Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:42 AM - Re: Musings (Brian Lloyd)
2. 02:57 AM - Vertical penetration (was: Musings) (Brian Lloyd)
3. 04:32 AM - Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) (Ernie)
4. 05:29 AM - Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) (Brian Lloyd)
5. 05:41 AM - BFM Training (Ernie)
6. 05:49 AM - Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) (Ernie)
7. 07:51 AM - Re: Chinese fire drill (Terry Calloway)
8. 07:54 AM - Re: http://www.yakuk.com/YAK-52TDPictures.asp (bowjfold)
9. 08:44 AM - Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) (Brian Lloyd)
10. 08:44 AM - Re: http://www.yakuk.com/YAK-52TDPictures.asp (A. Dennis Savarese)
11. 09:30 AM - Re: BFM Training (Jay Land)
12. 09:31 AM - Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) (DaBear)
13. 10:07 AM - Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) (Brian Lloyd)
14. 10:13 AM - Re: BFM Training (Bill Halverson)
15. 10:42 AM - Re: BFM Training (A. Dennis Savarese)
16. 12:48 PM - Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) (Ernie)
17. 12:48 PM - Re: BFM Training (Ernie)
18. 01:40 PM - ACM Clinic in SE - Selma AL (Shane Golden)
19. 02:10 PM - Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) (Brian Lloyd)
20. 03:00 PM - Re: ACM Clinic in SE - Selma AL (Terry Calloway)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
Barry Hancock wrote:
> use it. But please quit with all the detractions of the RPA
> forums....people have put a ton of work and time into providing what is
> the best association website around.
Then those people should feel good within themselves that they have done a good
job and not be concerned with what other people say. This is not a good place
for the thin-skinned.
As for asking me or others not to state our opinions, that strikes me as totally
inappropriate. Consider your audience and ask yourself if the kind of person
who acquires and flies an eastern-bloc aircraft is likely to respond well to
being told to just "shut up, be a team player, and get along with the program."
If you think that is going to fly I recommend you review your market analysis.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Vertical penetration (was: Musings) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
Barry Hancock wrote:
> 3) Vertical penetration. Hmm...tempting, but I'll stay on track here.
> That would be an interesting comparison. -52 has higher Vne but also
> much higher drag. I'm betting that the CJ, especially with big motor
> and many blades prop would make it interesting. That would be a fun
> comparison test...maybe we'll try to fit a side-by-side-by-side-by-side
> comparison run at ARS...
Vertical penetration is dependent on three things:
1. initial energy which equates to velocity in this case;
2. the rate at which the airframe bleeds energy (drag);
3. thrust-to-weight ratio.
If the initial speeds, weights, and engine/prop combinations are the same, the
cleaner airframe will have better vertical penetration. Probably the two biggest
variables are how fast the airframe sheds energy when you pull (you are going
to lose energy in the pull from horizontal to vertical) and weight.
So, a high-aspect ratio wing that doesn't shed energy in induced drag and low weight
will give you the best return on investment. A big engine and a prop that
is efficient at low airspeeds won't hurt either.
Given this, I would expect that a CJ6A at the same weight and with the same engine
and prop will have better vertical penetration than a Yak-52.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
Wouldn't the planes behavior with respect to the velocity vector have some
effect also? A plane that mushes more after the pull would be less effective
in the vertical.... no???
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl@lloyd.com>
Subject: Yak-List: Vertical penetration (was: Musings)
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
>
> Barry Hancock wrote:
>
> > 3) Vertical penetration. Hmm...tempting, but I'll stay on track here.
> > That would be an interesting comparison. -52 has higher Vne but also
> > much higher drag. I'm betting that the CJ, especially with big motor
> > and many blades prop would make it interesting. That would be a fun
> > comparison test...maybe we'll try to fit a side-by-side-by-side-by-side
> > comparison run at ARS...
>
> Vertical penetration is dependent on three things:
>
> 1. initial energy which equates to velocity in this case;
> 2. the rate at which the airframe bleeds energy (drag);
> 3. thrust-to-weight ratio.
>
> If the initial speeds, weights, and engine/prop combinations are the same,
the cleaner airframe will have better vertical penetration. Probably the
two biggest variables are how fast the airframe sheds energy when you pull
(you are going to lose energy in the pull from horizontal to vertical) and
weight.
