Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Harrier OCU film

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Harrier OCU film

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 24th Oct 2020, 11:08
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wherever it is this month
Posts: 1,784
Received 75 Likes on 34 Posts
Originally Posted by tartare
Was thrust split between the main nozzles fore and aft to control pitch in hover and low speed flight, as well as the puffers in the nose and tail?
How was that done, given front nozzles were cold and back nozzles were hot?
No, the thrust split between the front and rear nozzles couldn’t be adjusted so all jetborne pitch control was on the puffers. The rear nozzles generated more thrust due to their higher exhaust velocity; this was dealt with by positioning the rear nozzles slightly closer behind the CofG than the front nozzles were in front of it so the moment arms balanced.

Differential nozzle control for roll and pitch was proposed at one point by a certain John Farley, as he recounts among other fascinating insights from page 120 onwards at this link. Most interestingly in the context of this thread, he talks about the perceived ‘heresy’ of his aim to simplify the STOVL control system and the scepticism he faced both from the Hawker design office and from pilots who considered mastery of the nozzle control lever to be a marker of their elite status. He says the advantage of the VAAC testbed being a 2-seater was that test pilots with no Harrier background could fly and assess the control system with no such prejudice. Brilliant engineering that played a large part in establishing the UK’s early privileges in the JSF programme - and here we are in 2020 with F-35B STOVL such a walk in the park that no 2-seater is needed.

Last edited by Easy Street; 24th Oct 2020 at 11:43.
Easy Street is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2020, 12:57
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Brum
Posts: 852
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Easy Street
No, the thrust split between the front and rear nozzles couldn’t be adjusted so all jetborne pitch control was on the puffers. The rear nozzles generated more thrust due to their higher exhaust velocity; this was dealt with by positioning the rear nozzles slightly closer behind the CofG than the front nozzles were in front of it so the moment arms balanced.

Differential nozzle control for roll and pitch was proposed at one point by a certain John Farley, as he recounts among other fascinating insights from page 120 onwards at this link. Most interestingly in the context of this thread, he talks about the perceived ‘heresy’ of his aim to simplify the STOVL control system and the scepticism he faced both from the Hawker design office and from pilots who considered mastery of the nozzle control lever to be a marker of their elite status. He says the advantage of the VAAC testbed being a 2-seater was that test pilots with no Harrier background could fly and assess the control system with no such prejudice. Brilliant engineering that played a large part in establishing the UK’s early privileges in the JSF programme - and here we are in 2020 with F-35B STOVL such a walk in the park that no 2-seater is needed.
Your link is broken...

Nige321 is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2020, 13:05
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
The link works for me, but the pdf file takes a short while to load.
spekesoftly is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2020, 13:24
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Brum
Posts: 852
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by spekesoftly
The link works for me, but the pdf file takes a short while to load.
Yes, disregard last, it dumps a pdf in the downloads...!
Nige321 is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2020, 15:00
  #25 (permalink)  
lsh
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: uk
Age: 66
Posts: 381
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by charliegolf
I thought he had departed the fix? He certainly is/was everything you say about him. Never mentioned Harriers. Unless you nagged him! When you did, you got the clearest explanation you could want.

CG
Pleased to say he checked in on facebook for his birthday a couple of days back!
The virtues of a glass of red!
So many stories of flying with him.............all good!

lsh
lsh is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2020, 15:08
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Richard Burtonville, South Wales.
Posts: 2,338
Received 61 Likes on 44 Posts
Originally Posted by lsh
Pleased to say he checked in on facebook for his birthday a couple of days back!
The virtues of a glass of red!
So many stories of flying with him.............all good!

lsh
Excellent news!

CG
charliegolf 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.