50's Aviation technical discussion

[Guest deleted@83466]

On 12/31/2023 at 5:09 AM, ZachariasX said:

It is quite a sensible thing to start a whole new era when you will have incompatible assets (due to PBR etc.). Although the matchup between F86 and Mig15 is legendary, it is just thar, those two planes and some fringe content. But it would be something if we finally had the different models of the F86, proper Mach effects and the F86’s flying tail working as it should.

Obviously I don’t want to get into an extended DCS discussion on the IL-2 forum outside of the DCS thread, but I was curious how you think the Sabre F, with the flying tail, should behave near or above Mach 1?  As modeled, the aircraft tucks just a bit, it seems to get a little wonky in the roll axis, but it remains quite controllable as it goes supersonic.  Why do you think it’s wrong?  How should it behave? The MiG-15 obviously is an uncontrollable lawn dart long before, and I don’t think I ever got it above Mach 1.  

[ZachariasX]

20 hours ago, SeaSerpent said:

Obviously I don’t want to get into an extended DCS discussion on the IL-2 forum outside of the DCS thread, but I was curious how you think the Sabre F, with the flying tail, should behave near or above Mach 1?  As modeled, the aircraft tucks just a bit, it seems to get a little wonky in the roll axis, but it remains quite controllable as it goes supersonic.  Why do you think it’s wrong?  How should it behave? The MiG-15 obviously is an uncontrollable lawn dart long before, and I don’t think I ever got it above Mach 1.  

 

Both aircraft should have the Mach tuck in some way (as well as controls affected by compressibility) but the F-86 had the flying tail. It was a very secret feature of that plane. It was introduced in the Bell X-1 (and a most secret feature!) and it was the main factor that the X-1 could go supersonic in controlled flight. For some reason, hardly anyone ever gets into this topic, everyone just leaves it at saying „it had a flying tail“. It was the thing that set the X-1 apart from everything else in its day, while the rest of its design was remarkably conservative.

 

But what is the difference between the „flying tail“ and a stabilo trim, as introduced way before that with the Bf109 or the Fw190 (just to name a few)?

 

The difference is that with the „flying tail“, the pilot can switch from from just traditionally actuating the elevator surfaces to moving the entire stabilo with the stick to regain pitch control. AFAIR Bob Hoover mentiones that in his autobiography. It is one of the very few more detailed mentionings of this arrangement that I am aware of.

 

Just reaching for the trim during transsonic flight is very dangerous, as the trim function only permits slow and lagging inputs to a very dynamic behaviour. Hence, the stabilo has to be actuated by the stick for controlled flight. But this transition is used only when needed. Otherwise, counteracting Mach tuck by trim inputs are extremely dangerous and very much discouraged. In situations where in trans- or supersonic speeds controls lose all efficieny and become loose as if the cables were cut, the Flettner tab is no help anyway if that is your mean of pitch trim.

 

I have yet to see a sim incorporating this feature. It makes a huge difference between a plane that is hard redlined on a given Mach or one that can dive to even supersonic speeds thanks to more modern controls. A later series F86 should be able dive to supersonic speeds, depite that maneuver being risky. AFAIK, same could be done with the Hawker Hunter. They would even do such power dives with Hunters at airshows back in the day…

 

Also, the Mig15 is not a trivial plane to fly (just ask Juri Gagarin), while the F86 is praised as being simply a delight to fly. It is not just the performance that made the Sabre the then pinnacle of aircraft design, it was also his handling characteristics, with the Hawker Hunter being the runner up. I would want to see such in a sim aircraft.

 

Without all that, we just get significantly more competitive Mig15 in a way they were not. They should be higher performing at altitude, but especially up there, that red line on the speedometer would certainly put things into perspective.

 

I want that flying tail!

 

Over there… we don‘t have it. If we don‘t get it here, I would understand why, but then for me, it would make the whole proposition DOA.

[Guest deleted@83466]

34 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

 

I have yet to see a sim incorporating this feature…

 

I want that flying tail!

