Posted on 08/27/2014 8:31:43 AM PDT by Sergio
A question for the aviation buffs on this forum. I was told at one time, that the F-16 was an inherently unstable aircraft, and that without assistance from it computers, no human pilot would be able to fly the aircraft.
Then I saw this video, (see link below), of a quarter scale, radio controlled F-16, in the colors of the Royal Dutch Air Force demonstration team.
I would think that there is not enough room in the model or money in the owner’s bank account to include flight control computers. So my question is; “How is the unstable F-16 model can fly so well without its flight computers?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQ9dSrrBN28
I was not the pilot, just the builder. That had a lot to do with why it flew so well.
As much as I like aviation, I will not get an RC aircraft for that same reason. It would break my heart when, not if, I crash it.
Since a model is…well, a model…is doesn’t necessarily have the same characteristics of the real F-16. In the model, you could easily adjust he center of gravity for optimum stability.
There is an expert on every subject here at Free Republic. Thanks for your service.
My cousin was an F-15 wrench turner. He was at the airbase in Germany where three Italian demonstration team planes crashed during an airshow.
Thanks for the posted information.
Rather than designing the model with neutral or negative static stability, design the model with positive static to neutral static stability. Perhaps chose a more benign airfoil section, but the whole fan-fold world has shown that even a plank of foam will fly. Given the F-16's airfoil maybe sharp, that may help induce some vortex lift even at the Low Reynolds numbers they maybe running at....
Thank, but I won't claim expert status. I can fix 'em, but I can't design or fly!
Yes.
The F4 has a glide ratio similar to that of a brick.
;-)
Aft CG (behind the center of lift) gave it a lot of maneuvering capability.
Weight distribution plays a bit role in the real-life jet, and speed as well.
I wouldn't let that stop you, that's a big part of the fun.
I eventually became a fair RC pilot and it was much more difficult, (and expensive), back then than now. Getting ready for take off with a model you've spent months of work and a thousand dollars on would make your knees knock to the point you could hear 'em. Had no one to train us and the radios were real iffy.
It was awesome!
Piece a cake nowadays. Cheap, ready to fly stuff available. Some of the foam models are almost crash proof in the respect that they are so light, they don't break even when they crash. Plenty of people around now to help train you. Radios actually work. Go for it.
I believe that was the initial assesment of the space shuttle as well.
I worked on F-16 production for 11 years (while it was still a General Dynamics product) and the design is unstable with a far aft CG. This gives the plane it's outstanding pitch-up and turn rates.
I have always heard it was manually unflyable without the flight control system being active and that is why it was designed with a triple redundant FCS.
However, in relatively level flight without radical control inputs it should be stable enough on all three flight axes to maintain reasonable stability.
One sure problem the pilot would eventually encounter though is pilot induced oscillations (PIOs). That is over compensation on control inputs that requires correction. These tend to get progressively more intense with a likely loss of controllability.
My God. I never knew this and they didn’t mention it in Stewart’s autobiography.
Did they test the plane before?
GREAT Movie!. Also starred the very recently deceased Sir Richard Attenborough.
Sounds appealing, thanks for the encouragement. My issue, as tested with RC cars, is thinking in reverse when the vehicle is coming towards me. Up and down shouldn’t be a problem, but left and right will drive me crazy.
Still, as you say, if costs have come down and planes are sturdier, it might be worth a try. Thanks for the suggestion.
Thanks pfflier, your explanation seems to be the consensus of those “in the know”. Thanks for lending your expertise, it is much appreciated.
Yes, it was certified for flight by the FAA and had been flown several times before the accident in the Arizona desert during filming.
Man this is lik the Vic murrow incident in the twighlight zone movie.
Was this caught on film also?
Check out the "SPAD" forums on the RC websites. Great way to recycle coroplast political campaign signs, fun and tough as nails.
I love this and other larger scale model aircraft flight footage.
Very very very cool...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.