>
> So, a high-aspect ratio wing that doesn't shed energy in induced drag and
low weight will give you the best return on investment. A big engine and a
prop that is efficient at low airspeeds won't hurt either.
>
> Given this, I would expect that a CJ6A at the same weight and with the
same engine and prop will have better vertical penetration than a Yak-52.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
> http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
> +1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
>
> There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
> A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
Ernie wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
>
> Wouldn't the planes behavior with respect to the velocity vector have some
> effect also? A plane that mushes more after the pull would be less effective
> in the vertical.... no???
Are you sure you didn't mean to say "lift vector" as the velocity vector will be
approximately along the longitudinal axis of the airframe.
Basically, when you pull hard to go vertical, different airplanes will bleed energy
and airspeed at different rates. What you want is one that converts airspeed
into lift as efficiently as possible leaving you with as much velocity as
possible by the time you are vertical. (FYI, It turns out that this happens
at the AoA that produces the best L:D.) Also remember, the lighter the airplane
is, the less force (lift) will be needed to changes its direction so a lighter
aircraft has an advantage here too.
OK, so now we have the airplane pointed straight up. What will determine the greatest
distance traveled? We have three forces acting in a straight line at
this point. We have the force of gravity that is constant and is equal to the
weight of the airplane. We have the force of thrust which increases as airspeed
decreases. We have the force of drag which decreases as airspeed decreases.
(If we are vertical the wings are not producing any lift so there is no induced
drag; all the drag is coming from parasitic drag.) For a given engine and
prop combination the thrust vs. airspeed curve will be the same. Since we
use the same engine and prop combinations in the CJ6A and Yak-52, we can pretty
much ignore this. So best vertical penetration boils down to four things:
1. who is traveling faster initially;
2. who weighs less;
3. who has the better L:D during the initial pull;
4. who has the lower coefficient of drag.
Since a CJ6A can achieve a higher airspeed in level flight at full power, it has
the initial advantage. I don't know which weighs less but will assume they
are close to the same. If I recall properly, the airfoil used in the CJ6A has
less induced drag under high-lift conditions (hard pull). This favors the CJ6A.
The CJ6A has the lower overall Cd.
Given all this, I would assume that the CJ6A will have better vertical penetration
from full-power level flight, as in the side-by-side pass just before someone
calls, "fight's on!" This gives the CJ6A the energy advantage during the
entire fight.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
I'd really like to get some BFM training here inthe SE. I have an ex AF F-4/F-16
and T-38 IP driver at my disposal, all we need is another REAL fighter pilot,
and we could get some cool training.
I'd rather not go up and get into a furball unless I had real military IP's in
the back seats of both airplanes. So for us SE guys lets try to put something
together.
Ernie
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
No I meant velocity vector. If you are flying straight and level then pull
hard, the plane will want to continue in a straight line, thats the velocity
vector at that instance, even though the AOA and subsequent lift vector has
changed. If you look at the HUD of any fighter jet, you'll see a little
bubble that goes up and down from the middle of the AI. Thats the velocity
vector indicator, it tells you the vector of the airplanes travel regardless
of aircraft orientation. In straight and level flight it will be lined up
with the horizon line, if you pull up, it will drift down momentarily, if
you push, you'll see it drift up. Ever notice an F-16 at the bottom of a
loop near the gound how it keeps travelling down even though the pilot is
pulling up? Thats the mush I was talking about. I figured a plane with less
much has more energy for the vertical.
I learned about this when flying an F-16 SIM at Eglin AFB in Feb.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl@lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Vertical penetration (was: Musings)
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
>
> Ernie wrote:
> > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
> >
> > Wouldn't the planes behavior with respect to the velocity vector have
some
> > effect also? A plane that mushes more after the pull would be less
effective
> > in the vertical.... no???
>
> Are you sure you didn't mean to say "lift vector" as the velocity vector
will be approximately along the longitudinal axis of the airframe.
>
> Basically, when you pull hard to go vertical, different airplanes will
bleed energy and airspeed at different rates. What you want is one that
converts airspeed into lift as efficiently as possible leaving you with as
much velocity as possible by the time you are vertical. (FYI, It turns out
that this happens at the AoA that produces the best L:D.) Also remember,
the lighter the airplane is, the less force (lift) will be needed to changes
its direction so a lighter aircraft has an advantage here too.
