|
I'm not sure about the B-17 specifically, but a lot of warbirds have to run reduced power settings because the engines were designed for higher octane fuel than 100LL, which can also make it hard to keep plugs clear of lead deposits.
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2020 23:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 15:48 |
|
|
I don't think most surviving B-17s still run their turbosuperchargers for that reason, as well as saving maintenance and unnecessary wear and tear. Thankfully, the engines are single-row 9 cylinders, so cheaper and easier than a double wasp
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2020 23:44
|
|
|
joat mon posted:I don't think most surviving B-17s still run their turbosuperchargers for that reason, as well as saving maintenance and unnecessary wear and tear. I was actually wondering that, since the early turbos on the likes of the B-17 and P-47 were so maintenance-heavy, fault-prone and so relatively short lived, as well as introducing all sorts of additional operational headaches plus I can't imagine spare parts for 1940s turbos are easy to get these days. And it's not as if any of these warbirds need to power along at 20,000ft any more. IIRC the likes of the B-29, Stratrocruiser and DC-7 needed something like 30 man hours of maintenance for every hour of flying time. Whatever the number it was proposterously huge until you see it broken down into all the checks, adjustments, top-ups and servicing needed on the engines, props, control systems, hydraulics, undercarriage, pressurisation, airframe etc. etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 00:11
|
|
|
azflyboy posted:I'm not sure about the B-17 specifically, but a lot of warbirds have to run reduced power settings because the engines were designed for higher octane fuel than 100LL, which can also make it hard to keep plugs clear of lead deposits. Grape juice makes you stronger, faster, better. Apparently a new company in Poland has been making 115/145 again, so it’s become at least a LITTLE more available. Used to be, the only place you’d see it was Reno.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 01:45
|
|
|
Regarding rare fuels (though I gather this isn't too rare), one of my favourite "did you actually read the POH, or just say you did?" questions for students is "if you test the fuel, and it's green, can we fly?" You can! I don't know where you'd get 100/130 AVGAS these days, but if you found it, you could use it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2020 03:19
|
|
|
It seems really easy in, sorry War Thunder to rip your flaps off at high speed, does that ever happen irl? I assume that real pilots are much better trained than guys playing pew pew games, but for example in WW2 dogfights in the heat of the action did guys ever panic and rip off their flaps? IIRC there was something about Bf 109s liking to rip off their tails?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 10:22
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:It seems really easy in, sorry War Thunder to rip your flaps off at high speed, does that ever happen irl? I assume that real pilots are much better trained than guys playing pew pew games, but for example in WW2 dogfights in the heat of the action did guys ever panic and rip off their flaps? IIRC there was something about Bf 109s liking to rip off their tails?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 14:07
|
|
|
It might have been more common when fighter aircraft had wood-and-fabric control surfaces. These days I'd imagine an overspeed is more likely to jam the flap actuator or bend a linkage or something than actually tear pieces off the plane. I did hear an F/A-18 pilot once point out that "the G-limit only matters if you want to fly the plane again later."
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 16:34
|
|
|
(part of) The back fell off. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 20:25
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:It might have been more common when fighter aircraft had wood-and-fabric control surfaces. Most aircraft with fly by wire controls have software protections that will retract the flaps if a certain speed is exceeded (or just refuse to extend them), and even older jet aircraft had "blowback" features that would force the flaps to start retracting if the air loads exceeded a certain point. WW2 era airplanes didn't have massively powerful hydraulic or electrical systems, so they generally couldn't extend flaps fast enough to overload them to the point to the flap failing before a linkage or actuator got broken or jammed. Aircraft with manual flaps were protected by the simple fact that the pilot couldn't exert enough force to extend them at very high speeds, and some designs (like the Spitfire) that had pneumatic flaps had blowback systems that worked by simple virtue of the pneumatic system not being powerful enough to keep the flaps extended beyond a certain speed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 21:35
|
|
|
Huh so that kinda sounds like there's not all that much irl basis to the game mechanic, interesting. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 23:10
|
|
|
Not being familiar with War Thunder, are people exceeding max airspeed limitations which results in airframe damage (such as losing flaps and other control surfaces), or are people dogfighting with flaps extended? You normally only use flaps for low-speed maneuvers like takeoff and landing. I can't think of a reason why you'd want them for combat. Speed brakes on a dive bomber, maybe, but that's different (and designed for higher airspeeds).
