GIB effect on maneuverability

[Ucar]

Would one of the members who have hands on experience care to explain sciantifically the significance of the addition of a second crew member to an airplane in terms of its efects on maneuverability ? An analysis between F-16C and D would be almost perfect.

Pilots and engineers comments with regards to effects on G-envelope would be much appreciated.

[wabpilot]

Would one of the members who have hands on experience care to explain sciantifically the significance of the addition of a second crew member to an airplane in terms of its efects on maneuverability ? An analysis between F-16C and D would be almost perfect.

Pilots and engineers comments with regards to effects on G-envelope would be much appreciated.

There is no meaningful difference.

[gunnut]

There probably was a difference way back in the WW2 era or before. Back then planes were tiny. Power was hard to come by. Adding a 2nd crew member and the associated gear would certainly take away a good portion of the payload. Then you have to add a 2nd engine to make up the difference. Prop engines have to be mounted on the wings (Arado 335 was the exception, and an ingeneous solution). Putting engines on the wings would certainly decrease your roll rate. The thrust are not centerlined. There were no electronics to fine tune the engine. Everything was flying by the seat of your pants.

Nowadays we have much more power to work with. Metallurgy has improved so we can make bigger and bigger planes. Jet engines can be mounted very close to the centerline of the plane to decrease the effect of thrust off the center and improve roll rate. We have electronic gadgets to allow the design of inherently unstable platforms and correct the flaw in flight that is humanly impossible to do. F-16 is so agile because it's completely unstable. All planes designed before that were inherently stable. Stable platforms are bad for manuverablility.

I know, I know, I'm windbag...

[glyn]

There probably was a difference way back in the WW2 era or before. Back then planes were tiny.

The P-61 was bloody massive!


All planes designed before that were inherently stable. Stable platforms are bad for manuverablility.

Have we forgotten the Sopwith Camel?

I know, I know, I'm windbag...

Surely not. Perish the thought

[gunnut]

P-61 was the size of German and Japanese bombers in WW2, with about the same manuverability.

Sopwith Camel was definitely a handful, but the design principle was still the same. Its center of mass was in front of the wing. The wing provided lift, and the tail used the wing as a pivot to counteract the weight in the front. Its inherent instability came from a very compact nose and the huge angular momentum generated from the engine that's very close to the center of mass.

If I remember correctly, the Camel had a tendency to rise when rolling to the left and dive when rolling to the right. A good pilot would use that to his advantage. A bad pilot fought that and then got shot down.

Today's fighters are designed with center of mass between the wing and the tail. Both the wing and the tail provide lift to keep the plane in the air. The problem is the tail surface has to make tiny corrections dozens of times every second or the plane would roll over end over end and disintegrate in midair.

Glyn, I'm working very hard to show you that I'm a windbag...

[Scrapdog]

There is no meaningful difference.

I second that - I've got about 700 hours in the F-15C/D and about 400 in the F-16C/D. Not a lick of difference in manueverability...the difference comes in the variation of the external configuration. In other words, a 2 tanked F-16C and a clean F-16D are extremely different...you can guess which jet turns quite a bit better.

[wabpilot]

I second that - I've got about 700 hours in the F-15C/D and about 400 in the F-16C/D. Not a lick of difference in manueverability...the difference comes in the variation of the external configuration. In other words, a 2 tanked F-16C and a clean F-16D are extremely different...you can guess which jet turns quite a bit better.

Scrapdog, you should get the "military professional" tag from our friendly moderator. We need more airdales, even if they wear the wrong color blue.