Author Topic: could real life aircraft take it?  (Read 1481 times)

Offline Wingnutt

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: could real life aircraft take it?
« Reply #30 on: June 03, 2008, 05:36:16 PM »
dont know if its pertinent, but the instance i cited about the jug getting its wings bent upwards, the bomb was on the center rack, not a wing pylon.

at any rate this thread has drifted..

Im talking about a clean aircraft, and the transition from high positive to high negative Gs at a rapid rate.. I.E slamming the aircraft from +6g immediately into perhaps -4G  in less than 1 second, and the effects of doing such an extreme maneuver rapidly over and over would realistically have on a real WW2 aircraft.

its a give in the the pilot couldent handle it by a long shot, but I have trouble believing such stresses wouldn't damage the airframe, and immediately so.




Offline colmbo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2246
      • Photos
Re: could real life aircraft take it?
« Reply #31 on: June 04, 2008, 10:33:57 AM »
Wingnutt,

I don't think the rate of change would have much effect.   Of course R/L someone pumping the stick back and forth as seen online would quite likely exceed limit load factors.  The number of cycles and ultimate load certainly would fatigue the airframe.
Columbo

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."

Fate whispers to the warrior "You cannot withstand the storm" and the warrior whispers back "I AM THE STORM"

Offline Wingnutt

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: could real life aircraft take it?
« Reply #32 on: June 04, 2008, 11:40:45 AM »
Wingnutt,

I don't think the rate of change would have much effect.   Of course R/L someone pumping the stick back and forth as seen online would quite likely exceed limit load factors.  The number of cycles and ultimate load certainly would fatigue the airframe.

 :huh

so it wouldn't have much effect? but it would likely exceed the load limits?

you are has confuse me.

Offline Cthulhu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2463
Re: could real life aircraft take it?
« Reply #33 on: June 04, 2008, 04:31:29 PM »
Wingnutt,

I don't think the rate of change would have much effect.   Of course R/L someone pumping the stick back and forth as seen online would quite likely exceed limit load factors.  The number of cycles and ultimate load certainly would fatigue the airframe.

I agree. Loading rate can have an effect on ultimate strength for certain materials, but I don't think that the aerodynamic loads on a WWII aircraft could ramp-up quickly enough for this to be an issue. I agree that there would be fatigue due to stick stirring, but as I said earlier, even at elevated loads, low-cycle fatigue can require thousands or tens of thousands of cycles before you reach critical crack size, and you get a "new plane" everytime you land, so no biggie. :)

And just to clarify, ultimate load won't fatigue the airframe, it will destroy it. One cycle, Guaranteed. :D
"Think of Tetris as a metaphor for life:  You spend all your time trying to find a place for your long thin piece, then when you finally do, everything you've built disappears"

Offline Cthulhu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2463
Re: could real life aircraft take it?
« Reply #34 on: June 04, 2008, 04:45:26 PM »
Sorry guys, I should have put this in my previous post, but I think some more clarification is needed. So here it is.

Fatigue:
Many cycles of loads < Limit Load = wear out airframe over time (small undetectable cracks get bigger over time until something breaks; usually takes years)

Limit Load:
Limit Load = load at which airframe is permanently deformed (bad). Picture jugs and pony's coming back with wings permanently bent. Airplane is ruined but you survive (usually). :uhoh

Ultimate Load:
Ultimate load = load at which airframe breaks ( worse ). Significantly higher than Limit Load for aluminum and steel. Airplane falls apart and you probably don't make it.:pray
"Think of Tetris as a metaphor for life:  You spend all your time trying to find a place for your long thin piece, then when you finally do, everything you've built disappears"

Offline DEAR98

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 145
Re: could real life aircraft take it?
« Reply #35 on: June 04, 2008, 05:28:25 PM »
Just say'n but I think the "plane" can take it. If the pilot don't die in the seat.
Don't shoot a "deer" they may shoot back.
The String is stronger than steal.

Offline colmbo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2246
      • Photos
Re: could real life aircraft take it?
« Reply #36 on: June 05, 2008, 12:46:26 AM »
:huh

so it wouldn't have much effect? but it would likely exceed the load limits?

you are has confuse me.

I didn't word that very well I guess. <G>

I don't think the rate that the load is applied would have a great effect on the aircraft structure.

I do think that were a pilot to pump the stick as we see online he would likely exceed the limit load factors.

So, IF a pilot could stick stir without exceeding the limit load factors I don't think it would hurt the airplane. However I do think it is highly likely the pilot would overshoot limit load factors.
Columbo

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."

Fate whispers to the warrior "You cannot withstand the storm" and the warrior whispers back "I AM THE STORM"

Offline Gianlupo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5154
Re: could real life aircraft take it?
« Reply #37 on: June 05, 2008, 09:00:50 AM »
Im talking about a clean aircraft, and the transition from high positive to high negative Gs at a rapid rate.. I.E slamming the aircraft from +6g immediately into perhaps -4G  in less than 1 second, and the effects of doing such an extreme maneuver rapidly over and over would realistically have on a real WW2 aircraft.

Wingnutt, I don't think we ever inflict that kind of punishment on a plane. I'm not an engineer or a RL pilot and, despite some notions acquired reading books, I'm not claiming I'm an expert: but I think the point is not on airplane limits, it's another one.

Think about it: how many times you keep pulling when you blacked- or redded(?)- out? In 99% of the instances, you'll release the pressure on the stick before the screen goes totally black or red. Well, black screen happens when you're pulling 6 maybe 6.5 Gs (-2/2.5 for negative), so, while in combat, you almost never reach those values. And they are well within the safe operational limits of our fighters, I presume. I think we normally pull no more than 5/5.5 Gs and -2 G. Add to that that you get a new plane every time you land, and you can see that a structural failure is really unlikely in AH. If you have a .ahf of a very heated fight of yours, run it and check the G-meter: I think you'll find out that my above speculation are reasonable and maybe true. :)

Mind that you can pull more than 6 G or -2 G in the game, when the screen goes black or red. You just don't do it, because it would be of no help, if not for a brief pull (G-loc is quick to come!)

So I think RL planes would take it, just because it's not so much as it seems. A total different question is if the pilots, at time, could take it: I guess we'll be able to speculate about it (and have flame wars on the boards :D) about it when CT comes out and the pilot will be simulated as a "real" man and not only a part of the damage list.

Btw, nice stick stirring on the Yak! :)

EDITed to better clarify what I was trying to say.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2008, 09:06:58 AM by Gianlupo »
Live to fly, fly to live!