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 23:23
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:Huh so that kinda sounds like there's not all that much irl basis to the game mechanic, interesting. Thanks! I think it's just a simplification of "avoid high speed", which real planes have to do but which has some fairly complicated failure modes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 23:24
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:Not being familiar with War Thunder, are people exceeding max airspeed limitations which results in airframe damage (such as losing flaps and other control surfaces), or are people dogfighting with flaps extended? You normally only use flaps for low-speed maneuvers like takeoff and landing. I can't think of a reason why you'd want them for combat. Speed brakes on a dive bomber, maybe, but that's different (and designed for higher airspeeds). This is not correct. Plenty of fighters drop flaps and slats automatically depending on airspeed and aoa, in combat. You may also choose to drop "the big ones" (Full down), depending on situation, as they help with stall speed and turn rate. F-14 NATOPS posted:The flaps and slats form the high-lift system, which
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 23:50
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:Huh so that kinda sounds like there's not all that much irl basis to the game mechanic, interesting. Thanks! I mean, that assumes all the failsafes and security mechanisms work perfectly, I bet you could bend or break something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
Seeing as earlier we had submarines talk I thought this would be interesting to share from the bullshit forum OSHA thread. FuturePastNow posted:That's the Midway, which was commissioned right at the end of the war (September 1945) and was (I think) the last carrier of that era to be retired; she was refitted with an angled deck which made the ship extremely top-heavy and unstable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 00:01
|
|
|
Xakura posted:This is not correct. Plenty of fighters drop flaps and slats automatically depending on airspeed and aoa, in combat. You may also choose to drop "the big ones" (Full down), depending on situation, as they help with stall speed and turn rate. That's an automatic system, though. Were WWII fighters manually dropping flaps in the middle of a dogfight?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 00:31
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:That's an automatic system, though. Were WWII fighters manually dropping flaps in the middle of a dogfight? First off, I'm saying you can manually drop the main flaps if desired, on modern fighters, and it was done in combat. Secondly, you said "I can't think of a reason why you'd want them for combat.", I am responding to that statement in general. Thirdly, a quick google search leads me to believe that yes, this holds true for ww2 fighters as well, they did employ flaps in combat. This is a report from 1942 stating that the https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20090016589 Xakura fucked around with this message at 01:02 on Mar 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
Well, cool, that's why I was asking.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 00:58
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:That's an automatic system, though. Were WWII fighters manually dropping flaps in the middle of a dogfight? DROPPIN FLAPS ALL OVER YOUR ACE
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 01:03
|
|
|
Well that Corsair report doesn’t say much about combat it just says low speed turns which incidentally most planes have to do in some form before landing which is why they have their flaps down. Like dude the report is talking about flying 90mph level turns. Gonna throw some hard doubt that a Corsair flew 90mph in combat. I don’t think any aircraft uses manually adjusted flaps (ie, not fly by wire control surfaces) in combat or high speed maneuvering.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 01:05
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:That's an automatic system, though. Were WWII fighters manually dropping flaps in the middle of a dogfight? The Bf-109 had an automatic leading-edge slat system that would deploy at low airspeeds/high AoA. It was a very simple concept -- by default the slats were pushed open with springs, and as airspeed increased it would force them shut. Slow down, or pull to a high angle of attack so the air isn't hitting the slats directly, and the spring opens them back up. e: oh, you said manually. idk. almost certainly there were instances where it was happening, but in the modern model of dogfighting -- where keeping your total energy as high as possible is the goal -- I would imagine that it would generally be discouraged because any amount of flaps will increase drag and thus losing energy. Sagebrush fucked around with this message at 01:09 on Mar 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 01:06
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:Well that Corsair report doesn’t say much about combat it just says low speed turns which incidentally most planes have to do in some form before landing which is why they have their flaps down. And are they not powered? I'm looking at the cockpit of a mustang here, and the flap control is just a lever, same as a modern aircraft.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 01:12
|
|
|
