F16 Dead Stick Landing
Discussion
bobthemonkey said:
Mojocvh said:
EPU-running a monofuel that generates it's own oxygen as it burns, APU's are generally regarded as AIR breathing.
EPU's running monofuels have highly toxic exhaust gas components, the rule is get upwind and stay there.
A monofuel leak, on aircraft, is a very nasty affair indeed.
Last time I saw one was on a Canberra PR9 [at Bodo a long time ago] luckily the amount of monofuel (AVPIN) in the engine starting system is/was comparatively small. However the bloke that got more than a face full wasn't the happiest of chaps......especially as the deluge system was frozen over, he still went in it though, head first to break the ice.
Pretty sue the F16 is worse in that it uses hydrazine, which isn't exactly pleasant stuff!
We had to practise Hydrazine/EPU operation drills at VAS Laarbruch, yes, your not wrong.EPU's running monofuels have highly toxic exhaust gas components, the rule is get upwind and stay there.
A monofuel leak, on aircraft, is a very nasty affair indeed.
Last time I saw one was on a Canberra PR9 [at Bodo a long time ago] luckily the amount of monofuel (AVPIN) in the engine starting system is/was comparatively small. However the bloke that got more than a face full wasn't the happiest of chaps......especially as the deluge system was frozen over, he still went in it though, head first to break the ice.
Pretty sue the F16 is worse in that it uses hydrazine, which isn't exactly pleasant stuff!
aagh!
Edited by Mojocvh on Wednesday 27th April 22:20
Eric Mc said:
Would a Totnado be unflyable without FBW?
Tornado has fly by wire (CSAS) as it's primary controls and 'mech mode' as a back up. Mech mode uses conventional rods and linkages to put inputs into the control actuators.If you look at the curved black line on the side of the fuselage in front of the tailerons, these are used on a see off to give positions of the controls in mech mode and fly by wire.
chuntington101 said:
hmmmm these mono fuels sound intresting. are there any non-to-hazardus ones?
Nothing in common usage; something which burns on its own without any extra oxygen is going to be b y its very nature a bit of a basterd to handle!That being that, there is a development programme underway for a substance called NOFBX (technically a premixed bipropellent, I suppose) which is non toxic and made to the same standards of handling as US non nuclear munitions. YOu still wouldn't want it in your house, but there are worse things around!
The really, really nasty stuff in this group are hypergolic bipropellants like UMDH. Two, highly toxic and carcinogenic substances that spontaneously combust when mixed without ignition.
eccles said:
Eric Mc said:
Would a Totnado be unflyable without FBW?
Tornado has fly by wire (CSAS) as it's primary controls and 'mech mode' as a back up. Mech mode uses conventional rods and linkages to put inputs into the control actuators.If you look at the curved black line on the side of the fuselage in front of the tailerons, these are used on a see off to give positions of the controls in mech mode and fly by wire.
There is no advantage in having a Tornado inherently unstable is it was designed primarilly as a ground attack aircraft. Agile fighters are designed from the outset to be unstable with the active FBW system rendering them stable.
Therefore, if the FBW fails, they become unconrollable.
Simpo Two said:
I suppose a little propeller that pops out when everything goes 'phut' would be far too boring and analogue a solution?
Many do (eg the Hawk), it's called a RAT (Ram Air Turbine).If you ever watch a Hawk post shut down, the pilot will stir the controls to deplete residual hydraulic pressure. As this occurs the RAT will deploy through the a/cs upper spine.
Nice info about the Hydrazin, I did not know that it was used in emergency generators.
It´s about the only additive forbidden in a nitromethane (Top Fuel) dragster engine,
the other "no-no" being propylene oxide.
Both were used in the wild wild 60s/70s but lead to V8 engines not only blowing apart on the strip,
but also in the pits when not running (and the fuel had to be drained into sponges to avoid drippings, I heard).
It´s about the only additive forbidden in a nitromethane (Top Fuel) dragster engine,
the other "no-no" being propylene oxide.
