loss of lift near ground
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney NSW
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
loss of lift near ground
Lightning F3; Gnat; F-4 with stores; AW Argosy; HP Victor (welcome to Ascension!).
(The Jaguar suffered so much loss of lift near the ground that it never really wanted to leave it so I have left it out of the equation. But ...).
All featured in Boscombe Down lectures and were, as one might say, very prone to arrival con brio.
(The Jaguar suffered so much loss of lift near the ground that it never really wanted to leave it so I have left it out of the equation. But ...).
All featured in Boscombe Down lectures and were, as one might say, very prone to arrival con brio.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney NSW
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
flying characteristics
Cheers Beagle
Assumed (obviously wrongly) that certain wing configurations, and certain loads were known to require more care than might otherwise be expected in the landing config. One NASA report went into things in detail and although my copy has long been in the bin my card index still has its details. It was Robert K. Heffley and Wayne F. Jewell, "Aircraft Handling Qualities Data," NASA CR-2144, Dec. 1972. Obviously from your first-hand experience I see that I have been led somewhat up the garden path. It is good of you to put me right when I am wrong
Assumed (obviously wrongly) that certain wing configurations, and certain loads were known to require more care than might otherwise be expected in the landing config. One NASA report went into things in detail and although my copy has long been in the bin my card index still has its details. It was Robert K. Heffley and Wayne F. Jewell, "Aircraft Handling Qualities Data," NASA CR-2144, Dec. 1972. Obviously from your first-hand experience I see that I have been led somewhat up the garden path. It is good of you to put me right when I am wrong
The only thing which made the Gnat a bit tricky was its narrow undercarriage track and the brake response valves which could make crosswind landings.........thought provoking.
The F4 was almost as easy as the Buccaneer to land (once the speed and AoA were right). You simply waited for Planet Earth to stop your descent. A tiny little tweak on the control column just before touchdown cushioned things a bit in the F4, but the Buccaneer's undercarriage compliance made no-flare touchdowns surprisingly comfy. Certainly much more so than you'd think if you ever watched one 'arrive'!
The F4 was almost as easy as the Buccaneer to land (once the speed and AoA were right). You simply waited for Planet Earth to stop your descent. A tiny little tweak on the control column just before touchdown cushioned things a bit in the F4, but the Buccaneer's undercarriage compliance made no-flare touchdowns surprisingly comfy. Certainly much more so than you'd think if you ever watched one 'arrive'!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sydney NSW
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah..
Yeah, the F-4 did have a lot of wing area and the gnat was very small. I forgot how small. And narrow. But the Buccaneer had clever technology. I wonder if your surname is Browne? If so it was a nice machine.