>
> OK, so now we have the airplane pointed straight up. What will determine
the greatest distance traveled? We have three forces acting in a straight
line at this point. We have the force of gravity that is constant and is
equal to the weight of the airplane. We have the force of thrust which
increases as airspeed decreases. We have the force of drag which decreases
as airspeed decreases. (If we are vertical the wings are not producing any
lift so there is no induced drag; all the drag is coming from parasitic
drag.) For a given engine and prop combination the thrust vs. airspeed
curve will be the same. Since we use the same engine and prop combinations
in the CJ6A and Yak-52, we can pretty much ignore this. So best vertical
penetration boils down to four things:
>
> 1. who is traveling faster initially;
> 2. who weighs less;
> 3. who has the better L:D during the initial pull;
> 4. who has the lower coefficient of drag.
>
> Since a CJ6A can achieve a higher airspeed in level flight at full power,
it has the initial advantage. I don't know which weighs less but will
assume they are close to the same. If I recall properly, the airfoil used
in the CJ6A has less induced drag under high-lift conditions (hard pull).
This favors the CJ6A. The CJ6A has the lower overall Cd.
>
> Given all this, I would assume that the CJ6A will have better vertical
penetration from full-power level flight, as in the side-by-side pass just
before someone calls, "fight's on!" This gives the CJ6A the energy
advantage during the entire fight.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
> http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
> +1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
>
> There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
> A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Chinese fire drill |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Terry Calloway" <TCalloway@datatechnique.com>
Nope, Walt was. I have the video of our break to land from number 4 to
prove it. :)
It goes to show just how fast 5 planes and a lot of ramp can really not
always be the compatible.
Pumper
>>> radialpower@cox.net 4/30/2004 9:41:09 PM >>>
--> Yak-List message posted by: Barry Hancock < radialpower@cox.net >
> no...as in Alabama..Selma ID SEM has ILS..ramp the size of Texas
Yeah, and a flight of 5 CJ's and a Yak used ALL OF IT a couple years
ago. TC, weren't you flight lead? :)
Barry
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "bowjfold" <bowjf@swbell.net>
Mark,
I forgot to ask if the Yak 18T we spoke about yesterday is of Hungarian
registry or ??? Also, I assume it has the standard Russian avionics.
Please advise.
Will there be someone in your shop who can install the rivets in the
compressor drive shaft flange on Saturday, May 15th? If not, how late will
someone who can do the job be there on Friday the 14th or Monday the 17th?
Thanks,
Jim Bowerman
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Mark Jefferies
YAK UK Ltd (by way of Matt Dralle <nospam@matronics.com>)
Subject: Yak-List: http://www.yakuk.com/YAK-52TDPictures.asp
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Jefferies YAK UK Ltd" <mark@yakuk.com>
(by way of Matt Dralle <nospam@matronics.com>)
Last week I took the YAK-52 TD for its first flights, pictures at
<http://www.yakuk.com/YAK-52TDPictures.asp>http://www.yakuk.com/YAK-52TDPict
ures.asp
d81ecf1.gif
Best regards<http://www.yakuk.com>
d81ecf1.jpg
d81ed01.gif
<http://www.yakuk.com/airdisplays.asp>Mark Jefferies
<http://www.yakuk.com>YAK UK Ltd <http://www.yakuk.com/cob.doc>Conditions
of business
Lt Gransden Airfield
Sandy, Beds, SG19 3BP
United Kingdom.
d81ed10.gif
Phone:
Fax:
Mobile: +44 (0)1767 651 156
+44 (0)1767 651 157
+44 (0)7785 538 317
d81ecf1.gif
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
Ernie wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
>
> No I meant velocity vector. If you are flying straight and level then pull
> hard, the plane will want to continue in a straight line, thats the velocity
> vector at that instance, even though the AOA and subsequent lift vector has
> changed. If you look at the HUD of any fighter jet, you'll see a little
> bubble that goes up and down from the middle of the AI. Thats the velocity
> vector indicator, it tells you the vector of the airplanes travel regardless
> of aircraft orientation. In straight and level flight it will be lined up
> with the horizon line, if you pull up, it will drift down momentarily, if
> you push, you'll see it drift up. Ever notice an F-16 at the bottom of a
> loop near the gound how it keeps travelling down even though the pilot is
> pulling up? Thats the mush I was talking about. I figured a plane with less
> much has more energy for the vertical.
