June 12, 201213 yr Author because landing the plane shouldn't be the most difficult or dangerous part of the sortie. Wait. I thought landing on an aircraft carrier was the most heroic feat of aviation prowess ever devised. Edited June 12, 201213 yr by Beaver
June 12, 201213 yr Wait. I thought landing on an aircraft carrier was the most heroic feat of aviation prowess ever devised. It isn't?
June 12, 201213 yr This was coming from a legend in the fighter community. Made sense way back then. Still does. "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree." I will concede that everyone can probably use a couple overheads on the TR-2 ride in RTU. However, I don't think they have to do a touch and go. OK,... I copy all (including the fact that Brabus won't even to spend time in the squadron bar, since that's a few minutes he could be in the vault),... however, if you're going to do the overhead and eat up the time anyways, why wouldn't you do the T&G? You just burned up 1000+ gallons of fuel, pulled enough G's to continue to put significant stress on the jet as compared to a T&G. Is answer in the fighter/attack community honestly "tire wear"? I've landed the Viper from the front seat, and Hornet and T-45 from the back. They are "easy to land". Got it. Edited June 12, 201213 yr by Huggyu2
June 12, 201213 yr I've landed the Viper from the front seat, and Hornet and T-45 from the back. They are "easy to land". Got it. Yeah, the Fighting Falcon is easy to land, but it's not necessarily easy to land well. It's the only aircraft I've flown where I was told I needed to "bump" the stick forward as I touch down to counter the change in pitch rate and prevent getting airborne again. Edited June 12, 201213 yr by Muscle2002
June 13, 201213 yr https://www.flightglo...en-woes-372642/ From the article: "Ironically, some of the safety measures that the USAF added after the service lifted the grounding such as flying with a negative-pressure carbon-filter--which is having oxygen pushed through it under pressure-- and with the oxygen system set on maximum at all times probably exacerbated the problem, the source says. Wow.....Unintended consequences. Good luck, you guys might still need it,
June 15, 201213 yr Hmmm. It seems the pilots were correct: the O2 system (among others) was malfunctioning and the bureaucrats/shoeclerks/AIB were wrong. BIG shock https://news.yahoo.com/air-force-cites-progress-f-22-oxygen-mystery-013535776.html
July 25, 201213 yr Puzzle palace says it is a valve in the pilots' vest, not the jet https://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/07/f22-valve/#more-87307
July 25, 201213 yr https://www.adn.com/2012/07/25/2555457/defense-secretary-approves-plan.html LIfting F-22 restrictions.
July 31, 201213 yr Today's headline “But as soon as you get to the merge…” Pfeiffer said, referring to the point at which fighters engage in close-up dogfighting, “in that area, at least, the Typhoon doesn’t necessarily have to fear the F-22 in all aspects… In the dogfight the Eurofighter is at least as capable as the F-22, with advantages in some aspects.”
July 31, 201213 yr "Grumbrecht said that even if his planes did everything right, they weren’t able to get within 20 miles of the next-generation jets before being targeted." It doesn't surprise me that Raptors wouldn't be victorious in all wvr merges. It would surprise me if they (Eurofighters) were able to get to those merges without getting schwacked on the way. But shit happens and that's why you practice BFM/ACM. And the Eurofighter ain't exactly a slouch. Nor are the cats flying 'em. *Edit for grammatical buffoonery Edited July 31, 201213 yr by Danger41
July 31, 201213 yr If you're gonna invite your friends to an exercise, at some point you're gonna have to call "Tuesday only heaters, on Wednesday BFM", or they don't have any fun and won't come back to play.
July 31, 201213 yr Kinda surprised that the Eurofighter costs $200m each. Seems like a lot of money for something that can't get closer than 20 nm to a Raptor.
July 31, 201213 yr Kinda surprised that the Eurofighter costs $200m each. Seems like a lot of money for something that can't get closer than 20 nm to a Raptor. If they can in turn keep the Migs 20 nm away, then they are worth the money.
July 31, 201213 yr maybe some general in some terrible country is thinking "awesome, let the tactic be flight right at the thing and get to the merge...then we'll win!"
July 31, 201213 yr Yeah, the Fighting Falcon is easy to land, but it's not necessarily easy to land well. It's the only aircraft I've flown where I was told I needed to "bump" the stick forward as I touch down to counter the change in pitch rate and prevent getting airborne again. You're doing it wrong.
July 31, 201213 yr You may have to "bump the stick" in Falcon 4.0 or whatever video game you play, but not in the Viper.
July 31, 201213 yr And we call them Vipers. What do you fly? "we" don't call them vipers. "you" call them vipers. "we" call them fighting falcons, pork falcons, porkers, LGPOS, lawn darts, tinker toys, etc. And how many times are you going to pull this "what do you fly" shit like you're in a dick measuring contest for the insecure?
July 31, 201213 yr "we" don't call them vipers. "you" call them vipers. "we" call them fighting falcons, pork falcons, porkers, LGPOS, lawn darts, tinker toys, etc. And how many times are you going to pull this "what do you fly" shit like you're in a dick measuring contest for the insecure? Edit: On second thought...you kinda got the point with your first statement... Edited July 31, 201213 yr by SocialD
July 31, 201213 yr And how many times are you going to pull this "what do you fly" shit like you're in a dick measuring contest for the insecure? Fighting Falcon standard.
August 1, 201213 yr You're doing it wrong. You're probably right, but I would venture the majority of Viper pilots experienced this the first few times they flew the aircraft. Last time I checked neither the T-37, T-6 or T-38 use a pitch rate/AoA command system for landing which requires different compensation. And we call them Vipers. What do you fly? I flew Strike Eagles, or Mudhens as you probably call them. You may have to "bump the stick" in Falcon 4.0 or whatever video game you play, but not in the Viper. Okay, I'm telling you what I saw and the reasoning behind it. Edited August 1, 201213 yr by Muscle2002
August 1, 201213 yr You're probably right, but I would venture the majority of Viper pilots experienced this the first few times they flew the aircraft. Last time I checked neither the T-37, T-6 or T-38 use a pitch rate/AoA command system for landing which requires different compensation. I flew Strike Eagles, or Mudhens as you probably call them. Okay, I'm telling you what I saw and the reasoning behind it. Congrats. You're going to like your new trunk monkey. Less talking in the brief.
August 1, 201213 yr "we" don't call them vipers. "you" call them vipers. "we" call them fighting falcons, pork falcons, porkers, LGPOS, lawn darts, tinker toys, etc. And how many times are you going to pull this "what do you fly" shit like you're in a dick measuring contest for the insecure? You did miss the point, because you wanted or expected this to be a dick measuring contest. It wasn't.
August 2, 201213 yr You did miss the point, because you wanted or expected this to be a dick measuring contest. It wasn't. Ok... And we call them Vipers. What do you fly? ...so what was it then?
August 3, 201213 yr I'll bite.....Muscle2002 thought he had knowledge of how to land the Viper, but then called it the Fighting Falcon, something a real F-16 pilot would never say. My point was that he was NOT a Viper pilot but somebody that learned it on Falcon 4.0, or rumor, or WOM. So I told the forum what we really called it, and tried to call him out as a fake/wannabe. Turns out he is a fighter pilot.....I always preferred lawn dart. Edited August 3, 201213 yr by matmacwc
Create an account or sign in to comment