Negative-G push? or "stick stir"?

[Rich46yo]

It seems to me, and appears to me, that the difference between high G evasive maneuvers and stick stirring is pretty obvious. If anyone has doubt go up a fighter in the TA, start film, and start jerking the stick all over the place in a manner you know could never be done in an actual aircraft. THAT! is stick stirring.

High G maneuvers may be violent but they aren't short and jerky, and random too. I imagine in real life there was plenty of super high G evasive maneuvers because getting shot at with guns and cannon that could blow your head clear off was a pretty good motivator to ride the edge.

Stick stirring is pretty dweeby. Most of all cause there are other options, legit flight realistic options, that are open to you. 90% of the stick jerking Ive seen has been with run-90s or runstangs. They are both pretty helpless when caught low and slow.

[BnZs]

IMO, slipping and skidding about with the ailerons and rudders is alot *less* gamey than some of the uses of eye-popping neg Gs you see. There is always the question of course, just how long could a man rapidly reverse any of the control inputs using only his muscle power on the control surfaces? But as far as I know slipping, skidding, and rolling not have the deleterious physical side effects that alternately pushing the stick to firewall and pulling it to belly presumably would.

It seems to me, and appears to me, that the difference between high G evasive maneuvers and stick stirring is pretty obvious. If anyone has doubt go up a fighter in the TA, start film, and start jerking the stick all over the place in a manner you know could never be done in an actual aircraft. THAT! is stick stirring.

High G maneuvers may be violent but they aren't short and jerky, and random too. I imagine in real life there was plenty of super high G evasive maneuvers because getting shot at with guns and cannon that could blow your head clear off was a pretty good motivator to ride the edge.

Stick stirring is pretty dweeby. Most of all cause there are other options, legit flight realistic options, that are open to you. 90% of the stick jerking Ive seen has been with run-90s or runstangs. They are both pretty helpless when caught low and slow.

[Mace2004]

Perfectly legit maneuver.  There are four guns defense maneuver taught by TOPGUN.  Break turn, barrel-roll over the top, barrel-roll underneath and neg-G pushaway.  The neg-G pushaway is exactly as the OP describes it.  A hard push forward followed by a hard pull (usually out of plane).  The push spoils the attackers gun solution and, if done starting from a high-G turn, will usually cause the attacker to lose sight.  The out of plane positive G pull then serves to force an overshoot and yes, planes are perfectly capable of going from +6G to -2G and back to +6G again without damage.  I agree with the others though that the neg-G is very uncomfortable and there are other practical limits.  

First, most RL pilots never actually get to negative G in a push, they think they do but are actually just hitting 0G and starting to float in their seat but even that will sometimes work.  You have really got to stuff the stick to get a true 1-2 negative G and it's very unnatural and uncomfortable at first so it takes practice.  I always did a negative G check as part of my combat checklist to "warm up" and also to make sure that nothing would come flying up and hit me in the head.  I've never seen anyone able to push and sustain sufficient negative G during a guns defense to cause any damage to themselves, it's too short of a duration.

The biggest problem isn't red-out, it's staying in your seat.  For ACM you're supposed to fly with your lapbelts as tight as you can get them but the reality is most of us flew with the lap belts "comfortable".  The shoulder restraints are on inertia reels and can be locked or left free so you can turn but the lap restraints are fixed.  The problem is that you have to strike a balance between really strapping in and being able to turn around.  This is particularly a problem if you're short and the cockpit is large.  Lap belts on modern ejection seats don't do a great job of keeping you in your seat during negative G even when fully tightened because they are designed to pull back and down vice straight down.  What happens during negative G is that you end up "hanging" upside down from the lap restraints and that lifts your feet off the pedals and makes it hard to keep forward pressure on the stick so the trick is to have your seat restraints tight enough to be able to maintain control without limiting your ability to turn too much.  The newer seats now have a neg-G strap which comes up between your legs but I only found it to be a little bit better but it still didn't keep your butt in the seat.

