my profile | register | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
»  COMBATSIM.COM Forum Archive   » Game Discussions (Genre)   » Jets   » Up Close and Personal

Author Topic: Up Close and Personal

posted 05-29-2000 11:57 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Hi Everyone,

As some of you *might* know I'm writing a novel (for fun not profit) anyway I've asked several questions here before and got some great answers so here I go again.

OK The question is, what would the perfect plane for dogfighting be like?
In the novel the Russians have designed a plane around this concept (difficult to explain but this plane wouldn't have to have any long range dogfighting capabilities at all nor would it need to be particularly stealthy, it pops up in combat basically beside the enemies and wreaks havoc from there)

My ideas so far would it would be kind of like an evolution of the S-37 Berkut.
I.e. Forward swept wings, etc but a lot smaller and more nimble. Thrust vectoring natch The pilot would lie basically horizontal to combat the G's (this raises the question of ejector seats, but in the story the Rusky's still haven't solved this problem so it first see's combat without one)

Anyway any ideas? Any input is gratefully appreciated

IP: Logged
Member # 4579

posted 05-29-2000 09:13 PM     Profile for Ozias   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Forward and rear IRST units would be a good idea for a start.

The russians have already introduced the IRST with their MiG-29 and Su-27 series aircraft, coupled with the R-73 (AA-11) Archer dogfight missile and a helmet mounted sight. These two aircraft also combine a laser range finder into the IRST, which provides very accurate range information within a couple of kilometres of the target.
The archer missile has a wide angle, imaging infra-red seeker, which means it is resistant to the decoy effect of flares, and it can locate and lock onto targets at up to 60 degrees off of the launch aircraft's axis. It also uses a thrust vectoring system, metal paddles which stick into the booster rocket exhaust to make tighter turns, it is probable this would only be used immediately after the missile was launched, this would allow the missile to oprient itself on close targets, but would probably reduce the range of the missile, which is rated at about 10 kilometres.
Also, the russians have tested a rear-firing version of the archer, which would be severely scary to come up against.

Posts: 334 | From: London,UK | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged
Member # 1639

posted 05-29-2000 09:23 PM     Profile for goanna   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Ummm...sorry for the tangent, but if it isn't stealthy, how does it just "pop-up" amoungst the enemy to wreak havoc without having to dodge or swollowing an A2A missile on the ingress?
Posts: 427 | From: QLD Australia | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged

posted 05-30-2000 05:26 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Thanks Ozias.

Goanna, good question the background to the story is (meant to be fun not *totally* realistic) the Russians test a working but flawed version of the Philedelphia experiment in the early sixties (radar, and optical invisibility) the technology is rediscovered in 2004 and the Russians start to put it into their military hardware.

The dogfighter is the first plane built around this concept to provide coverage for the other shielded bombers (they have to drop out of invisibility for their final attack run) therefore no ingress problems the fighter simply reappears beside the enemies and *boom*

Anyone any other ideas on what the ultimate dogfighter would be? (no air-to-ground)

IP: Logged
Member # 998

posted 05-30-2000 12:08 PM     Profile for Bogey   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
One way to solve the ejection problem with near-horizontal seats would be to have it fire slightly backwards, moving along a curved rail ending vertical.
Waddaya think?

Up there, where the air is rare...

Posts: 339 | From: West coast of Sweden | Registered: Nov 1999  |  IP: Logged
Swervin Irvin
Member # 888

posted 05-30-2000 01:19 PM     Profile for Swervin Irvin   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I wonder if greater turning performance could be gained by a jet with a "spine" that could arch into the turn when the stick is pulled back. Perhaps a given g load would give a much smaller turning radius.

Take it vertical.. dive.. ram your talons deep.

