FLYING THE AWACS - SKY POINTERS
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sky Pointers
Having been trained on and operated British aircraft (or those modified to RAF requirements) I had only seen Attitude Indicators with ground pointers. On conversion to a glass-cockpit, I also found the sky pointer to be a little counter-intuitive. Once the penny dropped though, I realised that it is a much better presentation for upset recovery. The ground pointer (like QFE) really is a British quirk that generations of RAF pilots believed was 'normal'. As glass is now standard in the multi stream, this peculiarity should be consigned to history. Or will the Phenom PFD be modified to have an MoD-specified presentation?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
H Peacock
UK Rivet Joints are called the 'Airseeker'.
This name was originally given to the UK RJ programme and has subsequently been passed onto the airframe.
Rivet is the prefix the Yanks give their heavy recce aircraft. Rivet Stand, Rivet Quick etc. Completely crap names!
This name was originally given to the UK RJ programme and has subsequently been passed onto the airframe.
Rivet is the prefix the Yanks give their heavy recce aircraft. Rivet Stand, Rivet Quick etc. Completely crap names!
Quote:
RAF Rivet Joint.
Probably been said before, but what a truly ridiculous name for an RAF aircraft! Why on earth didn't we give it a different name; anything would be better! Is it too late to do a competition??
RAF Rivet Joint.
Probably been said before, but what a truly ridiculous name for an RAF aircraft! Why on earth didn't we give it a different name; anything would be better! Is it too late to do a competition??
Back to the thread ......
Thanks PP, beat me to it - I used 'that' name in case any col***ls knew the answer to my question.
Last edited by Lordflasheart; 2nd Apr 2017 at 22:28. Reason: Thanks PP
Brian Potter
Congrats you are the first pilot who in my ( ltd ) experience prefers the SKY POINTER to the ground pointer!
Looking back I find that there was a SP thread in the Tech Log Forum - decoded 17 March 2011.It recalled an extensive study into the SP
www./leonardo.lth.se/fileadmin-re- Horizon.pdf - in which it conclusively proved that that it 5 times more likely to initiate a 'roll reversal' ie turn the wrong way when recovering from a UP using the SP!!
Every possible effort should be made to make the pilots job simple -KISS and in my opinion the Ground Pointer is simple !
After all the Attidude display is rather important!
PS Still think that envisaging a pointy Prussian helmet is more intuitive than the Fin - when interpreting the SP!
Congrats you are the first pilot who in my ( ltd ) experience prefers the SKY POINTER to the ground pointer!
Looking back I find that there was a SP thread in the Tech Log Forum - decoded 17 March 2011.It recalled an extensive study into the SP
www./leonardo.lth.se/fileadmin-re- Horizon.pdf - in which it conclusively proved that that it 5 times more likely to initiate a 'roll reversal' ie turn the wrong way when recovering from a UP using the SP!!
Every possible effort should be made to make the pilots job simple -KISS and in my opinion the Ground Pointer is simple !
After all the Attidude display is rather important!
PS Still think that envisaging a pointy Prussian helmet is more intuitive than the Fin - when interpreting the SP!
Brian Potter
Congrats you are the first pilot who in my ( ltd ) experience prefers the SKY POINTER to the ground pointer!
Looking back I find that there was a SP thread in the Tech Log Forum - decoded 17 March 2011.It recalled an extensive study into the SP
www./leonardo.lth.se/fileadmin-re- Horizon.pdf - in which it conclusively proved that that it 5 times more likely to initiate a 'roll reversal' ie turn the wrong way when recovering from a UP using the SP!!
Every possible effort should be made to make the pilots job simple -KISS and in my opinion the Ground Pointer is simple !
After al is rather important!
PS Still think that envisaging a pointy Prussian helmet is more intuitive than the Fin - when interpreting the SP!
Congrats you are the first pilot who in my ( ltd ) experience prefers the SKY POINTER to the ground pointer!
Looking back I find that there was a SP thread in the Tech Log Forum - decoded 17 March 2011.It recalled an extensive study into the SP
www./leonardo.lth.se/fileadmin-re- Horizon.pdf - in which it conclusively proved that that it 5 times more likely to initiate a 'roll reversal' ie turn the wrong way when recovering from a UP using the SP!!
Every possible effort should be made to make the pilots job simple -KISS and in my opinion the Ground Pointer is simple !
After al is rather important!
PS Still think that envisaging a pointy Prussian helmet is more intuitive than the Fin - when interpreting the SP!
Mah. Bob - If you wuz brought up on the sky pointer, you wouldn't know the brits had invented a far better way first. Being a bit slow, I never did get the hang of the Sky Pointer
UPs - Limited panel T & S recovery ?
All instruments failed - Use the E2 compass to descent through cloud on heading south ?