 

Over there… we don‘t have it. If we don‘t get it here, I would understand why, but then for me, it would make the whole proposition DOA.

I guess I’m confused by this:  the DCS Sabre does have a flying tail, and it does got over Mach 1 in a dive, pretty easily.  The entire assembly moves with the stick.  But you’re saying it doesn’t?  The MiG-15, meanwhile, is essentially non-controllable over about 0.9, as we might expect.

[ZachariasX]

1 hour ago, SeaSerpent said:

the DCS Sabre does have a flying tail, and it does got over Mach 1 in a dive, pretty easily.

Yes it does go fast. What I am more interested in, is the mean of control. Right now, you just go supersonic and maybe help with the trim somewhat. But this is not how I‘d think such a central arrangement to the plane would work. I see no reson why the Mig15 shouldn‘t go supersonic, if all it takes is a bit of trim or just pull on the stick enough. I would assume the F86 would lawndart as the Mig15 does past critical Mach, if there wasn‘t such an arrangement like the flying tail that can be used in a certain way in this condition.

 

Going through the entire F86 manual in the other sim, hardly a word is lost on something that revolutionised fighter plane design. Why would Chuck Yeager or Bob Hoover be so fond of that tech, which according to them gave them an edge over the Mig15, if all it was is the Fw190 trim put on a coolie hat?

 

In the other manual, I find one single reference to the „all flying tail“ in the table featuring the different variants. The E type introduced that tech. I would expect huge differences in high speed qualities between E an D models, yet, no word is lost on it. It is if people never bothered about all that, just because that tech was secret and hence is not discussed in common documents.

 

It all sounds to me like lazy research.

[Guest deleted@83466]

Well, just to test, I just took the Mig supersonic.  I guess I had never flown it outside of its envelope like that before.  It had a lot of buffeting as it broke through, and wanted to roll hard.  So at least we know that its Mach number isn’t artificially limited in the sim.  Once through Mach 1, the buffeting lessened.  Still could not control it in the roll axis.  With such a simple test, it’s difficult to see how much tuck it experienced because you are pointed at least 70 degrees nose down to start, and then it will roll around, and you only have a limited time as the ground approaches and the air thickens.  I don’t know how it’s supposed to behave, but the way I look at it, if the IL-2 guys can get it at least as good in their version, I think it will be satisfactory.  The MiG-15 definitely cannot follow a Sabre in a power dive.

Edited January 3, 2024 by SeaSerpent

[LuftManu]

Hey guys!

Thread splitted @SeaSerpent and @ZachariasX. 

I believe this deserves it's own thread so we can all talk about this really interesting phase of Aviation history. ?

[ZachariasX]

1 hour ago, LuftManu said:

I believe this deserves it's own thread so we can all talk about this really interesting phase of Aviation history. ?

Thanks, I digressed there, so maybe it is a good idea to partition these remarks to a specific thread.

 

First of all, as I looked more into the issue, the F type Sabre has the flying tail such that the stick actuated both the stabilo and the elevator surface control by a hydraulic servo, which is (of course) correctly replicated in the other sim. This at the price of less feedback from the stick in the real aircraft.

 

@SeaSerpent‘s descriptions of dive behaviours then make sense, both of the F86 and the Mig15 (AFAIK). For a Korea scenario, it would be great having the F86 from an early version on (with a fixed stab) where transsonic control is different from the later F models on, as well as the different wings.

 

Even in the Phantom II, stick input effect changes a lot when passing the sound barrier. More so than with the modern planes with digital flight controls. I think it is an interesting topic and seeing it suitably replicated in a sim would make a lot sense.

[LuftManu]

I remember back then on my F-86 from DCS diving away from the MiG-15s from Humans. It worked quite well as the MiGs had a tendency to not being able to recover or have some issues with it (If my memory serves right...)

I wonder if we are getting Korea, it would be cool to have several optinons for this.