Well, the velocity vector is where the center of mass of the airplane is going
and, yes, it may be different from the longitudinal axis of the airplane.
But for our discussion we are more interested in acceleration which tells us where
we will be going, not where we are going. I already know that, when I pull,
I am not going to be going where my instantaneous velocity vector tells me
I am going because I am accelerating perpendicular to my velocity vector. At
some time in the not-to-distant future my velocity vector will be vertical. So
in this case I am much more interested in how my acceleration is going to change
my velocity vector, not what my velocity is right now.
Where your VV gets more interesting is when you are thinking about weapons release.
The VV at the moment of release is the initial VV that your iron bombs have
and determines their trajectory.
> I learned about this when flying an F-16 SIM at Eglin AFB in Feb.
Yeah, it is interesting but I am not sure how it applies here.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar@gte.net>
Jim,
If you can't find someone to install the rivets, check with Carl Hays. He
usually stocks new compressor sheer couplings. I bought one about 6-8
months ago from him for $75. Clearly it was the least expensive way to go
and the quickest way to get back in the air.
Regards,
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "bowjfold" <bowjf@swbell.net>
Subject: RE: Yak-List: http://www.yakuk.com/YAK-52TDPictures.asp
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "bowjfold" <bowjf@swbell.net>
>
> Mark,
>
> I forgot to ask if the Yak 18T we spoke about yesterday is of Hungarian
> registry or ??? Also, I assume it has the standard Russian avionics.
> Please advise.
>
> Will there be someone in your shop who can install the rivets in the
> compressor drive shaft flange on Saturday, May 15th? If not, how late
will
> someone who can do the job be there on Friday the 14th or Monday the 17th?
>
> Thanks,
> Jim Bowerman
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Mark Jefferies
> YAK UK Ltd (by way of Matt Dralle <nospam@matronics.com>)
> To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Yak-List: http://www.yakuk.com/YAK-52TDPictures.asp
>
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Mark Jefferies YAK UK Ltd"
<mark@yakuk.com>
> (by way of Matt Dralle <nospam@matronics.com>)
>
> Last week I took the YAK-52 TD for its first flights, pictures at
>
<http://www.yakuk.com/YAK-52TDPictures.asp>http://www.yakuk.com/YAK-52TDPict
> ures.asp
>
> d81ecf1.gif
>
>
> Best regards<http://www.yakuk.com>
> d81ecf1.jpg
>
> d81ed01.gif
>
> <http://www.yakuk.com/airdisplays.asp>Mark Jefferies
> <http://www.yakuk.com>YAK UK Ltd <http://www.yakuk.com/cob.doc>Conditions
> of business
> Lt Gransden Airfield
> Sandy, Beds, SG19 3BP
> United Kingdom.
> d81ed10.gif
> Phone:
> Fax:
> Mobile: +44 (0)1767 651 156
> +44 (0)1767 651 157
> +44 (0)7785 538 317
> d81ecf1.gif
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: BFM Training |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
Ernie
One of the guys at Moontown in AL is also an ex F4 and F5 aggressor driver.
He's got a Yak 55. Maybe we could get him to join in....
Jay
> From: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
> Reply-To: yak-list@matronics.com
> Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 08:40:57 -0400
> To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Yak-List: BFM Training
>
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
>
> I'd really like to get some BFM training here inthe SE. I have an ex AF
> F-4/F-16 and T-38 IP driver at my disposal, all we need is another REAL
> fighter pilot, and we could get some cool training.
>
> I'd rather not go up and get into a furball unless I had real military IP's in
> the back seats of both airplanes. So for us SE guys lets try to put something
> together.
>
> Ernie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "DaBear" <dabear@damned.org>
>
> Given all this, I would assume that the CJ6A will have better vertical
penetration from full-power level flight, as in the side-by-side pass just
before someone calls, "fight's on!" This gives the CJ6A the energy
advantage during the entire fight.
I believe it gives the CJ6A the energy advantage during the merge. After
that, it does depend on which pilot makes the fewest mistakes.
Al
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
DaBear wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "DaBear" <dabear@damned.org>
>
>
>>Given all this, I would assume that the CJ6A will have better vertical
>
> penetration from full-power level flight, as in the side-by-side pass just
> before someone calls, "fight's on!" This gives the CJ6A the energy
> advantage during the entire fight.