Posts: 497 | From: Redmond, Wa. | Registered: Nov 1999  |  IP: Logged
Member # 1639

posted 05-30-2000 04:02 PM     Profile for goanna   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
About the ejection. Why not F-111 style, in a capsule. That way the capsule could fire upwards like a convention ejector seat. The pilots may thank you for it as their spins wouldn't compress as they would be almost laying down.
Posts: 427 | From: QLD Australia | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged
Member # 275

posted 05-31-2000 02:30 AM     Profile for Envelope   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
My jet fighter fantasy is a Mach capable VTOL fighter and something with some real payload too. This would include thrust vectoring as well.
Posts: 2057 | From: Davis, CA, USA | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Kurt Plummer
Member # 358

posted 05-31-2000 04:38 AM     Profile for Kurt Plummer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
You don't want to use a helmet system from the prone position, too much disorientation (inner ear effect 'turning' lateral to the plane of pitch rotation, like artificial gravity by spinning a space station, you turn sideways and your ear tells you are falling forward and to the antispin side and so your body reflexes back and into it).

And too little information coming in (how well can you see a horizon line, how far into the 3-9 critical areas can you scan).

Instead, AvLeak has shown an article in which lasers project up to 16-color hologramatics right into the eye and you are essentially 'pure virtual' without the need for bulky VR helmet. Your pupils still move and your iris contract and this is what is used to cue the system to the area /inside your eyeball/ where the 3D image can be rotated or a pseudo-global displays rear hemisphere tracks targeted.

Similarly, from the prone position you're not going to have a heckuva lot of dexterity/orientation factor on a joystick so you will likely either fly through the helmet or want to have some kind of 'piano system' to twitch fingers and rotate your fist etc. (keeping in mind that in the 10-20G range even your digits are likely going to weigh multiple pounds).

Again because your vision globe is going to be totally screwed up for depth-vs.-angle tracking perception in a traditional 'horizon-tal' orientation I would include some preprogrammed attack and/or evasion patterns based on either tagteaming copositioning with wingmen (pack attack tactics if the deer veers left wingie gets him, if he dodges right, you do) or MAWS (Missile Approach Warning System, the Russians call theirs 'MAKS', it looks like a rubics dodecahedron on each wingtip missile launch rail). Press evasion type 1 (piano) with your left index and a missile closing from your right side is automatically timed to EXCM firing at X seconds and max-rate break at X+Y followon seconds.

Lastly, I would suggest that their be some radical modifications made to the pilots. First off, just being prone is no guarantee against G. Again at truly high rate onsets there will still be a massive blood surge, particularly in extended vertical maneuvering, and as a consequence there's gonna be vascular osmosis if not outright hemorraghing. Anyone over the age of about 18-20 is going to have too hard an artery system, particularly in there brains (where loose blood is a poison) and even then you will want olypmic grade material, 'trained from birth'. They will last about 3-5 years (say from 14-19) before they must simply be replaced.

I would include further, surgical, modifications to include pin valve cutoffs of blood flow to-from the lower body at the femoral artery and a 'required' 2-stage rotarypump to fight the sudden bloodshift up-to-down and vice versa. Direct Forced Oxygenation would then come via an external mixer and the lungs might actually be shut down with tranks to save on muscular exhaustion.

External application of methamphetamine synthetic endorphin type drugs to heighten certain basic, instinctive, visual processing would also occur. The more you can maintain fight awareness 'outside the box' of rational awareness, ultimate, the better you're going to be in a 'dogfight'.

The combination of all of this is apt to be 'fighter junkies' who have all kinds of twitches and age-phobias in the program and a lot of lost-youth-longing (no traditional schooling/social awareness development, all their pals solely associated with the same fight-til-we-don't-want-you type program).

Especially at close range, your Best Friend is going to be a laser to blind the other guys optics and/or canopy with high energy dazzle. Needless to say, there should be NO canopy on your supermidget.

Radar, especially if it's frontquarter and mono-amplitude/centroid variance accuracy limited at close range (as are most systems today) will be next to useless and apt to draw AA-ARMs. It will certainly be noisy and a huge aperture for extraneous P-Space energy to enter the airframe (see later, MAW).

Your next best weapon is going to be hypervelocity/rocket cannons. If you can zip up the muzzle velocity to around 8-10K fps, you can put a largish (45mm) single round out to 3-4 miles in about two seconds under constant propulsion this is less than a third the time it takes a conventional SRM to go an equal distance.

