सभी
← Back to Squawk list
Watch Airbus' mad stunt with $1.5 billion worth of airplanes
I have to give kudos to Airbus for having the guts to do this using five test A350-900 XWB airplanes, its newest wide-body airliner. I know the stunt was well calculated and the pilots—all of them ex-military aviators—knew exactly what they were doing, but the entire thing still looks reckless. (sploid.gizmodo.com) और अधिक...I think the whole deal was well done. It's not really fair to compare the pilots' performance flying a 350 to the precision a good pilot can attain with a fighter-type aircraft. There are three large factors at play here:
1. The flight control laws of the 350 are definitely NOT optimized to permit flying. That's a big deal in any fly-by-wire airplane. For instance, when we are testing the F-16 in the 1970's, we finally settled on the need to have the electronics give the pilot three different "flight control systems" One for takeoff-landing, one for air refueling and one for formation. That may have changed in subsequent versions of the airplane) At the same time, while flying the T-38, F-4 and F-104, I was also involved in air refueling tests for the B-52 and C-5. We "practiced" in the B-52G. On the first flight, with no briefing or instruction, the instructor-pilot sat in the right seat and the only sound he made was near continuous laughter as the fighter-types tried to get into a stabilized "slot" position behind a straight-and-level KC-135 flying at 280 KIAS. Talk about inertia! And sore muscles
2. The side-stick controller. A right-handed pilot using his left hand (and vice-versa) requires a good amount of practice to get the fine muscle-motor control needed for formation flying. A whole different set of muscles are used than when flying "regular" maneuvers.
3. The engines: When I first flew the F-111 in formation, it was quickly evident that a fan engine (e.g., TF-30) had a different response to small throttle movement than did a turbojet. And the larger the fan, the bigger the difference. I can't imagine trying to hold position with a couple of Trents or GE90s under my fingers.
As a not aside, when you're the second through the ?? airplane on the wing in an echelon, the more you've got to work to convince your mind that you're not too close. Photos of most formations where there's more than one airplane on the wing will show the succeeding aircraft increasingly wide. The Thunderbirds and Blues usea pilot on the ground during both practice and during a show to watch for this and call a correction over the radio (e.g., "#5, three feet out.") It would take an awful lot of Jet A-1 to tune up 10 pilots to that level of precision.
All in all, a fine job. But "RECKLESS?" Yeah, maybe if they did a diamond barrel roll with 20 feet of wingtip overlap at an altitude of 200 ft at the bottom. All the test pilots I know of who were "Reckless" in any airplane. for even a moment are all dead now. Anyone with reckless tendencies in their approach to flying are washed out of the test pilot school. Allow about a week for the paperwork to clear.
1. The flight control laws of the 350 are definitely NOT optimized to permit flying. That's a big deal in any fly-by-wire airplane. For instance, when we are testing the F-16 in the 1970's, we finally settled on the need to have the electronics give the pilot three different "flight control systems" One for takeoff-landing, one for air refueling and one for formation. That may have changed in subsequent versions of the airplane) At the same time, while flying the T-38, F-4 and F-104, I was also involved in air refueling tests for the B-52 and C-5. We "practiced" in the B-52G. On the first flight, with no briefing or instruction, the instructor-pilot sat in the right seat and the only sound he made was near continuous laughter as the fighter-types tried to get into a stabilized "slot" position behind a straight-and-level KC-135 flying at 280 KIAS. Talk about inertia! And sore muscles
2. The side-stick controller. A right-handed pilot using his left hand (and vice-versa) requires a good amount of practice to get the fine muscle-motor control needed for formation flying. A whole different set of muscles are used than when flying "regular" maneuvers.
3. The engines: When I first flew the F-111 in formation, it was quickly evident that a fan engine (e.g., TF-30) had a different response to small throttle movement than did a turbojet. And the larger the fan, the bigger the difference. I can't imagine trying to hold position with a couple of Trents or GE90s under my fingers.