The other day I was searching for some info about Sabre variants and came across this page: https://finescale.com/~/media/files/pdf/online-extras/sabre/sabretable.pdf

[ZachariasX]

8 hours ago, LuftManu said:

The other day I was searching for some info about Sabre variants and came across this page: https://finescale.com/~/media/files/pdf/online-extras/sabre/sabretable.pdf

Looking at this table, it seems we can have way more F86 variants than Bf109 variants… ?

[Jackfraser24]

IL-2 Vietnam (Operation Rolling Thunder)

 

The North

• IL-28 Beagle
• MiG-17 Fresno 
• MiG-19 Farmer 
• MiG-21 Fishbed 
• Mi-8 Hip

The South

• A-7 Corsair II
• F-4 Phantom 
• F-5 Tiger
• F-8J Crusader 
• F-102 Delta Dagger 

 

B-52 is non-flyable 

Edited January 7, 2024 by Jackfraser24

[BMA_FlyingShark]

35 minutes ago, Jackfraser24 said:

The South

• A-7 Corsair II
• F-4 Phantom 
• F-5 Tiger
• F-8J Crusader 
• F-102 Delta Dagger 

I would also like to get a F-104 Starfighter as collector.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[Guest deleted@83466]

On 1/7/2024 at 2:58 AM, FlyingShark said:

I would also like to get a F-104 Starfighter as collector.

 

Have a nice day.

 

Here is what was it’s like to fly the Starfighter. (Trust me, it’s a cool movie clip)

 

 

[Jackfraser24]

Thanks for making this new thread. That was a good idea!

[AndyJWest]

Anyone into primary-source 50's aviation material should look out for the USAF's Flying Safety magazine: written for pilots, it discusses issues from a practical point of view, and illustrates the difficulties being experienced in moving into the transonic/supersonic jet era. The May 1954 one for examples has an interesting discussion on the effects of yaw on swept-wing aircraft (which could be nasty, before they figured out the solutions and/or taught the pilots to go easy with their boots), a short article on the X-1A, and an article on the spin characteristics of the F-94C (mostly benign, if you understood what was going on, but not so much if you didn't), along with much other interesting stuff. Captures the flavour of the era very well.

Download link

 

How to mess up spin recovery in an F-94C:

 

Probably applies to a lot of other aircraft too. The advice offered doesn't help us 1G armchair pilots much though:

Quote

If you ever get into an inverted spin, you can recognize it at once because both your hands and your feet will be pulling away from the controls.

 

 

The USAF has an archive of aviation safety magazines, going all the way back to 1948. I've not looked at them all, and don't know if it's complete, but there's no doubt plenty of good stuff in there, written at the sort of technical level us simmers can understand.

Archive

Edited January 10, 2024 by AndyJWest

[CountZero]

All this 50s jets got me to re-read No guts no glory, have some funny and usefule tips there

 

 

 

[Jackfraser24]

Malayan War Module
 

I’ll try sell the idea to you, the reader. 

• The perfect opportunity for British aircraft like the Vampire, Lincoln and deHavilland Hornet to join the inventory. Would draw in British war plane enthusiasts.
• No combat flight simulator has ever covered this conflict at all. Malaya is an untapped niche.
• The perfect opportunity to tell the tales of sorties flown in the largely forgotten 12 year long war through pilot career mode. 
• Will help you improve your ground attack skills against ground targets in dense jungle.
• A new and interesting set of piston and early jet aircraft would be included from aircraft with late WWII designs like the Spitfire Mk.18, to late 40s and 1950s jet technology, like the Vampire, Vulcan and the Canberra. 
• Will spice up your multiplayer experience by being given a new type of battlefield to fight other players in. You’d be able to do a British vs Soviet air battle over the jungle. You could even participate in a British vs American battle if you’d like. 
• We’d need more fighter bomber aircraft for Cold War multiplayer sessions. 

 

Aircraft to be included in Malayan War

• Beaufighter TF.10
• Canberra B.2
• Dragonfly 
• Hornet F.3/4
• Lincoln B.II
• Meteor F.8
• Spitfire Mk.18
• Typhoon Mk.II
• Venom FB.1
• Vulcan B.1

Edited January 16, 2024 by Jackfraser24