Landing the Phantom...

[Ewan Whosearmy]

Just a quick question for any phormer Phantom pilots or navs out there...

In RAF (or USAF) service, was the Phantom flared on landing? I read recently that on account of its Navy roots it was never flared, even when operating from land. Is this true?

Also, did you fly on-airspeed or -alpha during approach and landing?

Just curious.

[BEagle]

19 AoA and an ever-so-slight mini-flarette just before impact usually cushioned the collision with Planet Earth!

[Ewan Whosearmy]

19 AoA and an ever-so-slight mini-flarette just before impact usually cushioned the collision with Planet Earth!

Thanks, Beags.

[stillin1]

Check - 19AOA, speed makes you hallucinate!
Flare depended on runway length and pilot's mood at the time -
Full flare = the occasional greaser and a longer landing roll:ok:
Flarette = teeth still in head and stopped on a NATO standard length runway just fine:)
"Flareing is for poofs" = Teeth on the floor, "Ugh, you bas**rd" from the boot and stopped before the second turn off:ouch:
"Flareing is for poofs" & pop the shute out at about 30' AGL = wow we have stopped and teeth embedded in front consol:O
Personally always favoured the latter:=

[ORAC]

Used to watch the USMC F4 exchange pilot land. I don´t believe the word flare was in his vocabulary. And I hadn´t realised the wings could flex that far...

[Wyler]

Actually experienced one of those landings. We were at valley in 1987 for Missile Firing and I blagged a back seat in the Chase aircraft. The Pilot, a certain Pete Coker, was telling me about the Navy way of landing these things on Carriers and decided to 'demo' one for me.

It was like being belted at both ends with a baseball bat.

[A2QFI]

The U/C could take it and getting the aircraft firmly on the ground was the best way. As it was designed to be stopped on a carrier by a wire the brakes weren't too marvellous! Braking was not needed if one's speed in knots was less than 2 times the distance to go figure ie 80kt with 4000 ft to go was OK. On the ground the oleo extension was less than an inch, with the weight off the wheels the extension was huge (18 inches?) - there was an awful lot of compression available to absorb the firm landings.

[Double Hush]

To be pedantic, wasn't the best AoA 19.2 units?

[gareth herts]

I seem to remember Robert Prest saying in his book that the OCU taught the "controlled crash" method but that squadron pilots never landed the jet like this, preferring something a little more dignified!

[228 OCU]

19 deg was good enough, and "Flareing is for poofs" & pop the shute out at about 30' AGL is fun and turns the F4 into half a STOL:eek:

[soddim]

The only difference in landing technique for the F4 compared with other land-based fighters was the need to avoid throttling back in the flare or near the concrete. A significant part of the lift at landing was generated by boundary layer control provided by engine compressor bleed air blown over the wings and flaps and closing the throttles reduced this airflow. Not so marked if 7th stage air was used but 12th stage flow allowed lower approach speed.

Never did subscribe to the carrier landing technique except when necessary - the impact did none of the avionics any good and ruined the harmonisation.

Popping the drag 'chute a little early seemed much more beneficial.

[Ewan Whosearmy]

Thanks for the responses, chaps. :D

[High_Expect]

WIWOP ALERT! ! ! ! don't we all get enough of this at work? :ugh:

;)

[ORAC]

Gosh, how the torch is passed to the younger generation.

When I were a lad it was old pilots like Bob Bonus (WIWOJ)
When we passed on to WIWOL (I'm ignore the WIWOB/V/A etc, bombers and AT didn't count)
Now we're onto the WIWOP.
In a couple of years it'll be WIWOT. (ignoring the KOF who are the leading edge...)

Gives you a sense of....continuity.... :)

[soddim]

You would think those geeks who operate the computers that fly the modern aircraft would have more respect for the real pilots who had to work it out manually.