I remember a 747 on a flight from Tokyo to the US getting in a dive due to clear air turbulence and slightly exceeding Mach 1 then being brought under control by the pilots and landing safely, was it fifteen years ago or twenty? It was seriously damaged and thought to have sustained nearly 10 g IIRC. I would imagine that a B-52 wouldn't reach 15 g even for a moment because it would loose its wings.
Shenyang FC-31 / J-31 Fighter Demonstrator
- Thread starter RedSky
- Start date
- Status
That is because two vortices from the wing tip and the outside of the flap are seen interacting. This will disappear when you retract the flaps. But we have only photographs from the aircraft flying at low speed and so at high angle of attack and with deployed flaps.
ladioussupp
Junior Member
The B-52 would enter an accellerated stall long before that, and yes it would shed its wings long before 15gs, more reason the fan boys shouldn't write things about which they know nothing. LOL!
Now you shall know the Vini_Vidi_Vici not only knows nothing of China military . But any military stuff!!
"(If you're crazy enough, even B52 can pull 15G-20G)"
That guy is ruining this forum. I am so sick of his post that I don't even bother to rebuke any of his nonsense recently.
Last edited:
Well Lion, I like Vini, and I'm sure some folks might have thought the same of me before some kindly gentlemen on this forum took me under their wing. I am a fan boy myself in the sense that my loyalties are not always informed by knowledge, but sometimes our desire to defend what we hold prescious and important. I respect you gentlemen and your informed opinions, but I more appreciatte your friendship. I don't know about you, but I delete half of my own posts after I think about how they could be missinterpreted by my friends on here. I am 56, going on 14 some days, but I'm trying to pay attention and learn. For what it is worth, I don't just take anybodys word for what is true, and some days I see that perspective is helpfull for us all. Have a good day and don't take all this fanboy stuff to heart, I have a Great and Profound respect for all my brothers here on Sino Defense, and your kind words and consideration are always apprectiated, your honest critisism may sting sometimes, but I do take every word to heart. Now back to the J-31, I am really looking forward to seeing how she does, and I am excited to see what I believe may be a very serious A2A bird, that looks like it could well become a naval aircraft, thanks to you guys for sharing all your insight. AFB
Vini_Vidi_Vici
Junior Member
That's exactly what I'm talking about. Any planes can reach high G's, but most cannot be controlled or sustained for long duration; just like you have mentioned, losing a wing or even disintegrating. Agile warplanes are like F1 cars, the high G can be maintained for a long time and during that time, the vehicle can still be precisely controlled. Cargo planes and bombers are like your average honda civic, you might pull a high g, but you probably will end up either rolling over or spin from over-steer.
To answer your questions, pulling a 15G maneuver on an airplane is not that hard (speaking as an amateur hobby pilot myself, of course never reaching that number). All you have to do is go into a dive, picking up speed and then bank to the side. The lateral G's would be insanely high. This can easily make any planes reach high G's, just that some might not survive. Just look at Red Bull air races, those are propeller planes and even they could reach 11-12G's.
But the bottomline is that the point I was making was not whether if B52 could pull 15-20G's, but clarifying that high G number doesn't necessarily equal to high agility. It's controllable high G maneuvers that truly matters.
You guys are simply missing my point here.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
Terrible analogy.. honda civics actually has pretty good maneuverbility.. if you want to use car analogies I think a Buick would be a better representation of the planes you are refering to.
Well Mr. Amatuer Hobby Pilot, I guess for the purpose of establishing your credentials, what country has issued your license, and how many hours and in what types/types of aircraft? I suggest you read the NTSB report of China Airlines Flight 006, which I just finished re/reading, and master delft that was nearly 28 years ago. It is quite revealing, the NTSB simply states that the aircraft exceeded 5gs, I doubt seriously that it actually approached 10gs, and I can certainly assure you that pulling 15gs on most aircraft is impossible, and had 006 exceeded Mach 1 or 10gs they would most certainly all be dead.
006 had an engine anamoly, where #4 failed to spool up after thrust had been reduced by the autothrottles, the FE misidentified it as an engine failure, the Captain ordered him to restart, but the Captain did NOT disengage the autopilot, and assume control of the aircraft himself as the POH and airline policy directs, but disengaged the altitude hold and directed the autopilot to descend the aircraft. His failure to assume manual control of the aircraft, allowed the autopilot to lose control of the aircraft as it rolled to the right and the nose of the aircraft fell through the horizon and as the aircraft rolled inverted, his pulling aft on the yoke actually pulled the nose of the aircraft down toward vertical, before the aircraft rolled back upright quite by chance. At no time did the Captain apply left rudder to compensate for the assymetric thrust condition of the aircraft, had he disengaged the auto pilot as POH instructs, and assumed control of the aircraft, he would have recognized that he was losing control of the aircraft and applied left rudder to hold his heading.
This over reliance on the autopilot would have and should have resulted in the loss of this aircraft, I would state that God in his mercy spared this crew and passengers certain death. As the aircraft fell out of the bottom of the clouds around 11,000 ft, the Captain was able to regain control of the aircraft about 9500 ft. As it was the aircraft had been severly overstressed and lost the outboard horizontal stabs and outboard elevators, if this had been brand X, they would have ALL been dead. This is in reality a very similar incident to Air France 447, off the coast of Brazil and we all know how that turned out.
So Vini, I'm happy to meet another pilot here on Sino Defense, but your G theories are innaccurate, but more importantly your observations about the Shenyang F-60/J-31 are also inaccurate, and I'm beginning to believe that you may be the Little Brother of another famous aeronaut here on Sino Defense! Perhaps you will allow us to straighten you up, so that you might "fly right"? let us hope, because you do display a good bit of desire, but please resist the temptation to prove to yourself and any other unsuspecting victims that pulling 15gs is easy, or we'll all be sending flowers to Vancouver!
I certainly did NOT misunderstand you, I corrected your misunderstanding, and the ability of a fighter aircraft to sustain between 7 to 9.5gs most certainly does mean it is highly manueverable, as I stated the F-35A has a design load limit of +9gs, it has "HIT" 9.9 positive gs momentarily, it is highly manueverable, but not a Raptor, the Raptor will maintain a 9.5 positive g loading, which is higher than any other manned aircraft to date, and is at the Pilots upper limit! The F-60 will certainly be in this neighborhood in order to be classified as a fifth generation aircraft. Cheers AFB
- Status