Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Other Aircrew Forums > Flight Testing
Reload this Page >

G Limits With Underwing Stores

Wikiposts
Search
Flight Testing A forum for test pilots, flight test engineers, observers, telemetry and instrumentation engineers and anybody else involved in the demanding and complex business of testing aeroplanes, helicopters and equipment.

G Limits With Underwing Stores

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 15th Oct 2006, 03:07
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
G Limits With Underwing Stores

Wondering what effect, if any, the carriage of stores has on the permitted G limit that the pilot can pull. An A-4 friend says he can't recall (with the proviso it was a long long time ago) any G limit, though there was a Mach limit. Any one able to give reliable info on say F-4, Harrier, Hawk, Buc or other FJ. Additionally what limits were placed on rolling G - any difference between clean and with stores?
Many Thanks,
Brian
Brian Abraham is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2006, 15:13
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Underwing stores can have significant effects on both rolling and non-rolling 'g' limits, both due to the loads imposed on the store itself (and the pylon) and due to the changed aircraft behaviour due to aerodynamic and inertia changes due to the presence of the store.

I'd have to wrack my brain to get details, but there were HUGE differences on Hawk depending on what stores were carried, with some cases probably halving the 'g' and rolling 'g' envelopes relative to the clean aircraft.
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 15th Oct 2006, 16:22
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: north
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Agree with scientist. Cut-backs in norm g approaching 50% are common.
There can be a smaller reduction in g limit when external fuel tanks are empty.
L Peacock is offline  
Old 17th Oct 2006, 13:58
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes, rolling with stores is much reduced than when clean.

We had a small whoopsie on Jag flight testing in early 70's when the Dep Chief Test Pilot did some full aileron rapid rolls at 0.8M with full 330L underwing tanks. Not his fault the "dolls eye" indicators were faulty so tanks showed empty. He did comment on debrief that it felt a bit ponderous in roll! Some swift checks on alignment and loads showed no real damage - other than to fatigue count.
JohnFTEng is offline  
Old 20th Oct 2006, 21:21
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The Wonderful Midlands
Age: 53
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by L Peacock
Agree with scientist. Cut-backs in norm g approaching 50% are common.
There can be a smaller reduction in g limit when external fuel tanks are empty.
As L Peacock correctly states, there are very different limits on g loading, depending on aircraft fit and status. In the F3 Tornado, with full 1800L U/Wing tanks, the A/C is restricted to around half it's maximum g loading, however, this jumps up to around 3/4 of max once the tanks are empty, which is quite a considerable jump.
The Rocket is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2006, 21:38
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In the F3 Tornado, with full 1800L U/Wing tanks, the A/C is restricted to around half it's maximum g loading, however, this jumps up to around 3/4 of max once the tanks are empty, which is quite a considerable jump.
Errrrm we dont have 1800L u/wing tanks. Its either 1500L or 2250L, unless there is one I have never heard of..........

Agree with the reduction in g though
PPRuNeUser0172 is offline  
Old 21st Oct 2006, 22:44
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The Wonderful Midlands
Age: 53
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Pardon me DS,

The L should have been a KG.

I cannot confirm or deny that alcohol may have been consumed.

I was referring of course to the 2250L tanks, which as you know contain 1800kg of fuel.
The Rocket is offline  
Old 22nd Oct 2006, 10:12
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: South West UK
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yep, similar story for the Harrier; significant reduction in the G and Rolling G limits with various external stores. Also most external stores configurations carry the imposition of significantly restricting Angle of Attack limits, and usually no VIFFing! Also, stores on the fuselage station carry a performance penalty for Vertical Take Off and (I think I remember correctly) for Vertical Landing.

Happy landings

3 Point
3 Point is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2006, 19:14
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
G-limiting

It stands to reason, which you were of course getting at in the first place, that aircraft are limited if carrying stores.

There is a relatively recent film of a Wart-on Harrier ( they don't know what to do with it up there apart from chase Whippets ) which departed in a big way & folded the pylons flat under the wing.

Also possibly more to the point, a Sea Jet years ago did a high G pull, resulting in lofting drop tanks, I believe complete with pylons, into a chap's Asparagus bed...

Most if not all fast jet a/c are limited to around 3g until the droptanks are empty or disposed of - rare due to cost unless in real combat - as aerodynamic loads soon come into the equasion.
Double Zero is offline  
Old 25th Oct 2006, 13:56
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Av-8b ???

That Harrier link has some remarkable stuff;

Leading photo is of a two-seat AV-8A Spanish Matador !

Two GAU-12 cannon ?

Wing area is different for US & UK aircraft, as the latter have LERX of various sizes.

The GR5 had the dual mode laser / tv ARBS tracker from new, the main addition with the GR7 was FLIR, some display updates & digital moving map.

GR9 to carry Amraam ?!
Double Zero is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2006, 19:46
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Harrier 2+

I think you're referring to the 2+, which has not only a cut-down F-16 radar, but strengthened rear fuselage, upward firing chaff / flares etc.

Once saw one fitted with 6 x AMRAAM on decoy launching rails, though not so sure about bring-back.

Would have been a sensible buy, even in small numbers, to go alongide the GR7 / 9 on the present & future carriers, as it's mainly compatible.

Not that I could imagine the Dave ever becoming delayed, or the UK inconveniently having a foe in the meantime.
Double Zero is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.