Author Topic: Stick force and pilot fatigue  (Read 1503 times)

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
Stick force and pilot fatigue
« Reply #75 on: December 15, 2003, 04:25:54 PM »
Quote
What's clear it that most of the "fatigue" promoters posting since Pongo punted the thread either haven't read the whole thing or simply choose to remain uninformed.


 Or perhaps read the whole thing, but wanna expand it into a different direction? :rolleyes:

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Stick force and pilot fatigue
« Reply #76 on: December 15, 2003, 04:27:42 PM »
It's the same direction.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Stick force and pilot fatigue
« Reply #77 on: December 15, 2003, 04:35:40 PM »
simple solution... since it is only the german planes that had high effort sticks then we could just model some fatigue for them and leave the other planes alone.   Say... 3 turns or flip flops and the plane could only fly straight and level...  this should not be any burden on them since they don't turn anyway.

In Hintons videos of the F6 and corsair he makes mention of how light the controls are and how roomy the cockpit is.   You can see him rolling the corsair useing basicaly, thumb and one finger.    

lazs

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Stick force and pilot fatigue
« Reply #78 on: December 15, 2003, 04:40:38 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
You can see him rolling the corsair useing basicaly, thumb and one finger.    

lazs


Yeah, sure.. but two consecutive rolls and your thumb and finger cramp up, rendering you totally incapable of rolling any more. We should model that.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Stick force and pilot fatigue
« Reply #79 on: December 15, 2003, 05:53:45 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by miko2d
Bf109 - 40 pounds of stick force/G. Extremely narrow cockpit. No rudder trim and constant need to push with one leg.
 P47 - 7 pounts of stick force/G. Spaceous cockpit. Very well-balanced, trim available.

 So the at high speeds, especially at altitude a pilot in P47 was rutinely able to outturn a pilot in Bf109 and in a short time exaust him.

 Ever tried to aim a gun weighting 60 pounds?
 I could loan you my 64-pound longbow and let you try a shot. I could hit a quarter at 20 yards but after 6 shots in a row I needed fifteen minutes break.
 I can shoot my wife's 40 pound bow indefinitely.

 Even simpler, try to run a mile with 7-pound load. Then try one with 40-pound load.
 After the run try some precision activity, like playing a piano or target shooting.
 I bet the results before and after the run will be quite different due to fatigue.

 miko


*cough* bull**** *cough*

Me 109 G:
"So how does the aeroplane compare with other contemporary fighters ? First, let me say that all my comments are based on operation below 10,000 feet and at power settings not exceeding +12 (54") and 2700 rpm. I like it as an aeroplane, and with familiarity I think it will give most of the allied fighters I have flown a hard time, particularly in a close, hard turning, slow speed dog-fight. It will definitely out-maneuver a P-51 in this type of flight, the roll rate and slow speed characteristics being much better. The Spitfire on the other hand is more of a problem for the '109 and I feel it is a superior close in fighter. Having said that the aircraft are sufficiently closely matched that pilot abilty would probably be the deciding factor. At higher speeds the P-51 is definitely superior, and provided the Mustang kept his energy up and refused to dogfight he would be relatively safe against the '109.
I like the aeroplane very much, and I think I can understand why many of the Luftwaffe aces had such a high regard and preference for it."
- Mark Hanna of the Old Flying Machine Company flying the OFMC Messerschmitt Bf 109 G

109 G:
"The roll rate is very good and very positive below about 250 mph. Above 250 mph however the roll starts to heavy up and up to 300 or so is very similar to a P-51. After that it's all getting pretty solid and you need two hands on the stick for any meaningfull roll rates. Pitch is also delighful at 250 mph and below. It feels very positve and the amount of effort on the control column needed to produce the relevant nose movement seems exactly right to me. The aircraft is perfectly happy carrying out low-level looping maneuvers from 300 mph and below. Above 300 mph one peculiarity is a slight nose down trim change as you accelerate. The rudder is effective and if medium feel up to 300. It becomes heavier above this speed but regardless the lack of rudder trim is not a problem for the type of operations we carry out with the aeroplane."
- Mark Hanna of the Old Flying Machine Company flying the OFMC Messerschmitt Bf 109 G

"The 109? That was a dream, the non plus ultra. Just like the F-14 of today. Of course, everyone wanted to fly it as soon as possible. I was very proud when I converted to it."
Major Gunther Rall, German fighter ace, NATO general, Commander of the German Air Force. 275 victories.

" I had made my own estimates of the performance and maneuverability characteristics of a lot of other single-seater fighters, and I'd be willing to wager that none of them represent the general, all-around flight and fighting characteristics possessed by the Me109."
- US Marine Corps major Al Williams.

Me 109 G:
"Fast and maneuverable Me 109 (G) would be a tough opponent in the hands of a skillful pilot. Messerschmitt was during it´s time an efficient fighter and would not be in shame even nowadays. Eventhough the top speeds of the today´s fighters are high the differerencies would even up in a dogfight.
Mersu (Messerchmitt) had three meters long engine in the nose were with 1 500 horsepowers. The speed was at it´s best 750 kilometers per hour. It turned well too, if you just pulled the stick"
- Mauno Fräntilä, Finnish fighter ace. 5 1/2 victories. Source: Finnish Virtual Pilots Association: fighter ace Mauno Fräntilä was creating the glory of the war pilots.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Jackal1

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9092
Stick force and pilot fatigue
« Reply #80 on: December 20, 2003, 01:34:25 AM »
Up, up and away
Democracy is two wolves deciding on what to eat. Freedom is a well armed sheep protesting the vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
Stick force and pilot fatigue
« Reply #81 on: December 20, 2003, 10:45:21 AM »
This idea assumes a common level of fitness. That would be highly unrealistic. It also assumes that everyone has the same general physical make-up. Again, unrealistic.

I recall reading that modern flight physiologists believe that pilots like Robert Johnson and Gabby Gabreski were successful partially due to being short of stature, thus decreasing the distance between heart and brain while allowing for greater O2 concentration in the blood and muscles.

Leave it alone folks, there's no fair way to apply this.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.