Don't get me started on the early brit 'MRG' based panels.
UPs - Limited panel T & S recovery ?
All instruments failed - Use the E2 compass to descent through cloud on heading south ?
Don't get me started on the early brit 'MRG' based panels.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK - sometimes
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies for slight Rivet Joint thread hijack on a Sentry (or should that be AWACS) thread.
The project is Airseeker (much like the ASTOR project which brought us the Sentinel R1).
The Aircraft is the RC-135 Rivet Joint. Same aircraft as the USAF, same name.
There are many (even some seniors) who call the aircraft by the project name but they are not correct to do so.
Anyone who disagrees, and is able to, can check the Release to Service or wander over to 51 Sqn and ask.
The Aircraft is the RC-135 Rivet Joint. Same aircraft as the USAF, same name.
There are many (even some seniors) who call the aircraft by the project name but they are not correct to do so.
Anyone who disagrees, and is able to, can check the Release to Service or wander over to 51 Sqn and ask.
SwitchMonkey has it right. The UK could not change the name of the aircraft even if it wanted to. Given that the USAF and RAF can fly each other's aircraft, share the same support system and can mix crews the idea of changing the name was never an option.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I stand corrected Switch Monkey. Thank you.
I did get my info from a 51 chap though...
Either way, it's ugly, lands at what appears to be close to light speed and always seem to be very, very clean!!
I did get my info from a 51 chap though...
Either way, it's ugly, lands at what appears to be close to light speed and always seem to be very, very clean!!
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: It's Fairyland!
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
UPs - Limited panel T & S recovery ?
Hey, Lord F, when do you reckon that was last taught within the RAF and on which platform??
UPs - Limited panel T & S recovery ?
Hey, Lord F, when do you reckon that was last taught within the RAF and on which platform??
Do I detect a sense that it is no longer ?
And Twenty Lashes for the previous poster ......
Lord F. We did Limited Panel on the Bulldog and I'm sure I was also taught on the JP. It was (re)-taught on 39 Sqn during conversion to the Canberra. I'm sure we also had to show our Limited Panel ability during the IRT.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 71
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
Lord F,
I also did Limited Panel UPs on the JP 3,5 and Hunter up until 1975. Oh how we loved those Self Nav Tac Recvy through Pt Alpha using Timed Turns and an E2B. I'm sure the practice carried on until the Hawk?
Fortunately in the Dominie in 2011 it was easier to fly Xcockpit rather than try LP. Mind you, we didn't do UPs in the Dominie, just "upsets", whatever they were?
I also did Limited Panel UPs on the JP 3,5 and Hunter up until 1975. Oh how we loved those Self Nav Tac Recvy through Pt Alpha using Timed Turns and an E2B. I'm sure the practice carried on until the Hawk?
Fortunately in the Dominie in 2011 it was easier to fly Xcockpit rather than try LP. Mind you, we didn't do UPs in the Dominie, just "upsets", whatever they were?
Oh dear, so does that make the Rivet Joint/Airseeker thingy an 'airplane' as opposed to an 'aeroplane'?
Dominator2 wrote:
As did I! QGH to PAR on standby instruments was such a joy in the Hunter, with its significant looping error. At least the T7A and T8B had the OR946 Gnat / Buccaneer / Lightning instrument fit though.
20 years later, I was still teaching them on the Bulldog (Height, Speed, 'g', Roll, Pitch) and with the unreliability of many GA aircraft AHs, also on the PA28 until 13 years after that. But our aircraft did at least have a proper turn and slip rather than the wretched 'turn coordinator'..
For complete and utter confusion though, try a Russian AH - the 'globe' remains parallel with the real horizon but the aircraft symbol moves...
They do have an excellent combined turn and slip and VSI though - as well as a combined 'g' and AoA gauge.
Some of us remember the frankly baffling Smiths Military Flight System fitted to the Vulcan, amongst others. Scanning that thing in any aggressive manoeuvring wasn't very natural - and as for the fixed card compass....
I also did Limited Panel UPs on the JP 3,5 and Hunter up until 1975.
20 years later, I was still teaching them on the Bulldog (Height, Speed, 'g', Roll, Pitch) and with the unreliability of many GA aircraft AHs, also on the PA28 until 13 years after that. But our aircraft did at least have a proper turn and slip rather than the wretched 'turn coordinator'..
For complete and utter confusion though, try a Russian AH - the 'globe' remains parallel with the real horizon but the aircraft symbol moves...
They do have an excellent combined turn and slip and VSI though - as well as a combined 'g' and AoA gauge.
Some of us remember the frankly baffling Smiths Military Flight System fitted to the Vulcan, amongst others. Scanning that thing in any aggressive manoeuvring wasn't very natural - and as for the fixed card compass....
