Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by Jade Falcon, Feb 11, 2020.
I thought our resident pilots would appreciate this:
Balls of steel, man.
Same storm as video #1 above, but longer and from a different angle.
Aren’t B-52 bombers equipped with steerable landing gear to help deal with crosswinds?
Gotta be scary for the pilot.
I was in a Cessna with a friend one day and we had to land and ride out a storm front.
It was windy as heck and that plane actually tipped up on a wingtip about 100' above the ground. It was hairy and my friend had beads of sweat on his forehead when we got on the ground.
Indeed they are. Maybe Caver 60 could chime in here, but I think it was because the wings are too high for the mains to be anywhere else than center of line. IIRC, they could crab 40 degrees either way of centerline, and they were a very, very closely guarded secret. HH
Crosswinds are fun!
Cross wind crab wasn't a closely guarded secret. And it could only pivot the main trucks 20 degrees either side of centerline. I can't remember how much crosswind 20 degrees could compensate for. I tried to search and find the pilots crosswind crab chart, but had no luck.
But 20 degrees of crab could compensate for quite a bit of crosswind. If you search B-52 crosswind landings you'll find lots of pictures and articles.
The B-52 was the only plane this system was ever deployed on, as far as I know. The most crab I can recall using was 12 degrees of crab at Okinawa. And that was pretty sporty.
The long (186 feet) B-52 wing span on the D model (my primary aircraft) were very flexible. They could flex up and down approximately 15 feet each way at the wing tip. The tip tanks were very big and very close to the ground, so there was a small tip gear on each end of the wing, close to the tip tank.
With the long wing and the tip tank being so big, a pilot could not do much of the traditional 'wing low' landing technique that other aircraft use to compensate for crosswinds. If he used too much wing low, he could break the flimsy tip gear and pound the tip tank into the ground.
But crosswinds are rarely steady in velocity and direction. So we took the towers reported winds and figured an average setting for the crosswind crab system, using a chart in the pilots checklist. Then we had to use some amount of wing low to compensate for variations in wind velocity and direction. B-52 crosswind landings were not a 'piece of cake,' even with the crosswind gear system.
That Antonov 124 in the second video was essentially a crash...that just happened to not end in a fireball. It’s pretty rare to land on the nose gear without bending something.
You are referring to this one?
First time I have seen a huge plane do a nose wheelie.
Do you have to report it?
And add to that you had to drive that plane onto the runway. No flaring, right?
Just the opposite.
If you've ever watched a BUFF on short final, they fly final NOSE DOWN. And as mentioned above, putting a nose wheel down first is a no no.
We didn't exactly have a 'nose wheel,' just the front trucks. But you didn't want the front trucks touching the pavement, before the rear trucks. If that happened you were going to bounce. If you didn't get the bounce under control the second time you came down, you had better be pushing all 8 to the firewall. Because on the third touchdown there was going to be a crash.
As you came over the pavement, you started pulling the throttles back and trimming the stabilizer trim nose up, about two degrees or so, while holding the plane off until the nose was above the rear trucks, and then let it settle in. This usually resulted in a slightly firm landing.
But a 'grease job landing' was a little dangerous, unless you were real good or lucky. For a grease job, both front and rear trucks touched the pavement at the same time. But that was real close to a nose truck first landing.
Then add a nice healthy crosswind to that landing. It could get sporty fast.
I know this question is a bit different than what is being talked about hear, but hear I go....
Did those big ole engines spoolup quickly or was there a lag in when you had to go balls out to keep that big girl from bouncing the 3rd time.
Thank you for your service , and answering a question from someone who know absolutely nothing about flying, I am a good passenger tho..
The old 'D' model engines had a fairly good response time for that day and age. But they were underpowered by today standards. If you lost one engine on a heavyweight takeoff, you had to be careful how you managed things until you got lighter.
Even in that day it wasn't long until better engines came along. The later 'G' model had slightly more powerful engines. And the 'H' model (the only model still flying today) had even more powerful engines. I fact the H model engines were so powerful they normally didn't need full power for most takeoffs. There was a thrust gate that was set before takeoff to limit the thrust. The pilot could override the thrust gate if necessary.
I know the D model engine response time was fast enough to 'save my bacon' one time when I was instructing at Combat Crew Training School (CCTS). At CCTS we trained guys who were already pilots, to fly the B-52.
There was a student Co Pilot who had flunked his final standardization check ride. He was not my student, but the check pilot said the student bounced the B-52 over 100 feet into the air.
I had my two normal students, (a guy becoming an Aircraft Commander and a guy becoming a Copilot) both of who had never flown B-52's. They assigned the guy who had flunked the check ride to me for a retraining ride.
During mission planning, we planned a normal training mission, then a couple hours in the VFR pattern shooting touch and go's. During mission planning I talked with the guy for about an hour covering all the fine points of how a B-52 lands.
We flew the mission and returned for the pattern work. His first touch and go was picture perfect. But I talked him through it. He had beautiful aircraft control. Airspeed, and all flying procedures were right on, including the touch and go.
I thought:'This guy must have just had a bad day on that check ride'. So I relaxed a little. (Too much relaxing as it turned out.) I ran the radios and read the checklist for the next trip around the pattern (which is just what a check pilot would do).
Going around the pattern he flew perfect. Airspeeds were right on, trimmed the plane well, everything just about perfect. As we came over the runway pavement, he suddenly chopped all 8 engines to idle and hooked his thumb over the electrical stabilizer trim button. The trim wheel began turning rapidly nose up. He was trimming us right into a stall.
I overrode his hand on the throttles and pushed all 8 to the firewall while shouting into the intercom: "I have the aircraft." I had also pushed the stabilizer trim cutout button with my left thumb, and was manually rolling the stab trim wheel back to a normal position with my right hand. But he was fighting me on the control yoke and still had the stab trim button pulled to the nose up position.
I got the plane away from him just as we hit the runway with the nose way high, and we bounced about 20 feet back into the air. The engines caught up, and we didn't touch down again.
His problem was, his instructor had never shut up when he was training him. As long as someone was talking to him and reassuring him, he could fly great. But a standardization check pilot isn't going to be talking. They expect you to be able to do the job unassisted.
We shot quite a few more touch and go's and I kept decreasing my talking. At the end he was doing OK while I ran the checklist and radios, and let him do the flying.
After the final landing, I documented the problem and recommended at least one more training ride with another instructor. I had to get back to instructing my regular students.