Smaller rounds will have poorer inertia velocity retention (mass:drag ratio) but using something like a Tround gun (Trochoidal Rounds shaped like so- \/ in crossection, 'open breached' into the cylinder) you could get 10-20rd burst rates on the order of 20-30Kspm (the Tround has been tested to this, in the U.S.).

Over about a mile and a half TOF, or twice the 4Kft of current weapons, this would box-saturate an incredibly tight-lethal volume (where saturation is the ballistic dispersion factor due to ballistic and weapon 'shudder' over time).

If you can pitch fast enough, you might even be able to use it as a terminal defence in anti-AAM role.

The problem with all of these is still going to be accuracy however and for this, I recommend a 'BLAM' (Barrel Launched Adaptive Munition) round.

If you've ever heard of Battle Tech, you know they've got electroactive 'myomer' tendons running their big robots and the BLAM is much the same, employing a ball and socket joint a in a two-part round divided a little ahead of the shell midbody.

Two 'piezoceramic' tendons at crossed-X angles are used to in-spin deflect the nose and generate an assymetrical aeroforce which provides an incredible steering moment at gun-velocities.

Again this is 'real' stuff in that I have an AvLeak article dated 6/30/97, page 49, citing 'Adaptive Aerostructures Laboratory' as having done the initial work for this (obviously you would have to transfer noveua modern to noveau-old if the Russki project dates back to the 60's).

With the control mechanism in-place, it becomes fairly simple to mount a quad of laser receptors at the base of the shell and steer off the FLIR (IRST laserranger) so to speak.

For longer ranged engagements, especially with a small fighter, you're facing two big problems.

1. Getting Thar Fustest.
You effectively cannot outrange a fighter capable of carrying a bigger round on pure rocket or even ramjet power. He who carries more weight wins. This is particularly important when you're escorting something because you're limited to it's performance as well.

2. Making The Mostest of the Leastest.
Pylon effects (mass, drag and assymetric aeros variance of same) is always going to limit the total size-quantity of weapons you can carry.

The solution is likely 'cruise AAM' whereby you stagger your shielded bomber approach paths and dump a truckload of these hunting capable weapons, right in the face of the enemy (at those kinds of power levels that it's unlikely your own sensors would be able to see anything either).

Because most jets still cruise in the range Mach.9 to 1.15, in their assigned CAP zone (it may be significantly less if they are endurance-loaded with tanks and/or not really expecting a fight) a small turbojet weapon _can_ catch them.

More importantly, it can /miss/.

And reattack.

The aimpoint likely being the enemy canopy and the small-warhead 'miss distance' perhaps as little as 5-10feet.

Jet Fuel is cheap compared to rocket or ramjet pours/chemistry and it's also very range-efficient in this fairly low speed arena.

To help the weapons sneak-in, you would want to use ARM or IR/EO (day TV is a very viable capability in some theatres) seekers. You would then want a small datalink so that the fairly narrow FOVs could scan-overlap together to increase their effective seeker coverage.

The idea being that some 'inviso generator' aircraft are specifically tasked to either on their own or as a function of dragged fighters (the bomber then can also be a tanker) drop-dump-jump back into 'P-Space', rather than attack the primary target.

The effect is like a stealth presweep/decoy maneuver ahead of the real bomb droppers.

Keep in mind these weapons WON'T be as peak-fast as a traditional AAM but they will give chase for a great deal longer, from a lot further away.

Again, reality has U.S. testing a small decoy called a 'MALD' in a similar role as a cruise missile interceptor.

There is no reason it wouldn't work against manned airframes if you didn't have to worry about target confliction with your inviso-bombers (behind/offset from you).

Lastly, the airframe. MAW is your key here. Mission Adaptive Wing, as tested on an F-111, uses superflexible composites to hold a form without the hingeline structural, aero and stealth penalties of a conventional plane. Especially if massively over-G'd you cannot afford a structurally non-cohesive leading/trailing edge.

And again, if you're dumping a gazillion kilwatts into the sky you may also want to have a TOTALLY CLOSED aeroshell or you will be EMI/EMP'ing your fellow travellers at the same time you are shielding them from detection.

