F-16 Landing (for all you pilots out there)

unbasslichkeit · #1 08-13-2008, 07:54 AM

Don't know if this has been posted before, but it is extremely impressive:

http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/SUPERGT/3384

Relic · #2 08-13-2008, 08:01 AM

very impressive. The calm maintained during the whole thing is amazing

Barkless Dog · #3 08-13-2008, 08:08 AM

I was always under the impression that with an engine failure a jet pretty much drops like a rock and can't really glide?

Relic · #4 08-13-2008, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barkless Dog

I was always under the impression that with an engine failure a jet pretty much drops like a rock and can't really glide?

I think it depends a lot on airspeed and/or altitude.

wld3 · #5 08-13-2008, 08:17 AM

Very cool.

Depth_Charge · #6 08-13-2008, 08:22 AM

That pilot has an excellent ability to cope under pressure!! His breathing on final approach to calm down and prepare for the landing speaks volumes for his true feelings of the situaiton I think...

Thanks for sharing the video.

Georynn · #7 08-13-2008, 08:35 AM

Major pucker factor.

RWP · #8 08-13-2008, 08:39 AM

He made that look so easy. Great job.

bmc · #9 08-13-2008, 08:49 AM

Every airplane has an optimum glide speed that takes it the maximum distance. The F-16, and most high speed aircraft, do not have a lot of wing. More wing = more drag. Drag isn't good if you need to go fast.

If he's high enough and chugging along at a good clip, he'll go a fair distance just slowing down. From there on in, he's looking for 2,000+ feet of tarmac. There are a lot of airports on the USA. I'm fairly sure he could have been within a number of airfields to deadstick his airplane to.

Despite pulling it off really well, I'm sure he was pulling his seat cushion when he came to a stop.

**john turner** · #10 08-13-2008, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barkless Dog

I was always under the impression that with an engine failure a jet pretty much drops like a rock and can't really glide?

only planes with an aerodynamic center, (the point where all the lift acting upon the plane is centered, creating no moment, or tendancy to turn) that is greatly behind or ahead of the center of mass will be aerodynamically unstable and unable to glide. the location of the aerodynamic center is a function of airspeed along with the wing geometry and angle of attack, while the com is a constant based on the plane construction.

in simple terms this means that increasing the wing's angle of attack (i.e. nose up) will help keep the aero center near the COM, and will keep the plane from losing control, given that the wing stays below the critical angle of attack, above which stalling is a danger. most planes are structurally able to maintain stable flight across a broad spectrum of conditions.

there are planes that require active control surfaces to stay aloft regardless of airspeed - the x-29 was one...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-29

it required constant corrections to the control surfaces (ie wings) to maintain stable flight - up to 40 a second - they called this "fly by wire" control. still, it's configuration enabled it to stay maneuverable with angles of attack over 60 degrees in some situations, if i remember, over three times what most wing configs have as their critical aoa. that meant, among other things, iirc, this plane was able to actually "dogfight" at supersonic speeds. unfortunately (for those of us who dig alien-looking fighterplanes heh) the expansion of air-to-air missile technology pretty much invalidated the style of dogfighting that the x29 would have excelled at, and the required amount of computational correction just to keep the plane up made it an unattractive option.

iirc, the yf23 (which lost out to the yf-22/ f22 lockheed raptor ) used a lot of this technology but in a diamond wing config.

granted, it's been a long time since i was an aerospace engineer

but that's what i remember - i was a hardcore junkie for this stuff when i was in college in the 80's.

FL Knifemaker · #11 08-13-2008, 09:26 AM

Using flaps with no thrust must be scary. No flaps, and it's easy overshoot the runway with no second chance.

Landing Jets with my RC Sim software deadstick isn't easy. I could understand the guys stress level in landing the real thing.