>
> I believe it gives the CJ6A the energy advantage during the merge. After
> that, it does depend on which pilot makes the fewest mistakes.
I didn't say that the CJ6A driver would win, only that he will have the energy
advantage. As they say, it's all yours to screw up. Yes, and it is your energy
to give away.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: BFM Training |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Bill Halverson <william@netpros.net>
Ah ha!
Another YAK-55 driver ... well, make sure you get a handicap out of him
'cause otherwise you'll have a frustrating time staying with him through
the maneuvers ...
Bill Halverson
YAK-55
At 04:29 AM 5/1/2004, Jay Land wrote:
>--> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
>
>Ernie
>
>One of the guys at Moontown in AL is also an ex F4 and F5 aggressor driver.
>He's got a Yak 55. Maybe we could get him to join in....
>
>Jay
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: BFM Training |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "A. Dennis Savarese" <adsavar@gte.net>
I believe the person at Moontown is Gordie Suell who owns a YAK 52, not a
55.
Regards,
Dennis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Halverson" <william@netpros.net>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: BFM Training
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Bill Halverson <william@netpros.net>
>
>
> Ah ha!
>
> Another YAK-55 driver ... well, make sure you get a handicap out of him
> 'cause otherwise you'll have a frustrating time staying with him through
> the maneuvers ...
>
> Bill Halverson
> YAK-55
>
>
> At 04:29 AM 5/1/2004, Jay Land wrote:
> >--> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
> >
> >Ernie
> >
> >One of the guys at Moontown in AL is also an ex F4 and F5 aggressor
driver.
> >He's got a Yak 55. Maybe we could get him to join in....
> >
> >Jay
>
>
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
I just figured that the more energy a particular aiplane expends in the VV
the less it has left to go up. You were comparing 2 different airplanes. I
thought that this may have had a bearing, where the plane that can change
direction the quickest, would be utitlizing that energy in the vertical
rather than fighting momentum.
Just a thought.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl@lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: Vertical penetration (was: Musings)
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
>
> Ernie wrote:
>
> > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
> >
> > No I meant velocity vector. If you are flying straight and level then
pull
> > hard, the plane will want to continue in a straight line, thats the
velocity
> > vector at that instance, even though the AOA and subsequent lift vector
has
> > changed. If you look at the HUD of any fighter jet, you'll see a little
> > bubble that goes up and down from the middle of the AI. Thats the
velocity
> > vector indicator, it tells you the vector of the airplanes travel
regardless
> > of aircraft orientation. In straight and level flight it will be lined
up
> > with the horizon line, if you pull up, it will drift down momentarily,
if
> > you push, you'll see it drift up. Ever notice an F-16 at the bottom of a
> > loop near the gound how it keeps travelling down even though the pilot
is
> > pulling up? Thats the mush I was talking about. I figured a plane with
less
> > much has more energy for the vertical.
>
> Well, the velocity vector is where the center of mass of the airplane is
going and, yes, it may be different from the longitudinal axis of the
airplane.
>
> But for our discussion we are more interested in acceleration which tells
us where we will be going, not where we are going. I already know that,
when I pull, I am not going to be going where my instantaneous velocity
vector tells me I am going because I am accelerating perpendicular to my
velocity vector. At some time in the not-to-distant future my velocity
vector will be vertical. So in this case I am much more interested in how
my acceleration is going to change my velocity vector, not what my velocity
is right now.
>
> Where your VV gets more interesting is when you are thinking about weapons
release. The VV at the moment of release is the initial VV that your iron
bombs have and determines their trajectory.
>
> > I learned about this when flying an F-16 SIM at Eglin AFB in Feb.
>
> Yeah, it is interesting but I am not sure how it applies here.
>
> --
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
> http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
> +1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
>
> There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
> A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
>
>
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: BFM Training |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
Cool,, lets see if we can coordinate a time.
Ernie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay Land" <jland@popeandland.com>
Subject: Re: Yak-List: BFM Training
> --> Yak-List message posted by: Jay Land <jland@popeandland.com>
>
> Ernie
>
> One of the guys at Moontown in AL is also an ex F4 and F5 aggressor
driver.
> He's got a Yak 55. Maybe we could get him to join in....