Exhausts have such a high ionizing counter-charge factor within their superheated stream that vectored thrust from inside a shielded duct (ala the X-36) is probably not a problem but anything 'open air' with a conventionally hinged cutline gap on a wing or tail would be fair game.

Imagine Sir Russkie 'accidentally' doing a Taran on your mothership as his outer elevon actuator goes nuts from battle damage or just fatigue/inadequate maintenance.

Kurt Plummer

Posts: 672 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged

posted 05-31-2000 10:36 AM       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Wow! Some great information/ideas there, thanks everyone

Kurt Plumer: I especially like your ideas on the planes weapons (something I hadn't really considered) and the pilots training, Thanks

IP: Logged
Swervin Irvin
Member # 888

posted 05-31-2000 01:07 PM     Profile for Swervin Irvin   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Mr. Plummer, it's a pleasure to have my horizons radically expanded again. Good to see you back.

Take it vertical.. dive.. ram your talons deep.

Posts: 497 | From: Redmond, Wa. | Registered: Nov 1999  |  IP: Logged
Member # 998

posted 05-31-2000 03:29 PM     Profile for Bogey   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Kurt P does it again...

I think he drifted off into some Klingon stuff there at the end...

Up there, where the air is rare...

Posts: 339 | From: West coast of Sweden | Registered: Nov 1999  |  IP: Logged
Member # 64

posted 05-31-2000 03:53 PM     Profile for Zed     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I'm not too sure as to Kurt's bit on the MMI, if one was to go to such extents, cybornisation would be preferable, and interfacing would be through interpretive pyschometric system.
Posts: 866 | From: Midlands, UK | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Member # 4579

posted 05-31-2000 04:18 PM     Profile for Ozias   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
'Borrow' some ideas from the dale brown novel 'Flight of The Cheetah' which features an experimental american aircraft, the Dreamstar, which featured

Mind control system, combined with a direct feed of sensor info and other info into the brain.

A tactical AI which presents a series of attck/defence options to the pilot, he selects the best option, or executes manouvers 'manually'

An airframe with forward swept mission adaptive wings, canards and vectored thurst nozzles.

360 degree phased radar system based on small playing card sized radar transmitter/recievers placed all over the skin of the aircraft.

Posts: 334 | From: London,UK | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged
Kurt Plummer
Member # 358

posted 06-01-2000 01:05 AM     Profile for Kurt Plummer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
He's Baaaaack...:-\\

First off, sorry if I was a little errrr, incoherent there. When you've just come off a 48hr sleep-there-work-there shift, it's 85` and the air conditioner is busted; your attention span tends to be hard-limited to the length of the refrigerator walk for your next Coke infusion...

Anyway, a Taran is a ramming tactic used by the Soviets flying crippled aircraft early in the war to 'take one more along with them'.

If you've ever seen Hollyweird's rendition of the Phily Experiment you know that they are messing with some /serious/ electrical discharge phenomena. Enough that external EMI effects through openpanel or damaged-cut airframes could truly mess with the airframe electronics and even the pilot.

That's what I meant and I'm sticking to it!

Second, I found the original article I was after, together with a couple more that might be useful.

The first is entitled 'Retinal Displays Portend Synthetic Vision, HUD advances'. It's another AvLeak piece, dated 7/15/96. Page 58.

The concept itself is called a 'Personal Vision System' by Micro Vision of Seattle.

"To create an image, PVS drive electronics accept, decode and combine all desired text, graphics, forward looking infrared and video input.

The resulting image is then divided into a pattern of individual pixels. Drive system output digitally modulates a stream of laser light, accurately recreating each individual pixels intensity.

Up to three lasers can be combined and synchronized for partial or full color systems. The resulting light stream then is transferred to a single strand of optic fibre and routed to the visor-or-helmet-mounted scanning system.

A pair of highspeed scanning mirrors also synchronize with drive box output, postioning each pixel.

One mirror provides the beams horizontal location and the other its vertical address.
The mirrors rapidly move the beam horizontally from pixel to pixel and vertically from line to line to make an image (me: your basic raster scan).

Both Prototype PVS systems refresh a 640X480 pixel image 60 times a sec., Rutkowski said.