As far as WWII aircraft are concerned, I imagine that there was a broad difference in the quality of their restraint systems.  Hartman's stories leads me to believe the Germans must have had a pretty good system but it's hard to say.

[rv6]

Wow..  That being said (what Mace just said above).  This subject is closed with the answer from one who's been there, done that for real.. very cool.

I suppose the only way to "simulate" this (as described) is to have my wife duc tape my legs and chest to the chair, and delete the "rear-view" hat-switch mode on the joystick, IF, we use the neg-G push.  :-)

Again, thanks for the great description Mace. It's clear now, no longer conjecture.


RV6

[Sc00ter]

If I'm behind ya its inappropriate, but id I'm not then its ok. Any move is ok with me after all it is a game. I just wish they could limit the not manned cv flaks fire.

[RufusLeaking]

I always did a negative G check as part of my combat checklist to "warm up" and also to make sure that nothing would come flying up and hit me in the head.

A great scene in the movie "Hot Shots" is when they're inverted and coins, playing cards, etc. all stick to the canopy.  

The biggest problem isn't red-out, it's staying in your seat.

Quoted for truth.  Spin recovery in a Tweet required a sharp push on the stick.  The scuffs on one's helmet were a record of how many times you banged your head on the canopy.  Coming out of the seat is another of those things impossible to model.

[Anaxogoras]

If I'm behind ya its inappropriate, but id I'm not then its ok. Any move is ok with me after all it is a game.

Hitech said something like "it's a simulation used to play a game."  That's why there physical limits on what the aircraft can do and what the pilot can sustain.  For my part, there's a big asymmetry in how black-outs can cause loss of control input and loss of view, but red-out never causes more than a half-second of inconvenience.

[Golfer]

Good to see you RV!  I'm happy to see you around because I'm still looking for a rematch  






Merry Christmas, Amigo!

[Shuffler]

Wow..  That being said (what Mace just said above).  This subject is closed with the answer from one who's been there, done that for real.. very cool.

I suppose the only way to "simulate" this (as described) is to have my wife duc tape my legs and chest to the chair, and delete the "rear-view" hat-switch mode on the joystick, IF, we use the neg-G push.  :-)

Again, thanks for the great description Mace. It's clear now, no longer conjecture.


RV6

He didn't post about WWII fighters.... just modern fighters.

[CAP1]

i drove the ole 38 o doom right into the trees last night, trying to avoid a bnz 190. obviously more caution is needed doing this maneuver.

 on another note, when i came back, the very same 190 was now only co-alt......no advantages. he kept running to the vbase, where the flakker couldn't hit me at all. 

[Sol75]

Perfectly legit maneuver.  There are four guns defense maneuver taught by TOPGUN.  Break turn, barrel-roll over the top, barrel-roll underneath and neg-G pushaway.  The neg-G pushaway is exactly as the OP describes it.  A hard push forward followed by a hard pull (usually out of plane).  The push spoils the attackers gun solution and, if done starting from a high-G turn, will usually cause the attacker to lose sight.  The out of plane positive G pull then serves to force an overshoot and yes, planes are perfectly capable of going from +6G to -2G and back to +6G again without damage.  I agree with the others though that the neg-G is very uncomfortable and there are other practical limits. 

First, most RL pilots never actually get to negative G in a push, they think they do but are actually just hitting 0G and starting to float in their seat but even that will sometimes work.  You have really got to stuff the stick to get a true 1-2 negative G and it's very unnatural and uncomfortable at first so it takes practice.  I always did a negative G check as part of my combat checklist to "warm up" and also to make sure that nothing would come flying up and hit me in the head.  I've never seen anyone able to push and sustain sufficient negative G during a guns defense to cause any damage to themselves, it's too short of a duration.

