PPRuNe Forums - F16 engine error

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)

- - F16 engine error (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/601151-f16-engine-error.html)

Quote:

. The pictures show that all the blades on one of the turbine wheels have lost the outer one third. They look as if they have melted away.

Roughly 2/3 of the stresses on a turbine blade are centripetal. The remaining third is thermal and bending, focussed on where the blade meets the root. It doesn't take much of an overspeed to cause significant creep (especially at close to maximal operating temps). Blade life is usually a function of creep burst (the blade stretches as it's life goes on).

And yes, any overspeed is likely to take the entire assembly into resonant modes that may result in untold High Cycle Fatigue and ultimately failure. It is likely the remainder of the blades was scraped off in the casing of the hot section as they stretched like toffee.

Salute!

Maybe help from new Viper drivers, but I do not unnerstan why there was no FCF after engine maintenance as described.

The Viper had less FCF requirements than anything I flew back then. We could even replace the FLCS boxes before flying and if the "extended" BIT was good, we flew. But the motor? And it has more mechanical stuff than the FLCS actuators and hydraulics.

One good example of less FCF's was my leading edge flap failure, and in my 4,000 hours I only had one emergency due to the wrenchbenders. Needless to say, after getting that thing back on the ground I had "perfect" jets for the rest of my time at Hill.

My profile here has a pic of the LEF, and it folded up because the two dudes working on the drive motor did not place a "keeper" pin in the drive tube and the shaft slipped out just after lift-off. The sensors indicated all was well during the various checks.

So I question the lack of a check on that motor as it was one of biggies we had back then in both the Sluf and Viper.

Gums sends...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fonsini (Post 9938796)

It must be a strange experience to pull back on the throttle and experience an increase in thrust. Whoa horsey.

French, Italian and Japanese used reverse throttles during the war, indeed the American built Trojan used by the French followed the same format into the sixties.

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/q...controls/39443

Is there an advantage to reversing the throttles other than the possibility of commonality with other aircraft in the force?

Quote:

Originally Posted by West Coast (Post 9939772)

Is there an advantage to reversing the throttles other than the possibility of commonality with other aircraft in the force?

[I'm jokin' - rite?] :} Would be useful in NavAv aircraft for the catapult stroke - the lateral G force would keep the throttle BACK & Wide Open - cool. :}

I wonder if it was to do with the stick?, you would pull back to climb, push forward to descend, logic says the throttle would operate in a similar manner,