As a not aside, when you're the second through the ?? airplane on the wing in an echelon, the more you've got to work to convince your mind that you're not too close. Photos of most formations where there's more than one airplane on the wing will show the succeeding aircraft increasingly wide. The Thunderbirds and Blues usea pilot on the ground during both practice and during a show to watch for this and call a correction over the radio (e.g., "#5, three feet out.") It would take an awful lot of Jet A-1 to tune up 10 pilots to that level of precision.
All in all, a fine job. But "RECKLESS?" Yeah, maybe if they did a diamond barrel roll with 20 feet of wingtip overlap at an altitude of 200 ft at the bottom. All the test pilots I know of who were "Reckless" in any airplane. for even a moment are all dead now. Anyone with reckless tendencies in their approach to flying are washed out of the test pilot school. Allow about a week for the paperwork to clear.
Very good points Peter.
Like most activities involving coordination of mind and body, practice and more practice gets both working together. Whenever I transitioned into a new aircraft there was a learning curve for how small a "box" I could keep the aircraft in when flying on the wing. The TF41 fan in the A-7D took some getting used to in close formation or refuelling. It forced you to think farther ahead...not a bad thing. Tried "cheating" by using some speed brake to keep the fan spooled up where it reponded more readily.
We often speak of a pilot having "good hands" when he/she is an excellent flyer. My take is that is really a "good brain" which the hands obey. An artist can paint the same picture with the off-hand or even toes or a mouse holding the brush. Sure the line quality is initially shaky, but it improves with practice. It is in you head, not your hands.
Fully agree on the "Reckless" comment. Never a TP, but I lost friends who did rcekless things in fighters. That policy should apply everywhere in military flying. Not a bad idea for commercial either. My best friend, a USAF TP for many years, was the best pilot I ever knew. He also had one of the best "brains" I have ever met. Don always claimed being a left-handed fighter driver was a major advantage..he could read his clipboard notes postflight!
Yeah, it did look like 4 and 5 were farther out in echelon. Pilots probably notice that more than non-pilots.
Enjoyed your comments.
Like most activities involving coordination of mind and body, practice and more practice gets both working together. Whenever I transitioned into a new aircraft there was a learning curve for how small a "box" I could keep the aircraft in when flying on the wing. The TF41 fan in the A-7D took some getting used to in close formation or refuelling. It forced you to think farther ahead...not a bad thing. Tried "cheating" by using some speed brake to keep the fan spooled up where it reponded more readily.
We often speak of a pilot having "good hands" when he/she is an excellent flyer. My take is that is really a "good brain" which the hands obey. An artist can paint the same picture with the off-hand or even toes or a mouse holding the brush. Sure the line quality is initially shaky, but it improves with practice. It is in you head, not your hands.
Fully agree on the "Reckless" comment. Never a TP, but I lost friends who did rcekless things in fighters. That policy should apply everywhere in military flying. Not a bad idea for commercial either. My best friend, a USAF TP for many years, was the best pilot I ever knew. He also had one of the best "brains" I have ever met. Don always claimed being a left-handed fighter driver was a major advantage..he could read his clipboard notes postflight!
Yeah, it did look like 4 and 5 were farther out in echelon. Pilots probably notice that more than non-pilots.
Enjoyed your comments.
I suppose it could have been worse...seem to remember a factory fly by demo at the Paris Air Show back in the day that resulted in "fly by wire" keeping the engines at idle when the throttle levers were pushed up....and a fancy Airbus became a not so fancy chain saw!
Looks like Airbus grasped the concept of the three most important things in aviation are "altitude, altitude, altitude".
The video reminds me of the early days in the KC10 program when we launched an 8 ship formation so we could do heavyweight air refueling training!
Our squadron call sign was "Opec" (We had the gas!)
"Opec flight check"
"Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
Seven
Eight"
Back when men were men and sheep were nervous!
Looks like Airbus grasped the concept of the three most important things in aviation are "altitude, altitude, altitude".
The video reminds me of the early days in the KC10 program when we launched an 8 ship formation so we could do heavyweight air refueling training!
Our squadron call sign was "Opec" (We had the gas!)
"Opec flight check"
"Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
Seven
Eight"
Back when men were men and sheep were nervous!
I think you're talking about the Mulhouse airshow, not the one in Paris.
WOW! ;-)