Xakura posted:And are they not powered? I'm looking at the cockpit of a mustang here, and the flap control is just a lever, same as a modern aircraft. Are you making a distinction between flaps that are powered by an electric motor vs. flaps that are powered by the pilot's arm on a johnson bar or flaps where the position may be directly commanded by the pilot, e.g. extend to 30 degrees, vs. flaps where the pilot selects e.g. "landing" and the flight control system decides what that entails and actuates the devices accordingly?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 01:15
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:The Bf-109 had an automatic leading-edge slat system that would deploy at low airspeeds/high AoA. It was a very simple concept -- by default the slats were pushed open with springs, and as airspeed increased it would force them shut. Slow down, or pull to a high angle of attack so the air isn't hitting the slats directly, and the spring opens them back up. Generally, yes, but that does not mean it's not a tool you can use. Tomcat Pilot posted:F-15s liked to drag the Tomcat high and use their superior thrust to gain an advantage. An off-the-books tactic we used to counter this was to manually extend the wings to the fullest, then incrementally lower the flaps beyond the normal maneuver setting. It was hugely successful, but the danger was that the flap torque tubes were not designed for this and could become stuck.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 01:16
|
|
|
Xakura posted:And are they not powered? I'm looking at the cockpit of a mustang here, and the flap control is just a lever, same as a modern aircraft. Sorry by manually adjusted I meant manually selected, as in the pilot has to select them to whatever setting he wants.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 01:16
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Are you making a distinction between I thought he meant manually operated, as opposed to electrical/hydraulic. But I see now that his point is "program controlled" vs "manual control", and that is just wrong. F-14A originally had manual control maneuver flaps, they did not become computer/program controlled until some update. Related, they even manually set wing sweep, to gain an advantage in a dogfight.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 01:20
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:e: oh, you said manually. idk. almost certainly there were instances where it was happening, but in the modern model of dogfighting -- where keeping your total energy as high as possible is the goal -- I would imagine that it would generally be discouraged because any amount of flaps will increase drag and thus losing energy. Yeah, since the original question was about overspeeding flaps, presumably an automated system isn't going to have an issue with that unless it malfunctions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 01:24
|
|
|
 A310 MRTT medevac plane of the German air force
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 05:02
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DrDreHistorian/status/1244150616407990272 https://twitter.com/mackenziepricee/status/1244158613410566144 Bye bye jumbo. drunkill fucked around with this message at 10:00 on Mar 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 09:57
|
|
|
The last KLM 747 is also having it's last flight today.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 11:08
|
|
|
drunkill posted:https://twitter.com/DrDreHistorian/status/1244150616407990272 Should be our national anthem to be honest. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbGuqmaDgLA
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 11:12
|
|
|
Molentik posted:The last KLM 747 is also having it's last flight today. Do you happen to know whether KLM freight is still operating 747 or is this literally the last last?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 12:03
|
|
|
If BA survives hopefully so will its jumbos
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 12:08
|
|
|
drgitlin posted:If BA survives hopefully so will its jumbos Word is that the Landor 74 will be going to storage this week.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 12:27
|
|
|
Big plane-nerd question: why did the Tu-22 Blinder have downward firing ejection seats? My gut instinct is that it was so crew could be strapped in by ground crew without needing a platform. Why replace a simple steel ladder and platform with a complex system that severely degraded seat performance? To demonstrate the superiority of Marxism, obviously
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 14:21
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MikeGo6671/status/1244248718481575939 https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/1244241663003971584
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 14:29
|
|
|
I refuse the discontinuation of the 747 while the bloated whale A380 still operates literally even one route anywhere in the world. It is unseemly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 14:38
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Big plane-nerd question: why did the Tu-22 Blinder have downward firing ejection seats? Lots of American planes had it too, like early F-104's, bottom seats of the B-52, and some others too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 14:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 15:48 |
|
|
PT6A posted:I refuse the discontinuation of the 747 while the bloated whale A380 still operates literally even one route anywhere in the world. It is unseemly. Some of the A380s were mothballed first. I had a couple of BA flights booked that were supposed to be A380s that changed to 777s before those trips got cancelled.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 14:49
|
|