>
> Jay
>
> > From: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
> > Reply-To: yak-list@matronics.com
> > Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 08:40:57 -0400
> > To: <yak-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: Yak-List: BFM Training
> >
> > --> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
> >
> > I'd really like to get some BFM training here inthe SE. I have an ex AF
> > F-4/F-16 and T-38 IP driver at my disposal, all we need is another REAL
> > fighter pilot, and we could get some cool training.
> >
> > I'd rather not go up and get into a furball unless I had real military
IP's in
> > the back seats of both airplanes. So for us SE guys lets try to put
something
> > together.
> >
> > Ernie
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | ACM Clinic in SE - Selma AL |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Shane Golden <scgsmg@direcway.com>
How about Friday October 22nd - Sunday October 24th with a Thursday
arrival date? Selma AL sounds great. How many instructors out there
would be willing to assist?
Scott, would you be willing to host?
Anyone interested please let me know off list.
Shane Golden
scgsmg@direcway.com
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Vertical penetration (was: Musings) |
--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
Ernie wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Ernie" <ernest.martinez@oracle.com>
>
> I just figured that the more energy a particular airplane expends in the VV
> the less it has left to go up. You were comparing 2 different airplanes. I
> thought that this may have had a bearing, where the plane that can change
> direction the quickest, would be utilizing that energy in the vertical
> rather than fighting momentum.
Well, you do have to look at the lift/drag curve for the wing at different loadings
and angles of attack. But I doubt the differences are that great for the
airfoils and speeds we are talking about here. (But I admit I am guessing and
invite correction.) I suspect that wing loading and aspect ratio have more
to do with it.
So from where I stand, weight (mass) and induced drag are the issue. If the wing
can generate the required lift at a lower AoA it is going to bleed less energy
in the pull. Make the airplane light.
The rate at which you can deflect the flight path of the aircraft is acceleration.
The formula is A = F/M (acceleration is force divided by mass). The available
force from the wing is a function of airspeed, AoA, and wing area. As
you increase the AoA or the airspeed at the same AoA the wing produces more force
up until you reach the critical AoA.
Also, high-aspect-ratio wings produce more lift at a given AoA and therefore generate
less induced drag. Ever watch a glider doing aerobatics? They lose very
little energy in the pull. On the other end of the spectrum are aircraft like
the F4 Phantom II and the delta winged fighters. Those suckers bleed energy
in the pull like there's no tomorrow. The Phantom made up for it with thrust
to put the energy back but friends who flew it tell me it ran out of energy
rather quickly in a turning (pulling) fight. (Turning and pulling vertical are
the same thing.) Delta wings are notorious for huge drag at high AoA. That
is why they try to keep the airspeed high so the induced drag will be as low
as possible. That is one of the reasons the F-15 has such a huge wing. More
lift at lower AoA and at lower airspeeds. Oh, and it has lots of thrust to get
back what it does bleed off.
For us the magic part is the M (mass). If you reduce the mass you can achieve
the same acceleration with less force. The wing isn't "working" quite so hard
so pulling X number of Gs will happen at a lower AoA. Lower AoA means lower
induced drag, less "mushing", and less energy loss.
So you want your airplane to have better vertical penetration and less energy loss
in a pull? Get rid of weight (mass really) and increase thrust.
Just to get this straight, I am not running down the yak-52. I would rather have
a Yak-52 for doing aerobatics. But I don't think it will fare as well as the
CJ6A in ACM. It can roll faster but I doubt it can force disengagement. It
will be slower, it will have poorer vertical penetration, and it will bleed
energy as fast or faster in a turning fight. Now that doesn't mean that there
won't be some waxed asses in CJ's but all else being equal ...
Sorry for rambling on so. This was kind of a stream of consciousness thing.
--
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
http://www.lloyd.com St. Thomas, VI 00802
+1.340.998.9447 (voice) +1.360.838.9669 (fax)
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest.
A good citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ACM Clinic in SE - Selma AL |
--> Yak-List message posted by: "Terry Calloway" <TCalloway@datatechnique.com>
Sounds good to me.
tc
>>> scgsmg@direcway.com 5/1/2004 3:39:40 PM >>>
--> Yak-List message posted by: Shane Golden < scgsmg@direcway.com >
How about Friday October 22nd - Sunday October 24th with a Thursday
arrival date? Selma AL sounds great. How many instructors out there
would be willing to assist?
Scott, would you be willing to host?
Anyone interested please let me know off list.
Shane Golden
scgsmg@direcway.com
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|