Basically, because of the F-15's large control surfaces and flat fuselage, he was able to maintain a degree of control, as long as he kept his speed up. He was flying like a guided missile...approach speed to the runway was almost double what is standard. Talk about bragging rights; that is one hell of a (lucky) pilot!! His backseater must have had a lot of faith in him, to stay with the aircraft.
IP: Logged
09:21 AM
Oreif Member
Posts: 16460 From: Schaumburg, IL Registered: Jan 2000
My sound is broke today, what were they doing shooting live ammo at each other?
No, They were target practicing and another plane that was upside-down was below him and climbing. They collided belly to belly and the A-4 fireballed.
IP: Logged
09:32 AM
Gokart Mozart Member
Posts: 12143 From: Metro Detroit Registered: Mar 2003
No, They were target practicing and another plane that was upside-down was below him and climbing. They collided belly to belly and the A-4 fireballed.
Ah, makes sense now. I couldn't hear the guy talk. Pretty impressive to be able to land what was basically a manned rocket at that point.
I wonder if that side's horizonal tailsurface took over the work of the missing wing, to some degree? All you would need is more speed, to compensate for the lack of surface area, between what the wing was, and what the tail is. Not to mention the elevator flaps would increase lift on the damaged, non-lifting side, and decrease on the lifting side. You would then control nose-attitude with throttle.
[This message has been edited by Boondawg (edited 11-03-2007).]
IP: Logged
12:59 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Canadians have this saying about American Aviators. "Put enough thrust on it and a brick will fly"
American engineers say the same thing.
How else do you think the Space Shuttle flies? It's got the glide slope of a brick. The landing angle of approach is about 15° - 18°.
"Compared to the 3 degree angle-of-approach of an ordinary commercial aircraft, it is really flying the aircraft like a rock. After de-orbit burn, the Space Shuttle flies almost like dropping down in a free fall." - Soichi Noguchi, Astronaut, STS-114
IP: Logged
02:09 PM
PFF
System Bot
blackrams Member
Posts: 33123 From: Covington, TN, USA Registered: Feb 2003
that was awesome! i'll have to send the link to my dad. he did extensive work on the testing equipment when the plane was being developed (engineer) and has always told me how great the plane was. i liked the plane before but WOW! that was insane! he'll be proud
I wonder if that side's horizonal tailsurface took over the work of the missing wing, to some degree? All you would need is more speed, to compensate for the lack of surface area, between what the wing was, and what the tail is. Not to mention the elevator flaps would increase lift on the damaged, non-lifting side, and decrease on the lifting side. You would then control nose-attitude with throttle.
And that, in essence, is exactly what happened. The pilot said he gave it MORE throttle when pointed at the ground, and the extra speed enabled him to pull up...with all the fuel he was bleeding, it's a good thing he didn't lose power a half-mile or so from the runway threshold...
I know it was an Israeli. The point was about American flying machinery if you didn't catch it. And I also acknowledge many Americans make the same point about jet propelled craft that basically fly based on thrust with minor avionics in the mix.
In this case I admire the pilot, I continue to admire the plane, and I applaud the feat of flying skill involved.
Arn
IP: Logged
01:05 PM
Vonov Member
Posts: 3745 From: Nashville,TN,USA Registered: May 2004
The word you used was "aviators," not "aircraft." My apologies for the misinterpretation. Apparently, I'm a victim of the old adage about members of the British Commonwealth and Americans being two peoples separated by a common language, lol...
[This message has been edited by Vonov (edited 11-04-2007).]
IP: Logged
01:11 PM
Vonov Member
Posts: 3745 From: Nashville,TN,USA Registered: May 2004
Canadians have this saying about American Aviators. "Put enough thrust on it and a brick will fly"
I didn't know until today that it was at least partially true. The shear thrust and flat bottom was keeping it going.
I am a huge fan of the F15 Eagle. It is with some sadness that I see them gradually becoming obsolete. They are simply the best combat jet IMHO
Arn
What amazes me is that the F-117 Stealth is a newer airplane than the F-15, and has already been retired! The fact that the F-15 is still, at least for now, in service, is a testament to the soundness of the original design work. Not many other fighters can claim that kind of longevity; the F-4 Phantom, the P-51 Mustang, the Supermarine Spitfire, and a few others.
IP: Logged
01:22 PM
Boondawg Member
Posts: 38235 From: Displaced Alaskan Registered: Jun 2003
When I was young, like draft age, when I went to bed at night I was somewhat comforted by two things. B52 Bomber Command and the F15 Fighting Eagles.
The only other fighting aircraft that can match it from an historical perspective and longevity is the B52 Stratofortress. In terms of fighter command, I'd have to say the P51 Mustang, although the only fighter I really love is the Super Marine Spitfire.