The beam is bounced off a tiny reflective surface on the visor before entering the eye."

yadda de yadda...

"Final PVS hardware should be extremely compact and lightweight, Willey said. The visor or helment-mounted scanning-mirror assembly is envisioned to look like a large hearing aid and weigh approximately 6oz. An off-airman drive box avionics would weigh no more than 1lb."

Article credit: Paul Proctor

Before you all start chortling about George Lucas and "Use the Force Luke", consider the JSF which is itself supposedly integrating a 'surround vision' camera system direct to a helmet display. _No HUD_.

How much better to manipulate the camera angle /in the eyeball/ than try and crane your neck around, manually, to exploit all Sonycam-apertures?

Some technodrivel to insert in your book from the accompanying engineering diagram: "modulated low power photon source" (laser); "achromatic focusing lens" (duuh B&W)
"mechanical resonant scanner for vertical scan"
"horizontal scanning mirror"


'McDonnell Fluid-Filled Suit Can Help Pilots Withstand 10G' AW&ST August 19, 1991. Page 66.

"New Suit, called Atlantis Warrior.

In some aircraft the, notable the F-16, the onset of G can occur so rapidly that pilots have blacked out from G-induced loss of conscience (GLOC).

The new suit protects by effectively immersing the pilot from his neck to the tips of his toes in a fluid, currently water. As g-forces increase, the fluid increases the pressure on the body to resist pooling of blood in the lower extremeties, but more effectively than curret G-suits (me: water is incompressible hence when it squeezes it's like your wrapped in the loving embrace of an all-over anaconda).

In the recent tests, the two pilots protected by Atlantis Warrior withstood 10g for 10 seconds and then 8G for 3 minutes. with no loss of vision (graying out) and only low straining. They also withstood accelerations changing between 5 and 9g for 5 min., in a test designed to simulat the varying forces sustained during air combat maneuvering.

The results were different with Combat Edge.

One pilot blacked out from GLOC after 5 sec. at 10g. Flight physiologists did not allow him to continue Combat Edge tests.

The other Combat Edge-equipped pilot achieved 10g for 10 sec. with moderate straining but had a 40% narrowing of his field of vision.
This loss of light or tunnel vision precedes blacking out.

The Combat Edge pilot also sustained 8G for 3 min. with moderate straining, but found speech difficult and complained of foot discomfort (me: vest pressures really hose your diaphragm control, AW has a specially designed 'transducer' sensor to decrease water volumes on detection of prespeech chest expansion, from the YF-23 program...).

With hard straining, he sustained 10G for 3 min., but again found speech difficult and his feet were uncomfortable."

Article Credit: Bruce D. Nordwall

Okay: grey/black/tunnel and the retina projection HUD goes bye-bye.

'Uncomfortable' means he's gonna have an incredible case of high g hickies when he hops out and he's gonna be one deadass puppy for fatigue later.

If repeated G-soak and/or endurance sortie effects get excessive, they start to layer natural bitoxin fatigue atop damage-repair to the errrm, petechiasis, and this can lead to serious necrotic effects degeneration of the skin and sublayered vasculars which survive partially through dermal oxygen exchange.

I don't think it will 'kill you' but it will make you sloppy and less G-endurant so someone else can.


'Air Force. NASA Conduct Tests to Define Fighter Aircraft Agility' AW&ST 1/9/89. Page 45.

"The current effort is an attempt to start correlating findings of agility studies that have been under way at Northrop, McDonnell Douglas, General Dynamics, Eidetics and the Air Force Flight Test Center (AFFTC) for several years.

The Air Force goal is to develop a database from which a common set of "metrics", or agility parameters, can be defined, and to creat a clearinghouse that will share data with other researchers."

Blah de Blah Blah Blah...

"AFFTC and NASA flight tests will attempt to quantify to types of airframe agility- transient and functional. Transient agility is defined as the nonsteady state part of a meneuver, from the intital onset of aircraft movment until a stable motion is established, plus the decelerating segment just before motion is terminated at the end of the maneuver. Functional agilaty covers the entire maneuver, including both the transient and stable portions. The time required to complete these segments will be directly related to the aircrafts agility measure of merit.

