Aircraft Pic & Vid Thread

[Eric]

[Eric]

[deputy tom]

14 hours ago, Cali-Glock said:

 

Near vertical take off

 

 

Very cool. tom.

[Dric902]

[Dric902]

https://www.foxnews.com/us/f-22-flight-mishap-was-human-error-investigation-finds

ok Wingnuts.

explain this to me. Did the pilot retract the main gear before he was airborne?

he couldn’t tell if he was flying or taxiing?

 

.

[Eric]

[Al Czervik]

11 hours ago, Dric902 said:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/f-22-flight-mishap-was-human-error-investigation-finds

ok Wingnuts.

explain this to me. Did the pilot retract the main gear before he was airborne?

he couldn’t tell if he was flying or taxiing?

 

.

I don't know anything about the Raptor, but most all retractable geared aircraft have squat switches, which generally prevent the retraction of the gear, when it shouldn't ought to be.  I do know a guy, however, that somehow dropped a couple of King Airs.

[tous]

9 minutes ago, Al Czervik said:

... but most all retractable geared aircraft have squat switches ...

You are referring to a weight on wheels sensor.  We used it to, among other things, inhibit the master arm switch.  Few circumstances demand the ability to fire missiles or the gun if the aircraft is parked on the tarmac.  It could be disabled for diagnostic procedures.

Let's think about an aircraft taking to the air.  When enough forward velocity generates sufficient lift, the aircraft will fly.  As the aircraft leaves the ground, it experiences the phenomena of ground effect, which, if I recall, is generally the height of one-half of the wing span, depending on the wing.  Aviators look for a positive rate, that is, the aircraft is climbing under power and all is good. 

Military pilots tend to want to 'clean up' the aircraft, that is, raise the landing gear and the flaps and leading edge extenders that gave them added lift for take off at a lower velocity, as soon as possible.  Watch commercial airliners.  They raise the flaps and landing gear quite a  while after they have positive rate and altitude.  They care less about maximum performance and opt for maximum safety.

I can't say what events and errors led to the loss of the referenced F-22, but if it was off the ground, weight on wheels was negative, but that didn't necessarily mean that the aircraft was flying.

 

 

[Dric902]

42 minutes ago, tous said:

You are referring to a weight on wheels sensor.  We used it to, among other things, inhibit the master arm switch.  Few circumstances demand the ability to fire missiles or the gun if the aircraft is parked on the tarmac.  It could be disabled for diagnostic procedures.

Let's think about an aircraft taking to the air.  When enough forward velocity generates sufficient lift, the aircraft will fly.  As the aircraft leaves the ground, it experiences the phenomena of ground effect, which, if I recall, is generally the height of one-half of the wing span, depending on the wing.  Aviators look for a positive rate, that is, the aircraft is climbing under power and all is good. 

Military pilots tend to want to 'clean up' the aircraft, that is, raise the landing gear and the flaps and leading edge extenders that gave them added lift for take off at a lower velocity, as soon as possible.  Watch commercial airliners.  They raise the flaps and landing gear quite a  while after they have positive rate and altitude.  They care less about maximum performance and opt for maximum safety.

I can't say what events and errors led to the loss of the referenced F-22, but if it was off the ground, weight on wheels was negative, but that didn't necessarily mean that the aircraft was flying.

 

 

So he may not have been “hot dogging” it

training issue maybe? Procedural?

 

.

[tous]

Driving the aircraft down the runway and getting it in the air is about the most basic thing  a pilot does.  Everything else the aircraft and aviator do after depends on taking off, no?  I don't believe that it is a training issue.

The procedure has been well-understood since the Wright brothers.

They don't let jerks, show-offs  and asshats fly the good toys, even the Air Force.

I suggest that the pilot miscalculated his KCAS be chalked up to a whoopsie, the inherent fallibility of the squishyware.

Aviator learned, won't make the same mistake twice.

 

I failed to mention above that an aircraft can have a positive rate and not be under thrust due to inertia.  That doesn't last long and generally does not end well.

 

Edited November 30, 2018 by tous

[Al Czervik]

1 hour ago, tous said:

You are referring to a weight on wheels sensor.  We used it to, among other things, inhibit the master arm switch.  Few circumstances demand the ability to fire missiles or the gun if the aircraft is parked on the tarmac.  It could be disabled for diagnostic procedures.

