Aviation can be very humbling.
Ain't that the truth!
Just for purposes of convenient reference, I am going to bring Hazelnut's Phugoid chart over to discuss how to possibly improve the results. To improve the results, we have to play with the assumptions.
Now lets look at piece of a Wikki article on BFM. The whole article can be found here:
Basic fighter maneuvers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Both turn rate, (degrees per second), and turn radius, (diameter of the turn), increase with speed, until the "corner speed" is reached. At this point, the growing turn radius begins to decrease the turn rate, so the aircraft will reach its best turn performance at its particular corner speed. The corner speed of an aircraft is the minimum speed at which it can sustain the maximum g-force load, and varies with its structural design, weight, and thrust capabilities.[10] It often falls in the area of 250 to 400 knots.[9]
One of the key assumptions in the chart is constant TE=total energy. Suppose we begin accelerating the engines from idle at T=0. (You probably will want to have the engines near idle to break the stall and negate the pitch up moment they would otherwise create.) By T=6 and later, you can begin to strongly increase CAS (Brownish line) and this will increase G available (Lift/Weight-The blue line). In the chart example. AOA is limited (somehow) to 7 degrees by the pilot. Using these conditions, we hit maximum structural g of 2.5 at the bottom of the pullout (321 knots). 321 knots is therefore our cornering speed.
But if we use the engines to strongly accelerate earlier, we have now created a problem. We are now hitting 321 knots much sooner. G limiting then keeps us from continuing to increase the turn rate and if we further accelerate, our turn radius increase will actually slow the turn rate.
Somehow, we have to avoid running through 321 knots. What tools do we have? Pulling the engines back would be one thing of course. What else might slow us? How about induced drag? We can continue to increase wing performance up to alpha max (and with it-Induced Drag). Finally, we have speed brakes available if we need them, but with wing mounted speed brakes, we may lose some of our wing lift performance (C
L).
Originally Posted by HN39
An even better trajectory would be achieved if the pilot managed to stay on the threshold of stall warning:
Initial normal acceleration 0.73 g, and level off at FL 69, M.47, 276 kCAS, AoA 8.5°, and az=2,05 g.
Using these parameters, we do not get into g limiting at all, so we are probably still leaving the thrust card on the table. (But you will still need some thrust to counteract induced drag and meet the TE=Constant condition).
The practical piloting problem during pullout is this: We do not have real AOA protection in Alt2 Law. We do not have a ready AOA indication. We do have a stall warning system, but it is either on or off-very hard to control AOA like that. Our flight control system is continually trimming off stick force, so a constant stick position causes an increasing AOA demand. There is significant risk of overpulling the stick and getting into a secondary stall-delaying the recovery still further.
You have to be very conservative in your approach to the pullout, particularly where g available is less than 1 g. But that early turn also gives you the most benefit because the turn radius is so small. This is a daunting problem for both pilots and aircraft performance engineers. All you can do is understand what your options are and know your corner speeds.