Typical maneuvers being flown on the X-29 and F-16B test aircraft during the initial metrics data gathering phase include:

Pitch Angle Capture...
Load Factor Capture...
Limiter Turn...
Loaded Roll...
Level Yaw...

Article Credit: William B. Scott

Okay THIS is potentially the neatoest of all of them but I can only vaguely describe why as the:

The Continental Performance Globe.

A mercator divided graph line surrounding a transparent circle to create a perspective shaded 3D sperical effect (in the eye-HUD this would be true-3D apparent).

On this globe are various color shades (bright to dark as well as green-yellow-blue) like continents, marking current envelope maneuver limits in roll and pitch and acceleration rate and rate-of-rate translation between.

Now imagine within this globe space are two ACM competing super-G airframes. You can't 'see' each other out a blank cockpit with your neck fixed to the floor but you can -see- the virtual performance representation.

Even if the guy is a 3miles out in your deep six.

Each plane maneuvers at roughly the same spatial movement speed around the globe but the /size of the continents/ keeps changing.

And the arrival -distance- to the border/water change limits of each zone depicts who will achieve peak energy or nose point relative-WHEN. Getting your peak color to touch his weakest envelope equivalent /while he's in it/ is what gives you the kill.

Now again, these continents are always subject to 'plate techtonics' redraw based on relative player energy states and aspect and he who is standing on Atlantis when China launches an 8 shot AAM attack had better be a Very Good Swimmer.

Each continent which is same-plane shared (albeit typically on opposite sides of the aspect-globe) has a 'political border' marked in white with individual seconds-label to achieve peak capability for each airframe.

Now, see _all_ of this projected like that Endor Moon holodisplay aboard the Rebel command ship in Return of the Jedi (See, no Klingons here!...;-) /inside/ your eyeball by the retinal superHUD.

Scaling effect on 'display area' is almost totally psychology driven at this point so you can have almost 1:1 equivalency if the airspace is crowded.

And also realize that, especially close in against a conventional fighter, you just Hook or Cobra and kill him straight across the circle with your supergun.

But against an even marginally equivalent foe who can snap-role and negge out of your pitch-point plane, it gets 'fun' puddle jumping across landbridges from continent to continent before each can sink beneath the waves behind the wake of your energy use.

Multiply this against 10-20-50-100 competing airframes who are also arriving/leaving continental airspace/performance factoring and each with maybe 1-4 missiles in air (Hunting/Cruise AAM at this point are a royal PITA, they just never go away).

All potentially trying to crawl into your flight couch with you.

THIS is why I suspect that pilots in your superfighter will have to be drugged out of their minds, both to withstand the G of rapid-sequence 'hazard avoidance' and to 'Zen' their way to ultimate, if incidental, own victory.

'Brain Speed' would be utterly maxxed out, on the order of a small supercomputer (say 2-3gigabyte/sec. visual processing) but you wouldn't have time to stand back and rationalize strategy from what you were looking at.

Instead it would come down to 'like, be the plane dude!' awareness-in-the-moment.

Except for laser sensor-kills, most shots will be truly wild/feint based and support will be random across cubic miles of airspace as you bleed each other down to the 'same continent, same street, same phone booth, one quarter' kills, going from the globe view to terminal targeting.

Snicker, Koplah...Kurt Plummer

MALD (Cruise AAM Concept) Pics

Posts: 672 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Member # 998

posted 06-02-2000 03:21 PM     Profile for Bogey   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
I'm not sure about this, but isn't the real problem with G-forces how fast you get there?
I've read that the Gripen has a maximum G-increase of 6 G/s. So it takes just 1.5 secs to reach max G.
Anyway, just a thought...

Up there, where the air is rare...

Posts: 339 | From: West coast of Sweden | Registered: Nov 1999  |  IP: Logged
Kurt Plummer
Member # 358

posted 06-04-2000 03:45 AM     Profile for Kurt Plummer   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Hey Bogey,

I do believe that you are right and while I lack the knowledge to be sure I think it is also effected by the radial-out vs. rotation-entry 'axis effect'.

