- in the clouds, or over water or terrain with no lights on the ground at night -- there is no reference to tell which way is up. Kinesthesia can not be depended upon, your body lies to you. The only way to maintain control of the airplane is by interpreting the instruments correctly. This is not an intuitive skill, it is something that must be learned and once learned, it takes practice to stay sharp. A skilled instrument pilot can fly an instrument approach and break out of the clouds 200' above the runway, a half mile from the threshhold, aligned with the center of the runway, maybe ten or fifteen seconds before touchdown. A pilot without instrument training will not even be able to hold the airplane straight and level, at altitude. One of the biggest killers of private pilots is continued flight into deteriorating weather. Not necessarily violent weather, it's typically just decreasing visibility. A non-instrument rated pilot is likely to die under these conditions. It's just that simple. We have a number of professional pilots, as well as current or ex military pilots who are members of this forum. Any of them will tell you the same thing. הרחפת שלי מלאה בצלופחים | |||
|
| hello darkness my old friend  |
As for Hypoxia couldn't that have been an issue in this aircraft? weren't they having issues with the o2 system in this aircraft over the last couple of years? | |||
|
| אַרְיֵה |
By that time (1993) the Private Pilot syllabus had been revised to include a minimum of three hours of instrument training. One of the tasks in the PTS (Practical Test Standards) was to demonstrate the ability to make a 180 degree turn by sole reference to instruments, the alleged purpose being to enable the non-instrument rated pilot to turn around and get back out of weather. My observation as an instructor was that this skill was generally not practiced, so the ability to perform this task degenerated over time. הרחפת שלי מלאה בצלופחים | |||
|
| Member |
Some more details, interesting... Japan blames spatial disorientation for F-35 crash
| |||
|
| Go ahead punk, make my day |
When an aircraft flies into the water and the pilot / crew make no attempt to recover or eject, they were either unable to fly the plane (unconscious, etc) or thought they were flying it in a proper manner. Hypoxia would be an aircraft issue - some Navy T-45s and F-18s had issues with their O2 system leading to increased incidents of Hypoxia, which at high altitude can quickly incapacitate a pilot. I hadn't heard anything about hypoxia with the F-35, but that doesn't mean it can't happen. GLOC / ALOC are also possibilities but they can be ruled out if the plane didn't make any high maneuvers before the crash (radar tapes could help with that). Additionally if there was communications leading up to the crash and the pilot was talking, that would help dispel Hypoxia / GLOC and put wait to a Spatial-D event. Looking at the information posted about about him flying and talking leading up to the crash, S-D seems to be the culprit.
He dropped 15K in 15 seconds, so 1K feet per second - it would have to be an aggressive nose low attitude to get that kind of decent rate and then he starts talking ("knock it off" - a very standard term to stop the training scenario, either to return to base or to set up again for another one) before flying the plane / leveling out, when he has less than 15 seconds before hitting the water, and likely less than 5-8 seconds to even be able to recover and save the plane. Pity. | |||
|
Political Cynic |
in most cases with light or light sport aircraft, the aircraft is designed to be inherently stable so letting go of the control, the aircraft will hunt to find its stability high performance military aircraft are typically designed to be inherently unstable, which means they need active control inputs to get to and remain straight and level two opposite ends of the control spectrum [B] Against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC | |||
|
| Political Cynic |
if I were a betting man, I'd say the idea of vertigo is probably for public consumption and it would not surprise me at all if the actual cause of pilot incapacitation was oxygen starvation or a failure of the onboard oxygen generation system [B] Against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC | |||
|
| אַרְיֵה |
I know nothing about modern military jets like this one, but those numbers caught my eye. Is 1,000' per second realistic, or is that an error in reporting? 1,000' per minute would be a moderately aggressive descent in the V-tail; this is sixty times as fast. הרחפת שלי מלאה בצלופחים | |||
|
Official Space Nerd |
I was thinking the same thing. IIRC, failure of the oxygen system killed an F-22 pilot in Alaska. . . (Lockheed built the F-22 and -35) It seems really suspicious to state cause of accident without any solid proof. Fear God and Dread Nought Admiral of the Fleet Sir Jacky Fisher | |||
|
| Official Space Nerd |
1000 FPS is about 682 MPH (that would be pure vertical speed only, not accounting for lateral movement). OP stated the plane impacted at 683. Sounds like they think he went from 15K straight down to the water. Fear God and Dread Nought Admiral of the Fleet Sir Jacky Fisher | |||
|
| Happiness is Vectored Thrust  |
Absolutely. And when you’re single seat there’s no one else to help you get over it. I once spent an interminable 10 minutes tanking a KC-130 at night and was convinced we were doing slow roles the entire time. Icarus flew too close to the sun, but at least he flew. | |||
|
| Member |
My question would be, what in the hell are the Japanese doing flying our most advanced fighter? | |||
|
| Member |
It's very expensive. Helps to drive down the production cost per aircraft if they build more of them. Plus it helps the balance of trade. It also sticks a thumb in the eye of China. The Chinese don't like the Japanese. The Japanese are reliable Pacific allies. I don't have a problem with it. I read somewhere that they were thinking of selling some to Turkey, but that's on hold due to questions about some of their recent actions. I think a sale to the Turks would be a huge mistake. | |||
|
| A Grateful American |
Two F-35's were "delivered" to Turkey (symbolically). The two jets are at Luke and used for training Turk maintenance and pilots, but likely will not ever leave the US. And the percentage of components that Turkey manufactures for the program are about 5%, and that involvement will be ended in 2020. Likely, more effective immediately. "the meaning of life, is to give life meaning" ✡ Ani Yehudi אני יהודי Le'olam lo shuv לעולם לא שוב! | |||
|
| Go ahead punk, make my day |
Yes it's physically / aerodynamically possible, but he had to be going pretty much straight down. At 600kts (nearly supersonic), 90degs nose down (straight down), 15K is going to be a difficult but doable recovery. The plane is likely well past it maximum performance turn airspeed and is also working against gravity, as opposed to a lateral or vertical turn where you can bleed excess airspeed to get down to you best performance bad. Looking at unclass F16 numbers (and it's conventional wisdom that the F35 doesn't turn better than a Viper, the plane is likely supersonic and at a max G turn), a max 9.0 G turn would get about 15 degrees a second. So at 15.5K a max performance turn, with throttle to idle and speedbrakes out would make it with likely some slop - my WAG incorporating reaction time would bottom out just below 10K, probably 8K would be my guess, with all the 'oh shit' factor involved. Obviously doing it at night adds a level of difficulty with reduced visual cues to keep the wings level. But every second you delay, you are 1K closer to the ground and only accelerating faster. But going that fast, straight down (especially at night) is no where to be. Sure, we would do maneuvers that bring the nose through straight up / down day or night, but it's transitory in nature - ie, you are executing a hard turn and come through nose high / low, but you don't bury you nose like that at night. And daytime its much more comfortable because that big piece of plane killing dirt or water is staring right at you. | |||
|
| Member |
They bought it. I believe they plan to take 150 of them, and will be one of the single biggest foreign F35 military sales. | |||
|
| Administrator |
Would you rather we sold F-35s to the People's Liberation Army Air Force? | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© SIGforum 2024