On Friday 17 Jun 2005 21:11, Christian Mayer wrote: > Josh Babcock schrieb: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>Oh, you seem to be experts. I can imagine what effect > >> jetwash has (fast hot air surrounded by stagnant cold air). > >> But what consequence do wing tip vortices have to the > >> aircraft? Does it mean to have more aerodynamic resistance > >> at a specific amount of speed? > > > > Actually the problem with jetwash is the very low O2 > > content. When you rely on a combustion engine to keep you in > > the air, this kind of air is the last thing you want to run > > you intake or carburetor through. The huge wind shear is no > > treat either, but the flameout/engine stall is the bigger > > problem. > > Wasn't that the cause for the accident in the "Top Gun" movie? > > CU, > Christian
The accident in 'Top Gun' was accurate regarding flat-spins in the F-14 and the likelihood of the crew hitting the canopy when ejecting in that condition. As to the circumstances that bring about a flat-spin in an F-14 - dunno. The F-14 was a 'lifting-body' design and like the later YF-23, it was mostly aero-dynamic lifting surfaces with the fuselage and engine nacelles attached. I believe it had good behaviour at high AoAs but in those conditions the twin fins had little authority. It also had widely separated engines, which wouldn't have helped in a high-AoA, high-power situation when one of the engines failed. The elevons, which would have been the only effective flight-control surfaces in that regime, probably wouldn't be able to cope with the off-center thrust without entering even worse regimes. Incidentally, there's some very good footage of the F-14 in Top Gun - worth watching if you're interested in different types of a/c. LeeE _______________________________________________ Flightgear-users mailing list [email protected] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