Let's think about an aircraft taking to the air.  When enough forward velocity generates sufficient lift, the aircraft will fly.  As the aircraft leaves the ground, it experiences the phenomena of ground effect, which, if I recall, is generally the height of one-half of the wing span, depending on the wing.  Aviators look for a positive rate, that is, the aircraft is climbing under power and all is good. 

Military pilots tend to want to 'clean up' the aircraft, that is, raise the landing gear and the flaps and leading edge extenders that gave them added lift for take off at a lower velocity, as soon as possible.  Watch commercial airliners.  They raise the flaps and landing gear quite a  while after they have positive rate and altitude.  They care less about maximum performance and opt for maximum safety.

I can't say what events and errors led to the loss of the referenced F-22, but if it was off the ground, weight on wheels was negative, but that didn't necessarily mean that the aircraft was flying.

 

 

Yes, also called the gear retraction lock by some.  On some aircraft, positive weight also disconnects the yaw damper function.

The only two failures of which I personally know, involved a now dead guy (yep, he was poorly aviating at the time of his departure from this planet and left a smoking' hole in the ground) who, on a bounced landing managed to activate the gear lever to the "up" position when he thought he was retracting flaps to "0%" at the time the gear unloaded during the bounce.

[tous]

I am sorry that happened to that feller, but why, if he is at no altitude and little velocity would he raise flaps? 

I'd want all the lift I could get unless he feared nose-up and a stall.

Edited November 30, 2018 by tous

[Al Czervik]

4 minutes ago, tous said:

I am sorry that happened to that feller, but why, if he is at no altitude and little velocity would he raise flaps? 

I'd want all the lift I could get unless he feared nose-up and a stall.

Tous, you are a kind fellow.  The world is better off with him at ambient temperature at -6' AGL.  He was with another guy (a decent one at that) and due to his enormous ego and lack awareness of time in the air v fuel capacity, took the other guy with him.

Due to this KA being a jump ship, as soon as it was on the ground flaps went up to decrease lift, beta/reverse/brakes applied to get quickly stopped and back to the next load.

[RenoF250]

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10217943121595661&set=a.10201332846069154&type=3&eid=ARBnIjrC5V2XttROTZ6YYkTC26k0VUHsz8ltY2g2_HLXVLv9y7-3RUoq2l9bM-KBEqkRuxs2QFVTEidu

The embedding did not seem to work.

Edited November 30, 2018 by RenoF250

[Taipei Personality]

11 hours ago, tous said:

You are referring to a weight on wheels sensor.  We used it to, among other things, inhibit the master arm switch.  Few circumstances demand the ability to fire missiles or the gun if the aircraft is parked on the tarmac.  It could be disabled for diagnostic procedures.

 

We called it the weight off wheels switch or WOW switch.  In addition to the master arm switch, it also kept the radar and electronic countermeasures gear from transmitting as well as chaff and flare dispensers from dispensing until airborne.

[gwalchmai]

[Eric]

[Eric]

[Paul53]

On 9/11/2018 at 3:24 PM, Eric said:

Awesome pic! Where is it, Eric?  Just need a BUFF for a full house!

Edited December 16, 2018 by Paul53

[Paul53]

Awesome thread. I think this will be the first one of these posted. The original See Bee with the single engine pusher prop had a reputation as a flying anvil. Somebody decided to add some more wing and 2 conventional engines and it was reputed to be quite a nice ride. I used to see them on the ramp at Norwood Mass.

[janice6]

3 hours ago, Paul53 said:

Awesome pic! Where is it, Eric?  Just need a BUFF for a complete set!

Oshkosh, 2019.

[Paul53]

48 minutes ago, janice6 said:

Oshkosh, 2019.

That was my first thought but no general aviation around. EAA puts on an impressive show I hear. Never been. It's on my wish list.

[Paul53]

The "Windecker Eagle." A plastic plane way ahead of it's time. In 1969 who could imagine substituting plastic for metal. Even today it would be an awesome plane.

[Eric]

8 hours ago, Paul53 said:

Awesome pic! Where is it, Eric?  Just need a BUFF for a full house!

I don’t know. Quite a scene though.

[Dric902]