Lightning & F-15 photo?
Zoom IAS
But none of these claimants has given us an IAS reading at the top of their zoom
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a bit of fun, go down to Tangmere Museum and try it! ok, the software is only generic fighter ( speed does not wash off with g) but the performance is pretty close to an F3.
There is no fuel burn so you can leave it in full burner all the way up
There is no fuel burn so you can leave it in full burner all the way up
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thankyou for that clarification.
Those modules were certainly well-built - I managed to split a whole flock of seagulls on take-off - at least a dozen divided between the two engines and they both kept turning at more than 90% all the way round the circuit to land. Not a lot of thrust though.
On another occasion we had an aircraft that lost its' radome and scanner plus waveguides - again more or less equally divided between the two engines and, once again, your modules all kept turning and produced enough thrust to get the jet on the ground.
Not a lot of modern engines would cope with that.
Those modules were certainly well-built - I managed to split a whole flock of seagulls on take-off - at least a dozen divided between the two engines and they both kept turning at more than 90% all the way round the circuit to land. Not a lot of thrust though.
On another occasion we had an aircraft that lost its' radome and scanner plus waveguides - again more or less equally divided between the two engines and, once again, your modules all kept turning and produced enough thrust to get the jet on the ground.
Not a lot of modern engines would cope with that.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But only one claimant has given us an IAS reading at the top of their zoom - 2
Nipva – ref #123 - Thank you. It is nice to see some IAS numbers quoted from a true aviator rather than a 'wannabe' .....
Realism and records are getting closer together.
On a similar subject, an airtest ended with a 'joie de vivre' much lower zoom. The Lightning Mk6 was homebound at the end of the high Mach run: there were concerns for a quickly reducing fuel reserve.
As the throttles were eased back there was a 'banging' in the intake below. A careful inspection after the flight revealed nothing untoward. The local R-R rep just shrugged his shoulders and said the Avons were 'real tough - don't worry'.
But the intake choking feeling on power reduction was an uncomfortable moment.
The Lightning remains a real hot-rod to this day. Let us hope that the 3 flyable Cape Town based Lightnings will return to the display circuit soon.
Realism and records are getting closer together.
Earlier: But we really need some more IAS readings at the top of their ballistic zooms (or controlled flight?) from the likes of those who claim 80K+ Lightning height records such as ...
Will “Firestreak” (#42) or Mike Hale (#45) please describe for us the profile that they used with IAS & Mach (...probe limits?) to reach a U-2 flying at it’s normal height of some 70,000’+?
PS "...and 80K?"
PPS "... and IAS at 88K in post #65 by Roome?
PS "...and 80K?"
PPS "... and IAS at 88K in post #65 by Roome?
As the throttles were eased back there was a 'banging' in the intake below. A careful inspection after the flight revealed nothing untoward. The local R-R rep just shrugged his shoulders and said the Avons were 'real tough - don't worry'.
But the intake choking feeling on power reduction was an uncomfortable moment.
The Lightning remains a real hot-rod to this day. Let us hope that the 3 flyable Cape Town based Lightnings will return to the display circuit soon.
Last edited by rubberband2; 31st Aug 2010 at 08:36.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lightning
I only worked on them but all these stories ring the same bells today as in the 80s.
Lets face it it was a rocket that only had wings on it to make the pilot feel like it was in fact an aircraft and not a ballistic missile.
I fly these days my self and wish I had their luck to be sat in the fastest thing out of binbrook, next to my old escort mexico.
Top speed was never declared (its a Secret)
Lets face it it was a rocket that only had wings on it to make the pilot feel like it was in fact an aircraft and not a ballistic missile.
I fly these days my self and wish I had their luck to be sat in the fastest thing out of binbrook, next to my old escort mexico.
Top speed was never declared (its a Secret)
Last edited by nrl1965; 5th Mar 2011 at 12:44.
Originally Posted by nrl1965
I fly these days my self and wish I had their luck to be sat in the fastest thing out of binbrook, next to my old escort mexico.
Top speed was never declared (its a Secret)
Top speed was never declared (its a Secret)
In my case I recall 140kts at 84k. It was October 1969 and I was in F1A XM215. Can't say that I recall the Mach - the F1A did not have the combined Mach/IAS strip speed of the F3/T5/F6 and my attention was firmly on the decreasing IAS! My intention, like the others, had been to see how high this fighter pilots dream would go. Whilst going through the mid 70's discretion took over but I ran out of forward stick and so continued on upwards without daring to cancel the reheat for fear of engine surge or to roll and pull - too little IAS. To my relief, gravity and the full forward stick eventually won the day and I peaked at 84000'.
Even with a pressure suit, do you know how long it would take for your blood to boil at that altitude if the pressurisation failed?
You, Sir, are a Troll!!
Please feel free to PM me......
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
60,000ft
you could do it in a glider with a pressure suit over the Andes, well 50,699ft so 60,000ft + in a lightning, EASY.
If your pressure suit fails in any flight in or above that Level then the result would be the same or similar regardless to the vehicle your in, also look at the fact that the human race always seems to be pushing the envelope, not all but their not the ones we tend to remember.
Now that doesn't make it right to push past limits, but the temptation to do so is too strong for some who still have the frontier pushing way of thinking.
Sorry to say I play safe so you will never know of me past this site.
If your pressure suit fails in any flight in or above that Level then the result would be the same or similar regardless to the vehicle your in, also look at the fact that the human race always seems to be pushing the envelope, not all but their not the ones we tend to remember.
Now that doesn't make it right to push past limits, but the temptation to do so is too strong for some who still have the frontier pushing way of thinking.
Sorry to say I play safe so you will never know of me past this site.
Last edited by nrl1965; 7th Mar 2011 at 19:25. Reason: added to
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
barnstormer1968 AND cornish-stormrider appear to be the same wannabe pilot. Some of the comments are childish.
None of his comments so far have any merit in discussing aerodynamic or high performance flight.
But these pprune columns and news bites do exist for all aviation buffs.
http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/.../eusa_clap.gif
None of his comments so far have any merit in discussing aerodynamic or high performance flight.
But these pprune columns and news bites do exist for all aviation buffs.
http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/.../eusa_clap.gif