Basically how fast you initially pitch (rotate the wing-AOA:flightpath differential) is a different 'kind' of G compared to how 'hard' you eventually stabilize (wing-center-to-ortagonal turn radial) to.

Most if not all fighters have an onset-rate limiters linked to the first condition as well as total-state limiters on the latter.

If you pop /too/ fast, you will simply collapse the blood vessel flow -inside- the brain and the effect is like a sudden hydrostatic shock to the circulatory/cell 02 transfusion level.


A-GLOCing-you-shall-go sleepyhead.

This may be somewhat offset by the prone positioning but then again, having your body surge-from-toes without the right-angle limiters of a seated posture could take some advantage away too. 'Red Out' is just a symptom in your microcapillaried eyes for what is happening /everywhere/ above-shoulder.

However; at all times, you're still vulnerable to the 'creeping effect' of gradual deoxygenation as the blood cannot beat beat the inertial weight of climbing to your head. The longer you can take a fixed G-state/turn-rate the better your fight performance.

This is why I suggested very young pilots (to whom 'blood pressure' is not an in-vocabulary concern) and a forced-pump rotary replacement for the conventional heart.

The thing about AW is that, being water and being -all around you-, it keeps the blood from shifting 'negative' to the desired flow by compressing much of the outer-body vessels.

This, if nothing else, staticizes the core infusion level (blood being also largely water) and, with the aid of a rotary 'Jarvix 21';-) allows you to get the O2 going nominally 'headwards' again once the rate-onset G has stabilized.

All without just max-overdrive blasting even the youngest internal arteries on forced flow.

Your brain in particular has very weak, very thin-walled, vessels. Remember Jim Henson and what happens when you break the blood-brain barrier.

I'm not a doctor I just play one on Inter-V...:-))

Kurt Plummer

Posts: 672 | From: | Registered: Sep 1999  |  IP: Logged
Member # 5056

posted 06-07-2000 07:48 PM     Profile for MovinTarget   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
OK I've taken a lot of these ideas on board, adding them to Project Tunguska (the name of the fictional plane, damn I can see her in my minds eye, wish I could draw )

Anyway, heres another question, the plane wouldn't have a particularly high speed (not nesecarry) but it would have *stunning* acceleration, what thrust and power/weight levels could be reasonable and how quickly could it theoretically accelerate? I.e. from just take off speed to Mach1 at sea level?


Posts: 35 | From: N.Ireland | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Member # 780

posted 06-07-2000 09:50 PM     Profile for SavoirFaire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
OK, I've got it! Deferring to Mr. Plummer on weapons systems, I offer the following flight systems and physiological improvements.

First, for stealth, there is no reason to reinvent the wheel. The "Cloaking Device" can be easily retrofitted from an old Klingon battle cruiser.
To overcome the effects of high g-loads, which we all know is caused by blood leaving the head, the pilot will be reduced to just that....a head. The blood can't go anywhere else. Since the pilot will have no arms or legs to actuate the controls, inputs will come from a spit tube (a la Christopher Reeve). Eye blinks will provide additional control functions. The eye blink controls can be doubled when used in conjuntion with the spit tube, like on the MS Sidewinder Precision Pro shift button.
And forget about attrition in the ranks due to skilled pilots leaving to join the airlines. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't fly on an airliner piloted by a freaking head, no matter how much "time in type" he (or she) had.

SavoirFaire is everywhere!!........

Posts: 29 | From: Newport Beach, CA USA | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
Member # 4976

posted 06-09-2000 03:17 PM     Profile for Scrape   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Can you imagine the callsign he'd have?

PASSENGER : Who's flying the plane?
PASSENGER : Whaaaaa..????

Posts: 57 | From: Milwaukee, WI | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Member # 780

posted 06-09-2000 10:19 PM     Profile for SavoirFaire   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote
Sounds like an Abbott & Costello bit.

SavoirFaire is everywhere!!........

Posts: 29 | From: Newport Beach, CA USA | Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged

All times are MST (US)  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | COMBATSIM.COM Home

COMBATSIM.COM, INC. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin Board 6.04b

2014 COMBATSIM.COM - All Rights Reserved