Barkless Dog · #12 08-13-2008, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by john turner

only planes with an aerodynamic center, (the point where all the lift acting upon the plane is centered, creating no moment, or tendancy to turn) that is greatly behind or ahead of the center of mass will be aerodynamically unstable and unable to glide. the location of the aerodynamic center is a function of airspeed along with the wing geometry and angle of attack, while the com is a constant based on the plane construction.

in simple terms this means that increasing the wing's angle of attack (i.e. nose up) will help keep the aero center near the COM, and will keep the plane from losing control, given that the wing stays below the critical angle of attack, above which stalling is a danger. most planes are structurally able to maintain stable flight across a broad spectrum of conditions.

there are planes that require active control surfaces to stay aloft regardless of airspeed - the x-29 was one...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-29

it required constant corrections to the control surfaces (ie wings) to maintain stable flight - up to 40 a second - they called this "fly by wire" control. still, it's configuration enabled it to stay maneuverable with angles of attack over 60 degrees in some situations, if i remember, over three times what most wing configs have as their critical aoa. that meant, among other things, iirc, this plane was able to actually "dogfight" at supersonic speeds. unfortunately (for those of us who dig alien-looking fighterplanes heh) the expansion of air-to-air missile technology pretty much invalidated the style of dogfighting that the x29 would have excelled at, and the required amount of computational correction just to keep the plane up made it an unattractive option.

iirc, the yf23 (which lost out to the yf-22/ f22 lockheed raptor ) used a lot of this technology but in a diamond wing config.

granted, it's been a long time since i was an aerospace engineer

but that's what i remember - i was a hardcore junkie for this stuff when i was in college in the 80's.

Good thing he was not flying a StarFighter!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hBJW...eature=related

NJL · #13 08-13-2008, 09:56 AM

great find!!

msquared · #14 08-13-2008, 12:38 PM

That was awesome, thanks for posting.

bmc · #15 08-13-2008, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FL Knifemaker

Using flaps with no thrust must be scary. No flaps, and it's easy overshoot the runway with no second chance.

Landing Jets with my RC Sim software deadstick isn't easy. I could understand the guys stress level in landing the real thing.

I think the F-16 has speed brakes.

Relic · #16 08-13-2008, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barkless Dog

Good thing he was not flying a StarFighter!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hBJW...eature=related

I swear to god I thought the same thing!

I still love those 104's though

Bob Lee (QSC) · #17 08-13-2008, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Depth_Charge

That pilot has an excellent ability to cope under pressure!! His breathing on final approach to calm down and prepare for the landing speaks volumes for his true feelings of the situaiton I think...

Thanks for sharing the video.

Controlling one's breathing is often an effective physiological way of improving how one handles an emergency situation. In for four, hold for four, out for four, hold for four, in for four, etc.

It is an impressive video.

MoD_Scotty · #18 08-13-2008, 01:29 PM

Actually, the F-16 is extremely unstable, but thanks to triple redundant flight control computers, it is flyable. Even though his engine was out, he still had power and the computer was still making corrections the whole time. If he would have lost all power, that plane would have definitely not made it to a runway. Still an excellent job on the part of the pilot. That kind of situation is certainly a true test of a pilot's mettle.

FL Knifemaker · #19 08-13-2008, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmc

I think the F-16 has speed brakes.

Split flaps or speed brakes.........It's still nice to have some thrust on tap to balance them out

I'm pretty sure they have a drag chute as well for short landings.

I wish I could post videos from RealFlight. You guys might enjoy my attempts at dead stick landings in the F15 and 16. I've killed many pilots

Relic · #20 08-13-2008, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoD_Scotty

Actually, the F-16 is extremely unstable, but thanks to triple redundant flight control computers, it is flyable. Even though his engine was out, he still had power and the computer was still making corrections the whole time. If he would have lost all power, that plane would have definitely not made it to a runway. Still an excellent job on the part of the pilot. That kind of situation is certainly a true test of a pilot's mettle.

isn't this true of most modern fighter aircraft? I recall reading that that same "instability" also makes an airframe more maneuverable.