The biggest problem isn't red-out, it's staying in your seat.  For ACM you're supposed to fly with your lapbelts as tight as you can get them but the reality is most of us flew with the lap belts "comfortable".  The shoulder restraints are on inertia reels and can be locked or left free so you can turn but the lap restraints are fixed.  The problem is that you have to strike a balance between really strapping in and being able to turn around.  This is particularly a problem if you're short and the cockpit is large.  Lap belts on modern ejection seats don't do a great job of keeping you in your seat during negative G even when fully tightened because they are designed to pull back and down vice straight down.  What happens during negative G is that you end up "hanging" upside down from the lap restraints and that lifts your feet off the pedals and makes it hard to keep forward pressure on the stick so the trick is to have your seat restraints tight enough to be able to maintain control without limiting your ability to turn too much.  The newer seats now have a neg-G strap which comes up between your legs but I only found it to be a little bit better but it still didn't keep your butt in the seat.

As far as WWII aircraft are concerned, I imagine that there was a broad difference in the quality of their restraint systems.  Hartman's stories leads me to believe the Germans must have had a pretty good system but it's hard to say.

I oculd DEFINITELY see this mace... in Aero flying, we cinch those restraints down tight, of course we do not need the freedom of movement you guys do... and even with those belts cinched it is quite uncomfortable, I can imagine it would be even more so with loose straps...

[BnZs]

 The out of plane positive G pull then serves to force an overshoot and yes, planes are perfectly capable of going from +6G to -2G and back to +6G again without damage.  I agree with the others though that the neg-G is very uncomfortable and there are other practical limits.  

What you see in-game (particularly from Tempests in trouble in the DA lake ) is more like +6 or 7, then -4 or more (-Gs pegged on the meter, you can do it, tried it offline) over and over. Red out to black out in rapid succession. That realistic?

[BnZs]

Hitech said something like "it's a simulation used to play a game."  That's why there physical limits on what the aircraft can do and what the pilot can sustain.  For my part, there's a big asymmetry in how black-outs can cause loss of control input and loss of view, but red-out never causes more than a half-second of inconvenience.

QFT

[Sol75]

What you see in-game (particularly from Tempests in trouble in the DA lake ) is more like +6 or 7, then -4 or more (-Gs pegged on the meter, you can do it, tried it offline) over and over. Red out to black out in rapid succession. That realistic?

As I said I don't know for certain, since this is not something I do when flying aero,  but it is a fact that going pos G right after Neg, increases your susceptibility to GLOC from the pos G's... I would have to assume it works the same in the opposite direction as well, and repeated porpoise moves like this? I would think it could get to be an issue if done repeatedly.  That being said, again, the amount and duration of G loads both Pos and Neg would have a large impact on the physiological effects.  The other factor is the total amount of time spent at "G loading" as pilot fatigue plays a large role in his ability to withstand G loadings... If you have been in a lengthy sequence of maneuvers, the more times you grey out, or even have high G loadings, the more susceptible you are to GLOC from maneuvers performed soon thereafter.  Note Sean D Tucker, during his 20 min performance, takes a 5 minute break in the middle to reset and clear his head a bit. (although this is also to get the engine cooled off some too)
The same would apply to combat I would think (never been in combat, this is all based on my exp flying aerobatics), if you have spent any significant amount of time pulling G loads in a fight, then try to extend and use the "porpoise" move shortly thereafter, your fatigue would play a factor in both the onset, and recovery of GLOC/Redout.  I do not believe this fatigue factor is modelled in AH though.

Sol

[thorsim]

you do whatever it takes remember ...

even negative Gs ...

negative G evasive was standard for the fuel injector planes against their non fuel injected opponents ...

stick stirring is using the "prediction software" to make you nearly impossible to hit and as i understand it has more to do with how rapid the stick movements are than how dramatic they are.

i do see a lot of intentional prediction software manipulation to evade pursuit but it is more like a negative g fade then hard pull resulting in a warp turn more than the traditional up down up down rapid succession of a "stick stir"

both very cartoon and lame imo but what ya gonna do with so many lame cartoon players