Matevz Jekovec wrote:
Do we have deep stall and flat spin implemented in FlightGear? Cause I flew F16 yesterday and I just couldn't get it to deep stall.
Uhm, that's the trick with an F-16. You can't get it into an uncontrollable flight region ...
(Although I'm not sure the configuration is close enough at this time to be that realistic on purpose).
Erik
I think I can't agree with you on that one. Both deep stall and flat spin are possible to occur to F16. The computer can't just guess everything and save you from everything nasty possible in the air (at least not in F16). We had this simulated in Falcon very well (and since Falcon is mostly F16 simulation I don't think they've just made that up IMO).
In deep stall, the aircraft is turned normally, just that it is falling verticaly down due to lack of the speed. The engines are too weak to produce enough thrust to push the aircraft out of this. The only way you could escape the deep stall in Falcon (taken from the real training courses though) was to enable manual override controls (you mostly disabled FBW controls) and then pushed the nose gently up and down in the same rythm the aircraft had when falling. Over some time, you got your nose pointing directly to the ground and then, you were able to gain enough speed to escape the stall. Of course, when deep stall occured, you needed at least 4000 feet of altitude (in best case) to save your butt.
The flat spin is the other story (the aircraft is liying on his back and fallling rapidly and spinning around madly). There is actually no escape from that. You usually push your stick in the other direction where the aircraft is spinning too, to decrease the acceleration a bit. If you are able at the moment, you reach the ejection handle (if the forces aren't too high).
Both deep stall and flat spin occur when you don't have enough speed and you push your aircraft too much (that's why the computers can hardly track this when and if it will happen). For e.g. in Falcon, you just made a hard turn to decrease your speed to say <120 knots and then stronlgy pull up. And if you were heavy enough, you just swam through the air in front of you (you made a cobra!?!) and starting to fall like a rock down then.
Newer generations of aircrafts (F22, EF200, Raffale and younger) have completely differently placed sensors and electronics, to prevent this from happening in practise and they have a bit different shapes (mostly larger surfaces like wings). However, the main problem for all these stalls was/is not appropriate aerodynamic shape and wrongly placed aircraft's center of gravity point (for fighter aircrafts usually pushed back in order to gain faster and more correct turns and reactions). For e.g. Su27 were never able to fall in deep stall or anything like this because just of his shape. All the accidents which occured (as seen tragically on many meetings) were due to too low aircraft's speed, though the aircraft itself would gain enough speed to escape these stalls over time. The problems in easteren aircrafts are that the pilot doesn't have much of the feeling how hard and much can he push his aircraft so it still obeys him (the "style" of piloting Su27, 33, 34, 37 is completely different than the west style), because the aircraft is usually very "loyal" to pilot's moves (not much of electronics, robust and strong engines, very studied aerodynamics and center of gravity point pushed to the back as much as possible). So it obeys the pilot but can therefore lose control easily, but as I said is able to regain it itself over time.
I think implementing deep stalls to FlightGear would be ... khm, cool!:)
_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