Both were used in the wild wild 60s/70s but lead to V8 engines not only blowing apart on the strip,
but also in the pits when not running (and the fuel had to be drained into sponges to avoid drippings, I heard).
Eric Mc said:
eccles said:
Eric Mc said:
Would a Totnado be unflyable without FBW?
Tornado has fly by wire (CSAS) as it's primary controls and 'mech mode' as a back up. Mech mode uses conventional rods and linkages to put inputs into the control actuators.If you look at the curved black line on the side of the fuselage in front of the tailerons, these are used on a see off to give positions of the controls in mech mode and fly by wire.
] the pilot said something along the lines of "I'm not really flying this jet" to the WSO who, give him his due, didn't immediately grab the yellow/black thingy between his legs. When the green light was pressed [literally over the threshold markings] the aircraft seemed to give a visible shudder and started flying "properly".bobthemonkey said:
Nothing in common usage; something which burns on its own without any extra oxygen is going to be b y its very nature a bit of a basterd to handle!
That being that, there is a development programme underway for a substance called NOFBX (technically a premixed bipropellent, I suppose) which is non toxic and made to the same standards of handling as US non nuclear munitions. YOu still wouldn't want it in your house, but there are worse things around!
The really, really nasty stuff in this group are hypergolic bipropellants like UMDH. Two, highly toxic and carcinogenic substances that spontaneously combust when mixed without ignition.
Thanks for the info. Thinking about it i guess if you are to have something that can burn on its own even in a sealed container isn't the best idea in the world! lol So will these fuels run totally without o2 present? thats very impreseive and makes Nitromethane powered dragsters look like childs play! lolThat being that, there is a development programme underway for a substance called NOFBX (technically a premixed bipropellent, I suppose) which is non toxic and made to the same standards of handling as US non nuclear munitions. YOu still wouldn't want it in your house, but there are worse things around!
The really, really nasty stuff in this group are hypergolic bipropellants like UMDH. Two, highly toxic and carcinogenic substances that spontaneously combust when mixed without ignition.
Chris.
Mojocvh said:
Eric Mc said:
eccles said:
Eric Mc said:
Would a Totnado be unflyable without FBW?
Tornado has fly by wire (CSAS) as it's primary controls and 'mech mode' as a back up. Mech mode uses conventional rods and linkages to put inputs into the control actuators.If you look at the curved black line on the side of the fuselage in front of the tailerons, these are used on a see off to give positions of the controls in mech mode and fly by wire.
] the pilot said something along the lines of "I'm not really flying this jet" to the WSO who, give him his due, didn't immediately grab the yellow/black thingy between his legs. When the green light was pressed [literally over the threshold markings] the aircraft seemed to give a visible shudder and started flying "properly".That F16 state 2 recovery showed great control and calmness! Very impressive.
Anyway, CSAS you laters, TFR to bar, No SPILS.
Edited by PaulG40 on Thursday 28th April 09:30
eccles said:
I seem to recall the Tornado was the first RAF aircraft to have it's own book just for the acronyms.
If you really want death by acronym get involved with the Apache! It make the Tonka look simple!
Pah, the Navy have the 9LC which stands for 9 Letter Committee, which is short for an acronym of nine letters.If you really want death by acronym get involved with the Apache! It make the Tonka look simple!
They also have a 7LC.
Eric Mc said:
Tornado isn't really FBW though, is it?
I know a member of the team who wrote they FCC software way back when... he would disagree with you..However if what you meant was the Tornado is a inherantly stable design as opposed to the F-16 which would have the flight profile of a napkin in the wind should the FCC fail, you would be correct.
EFA: seems you beat me to it...
jimbobsimmonds said:
Eric Mc said:
Tornado isn't really FBW though, is it?
I know a member of the team who wrote they FCC software way back when... he would disagree with you..However if what you meant was the Tornado is a inherantly stable design as opposed to the F-16 which would have the flight profile of a napkin in the wind should the FCC fail, you would be correct.
EFA: seems you beat me to it...
I'll rephrase what I really meant. The F-16 was the first fighter aircraft designed to be unstable WITHOUT digital fly by wire to allow it to remain airworthy and controllable.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff