Ep #296: "He'll See the Big Board!"

A place to post misc. feedback to individual eps.
Forum rules
We'd love to have you Reply to posts in this Forum, but please don't create new Topics here. One exception: If we haven't created a thread for a particular episode, feel free to get it started. For other subjects, I suggest creating new Topics in Virtual Hangar=>Other Topics. Thanks.
User avatar
Scofreyjet
Posts: 385
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:13 pm
Location: Billerica, MA/KBED

Ep #296: "He'll See the Big Board!"

Postby Scofreyjet » Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:46 pm

Unfortunately, the "Russia at Red Flag" story was apparently either grossly inaccurate, or a fabrication. Either way, it ain't gonna happen according to Air Force Magazine, reporting on USAF spokesperson statements.
Jeff Ward
I love things with wings!
Scofreyjet on Twitter

User avatar
jackhodgson
Site Admin
Posts: 1283
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:07 pm
Location: Lookout Point, Nottingham, NH / Nashua Airport (ASH)
Contact:

Re: Ep #296: "He'll See the Big Board!"

Postby jackhodgson » Thu Jul 19, 2012 5:18 pm

Oops.

// Jack

Krullery
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:57 pm
Location: Sagamore Hills, OH / Medina Municipal (1G5)

Re: Ep #296: "He'll See the Big Board!"

Postby Krullery » Thu Jul 19, 2012 7:53 pm

Regarding Jeb's reference to the "another 1000 feet and we'll be on top" comment supposedly made by John Glenn during the flight of Friendship 7....

Barry Schiff made reference to this as a John Glenn quote in his article entitled "High Flight" but a check of the full transcript of Glenn's flight based on the on board flight recorder does not support that Glenn ever made this statement during the flight.  The full transcript (as well as the audio tracks)  is available at:http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/history/mercury/ma-6/sounds/.


Ken

User avatar
jackhodgson
Site Admin
Posts: 1283
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:07 pm
Location: Lookout Point, Nottingham, NH / Nashua Airport (ASH)
Contact:

Re: Ep #296: "He'll See the Big Board!"

Postby jackhodgson » Fri Jul 20, 2012 11:58 am

Ken,

Thanks for the pointer to that NASA site. Looks very fascinating. An energetic search of the site might reveal the actual source of the "on top" quote.

// Jack

CliffD
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 9:32 pm

Re: Ep #296: "He'll See the Big Board!"

Postby CliffD » Sat Jul 21, 2012 11:00 am

The last Red Flag I participated in was 09-02, so some things could have changed in the last 3 years.

Concerning the distinction between Top Gun, Fighter Weapons School, and Red Flag: The first two (FWS is now just Weapons School) are long (months) to create MS/PhD level combat aviators, attendance being individually selective. Red Flag was designed to get the first 10 combat mission under the belt of the average aircrew BEFORE they go to actual combat (train like you fight). I found Red Flag more difficult than actual combat (more rules, etc).

Red Flag is 2-3 weeks long and always is held at Nellis AFB, NV. There is a newer Red Flag Alaska hosted at Eielson AFB, Alaska. Whole squadrons deploy in to participate. The product (my opinion) is to produce good 'package' commanders. There are typically two "go's" a day, a day and a night. Each combat squadron gets a chance to supply a package commander to design and lead a package against a cadre-supplied tactical problem. This package is combined platform with all major weapons systems (A-10, F-16, Bomber, etc) participating and the package commander having to consider how to smartly apply all available capabilities against the tactical problem. Deconfliction is always the big headache with wide-ranging differences in performance and capes of each aircraft type participating. It does not always go well, which is why it is done in the controlled environment instead of first time in combat.

Live ammunition is not used (my recollection). Inert munitions and electronic simulation are used (I won't go into any more detail).

In recent years, the scope of the exercise has increased to include UAV and other capabilities as they become "mainstream" and therefore need to be dealt with in the real world of combat.

I always enjoyed Red Flag, (I think I went to 7-8 of these in 21 years on the line), sometimes a little frustrating because it is a little fighter-centric, but still the best training in the world.

Cliff D (the ex-B-52/B-2 guy)

User avatar
baswell
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 10:00 pm

AF447: Controls are a Red Herring

Postby baswell » Sun Jul 22, 2012 5:14 am

IMHO, the Airbus control system is nothing but a red herring when trying to understand loss of control due to failed pitot/static systems. These accidents happen from time to time and happen just as often with traditional controls.

Jeb hit the nail on the head with wondering if the aircraft should have turned off things like autopilot. No pilot could ever hand-fly an aircraft in power+attitude mode better than a machine could. But I doubt current auto pilots have such a mode. (Otherwise they wouldn't need to disconnect, right?)

One thing a lot of people mis-understand about the Airbus FBW system is that there is this big HAL 9000 style computer controlling the whole show. This isn't the case. Instead, they use all the traditional ADAHRS units, FMS, glass panels and auto pilots found in other airliners. They just tie them together via their FBW computer.

I also get the feeling manufacturers make systems more "dumb" then they could make them because it makes them easier to document for certification.

In an ideal world we'd have HAL 9000 (or a less psychotic variant of it) running the show and have everything so closely integrated that the pilot (and the dog) would in this case just have gotten the message: "pitot/static system unreliable, flying in power + attitude mode. Have another coffee."

We'll find those system in UAVs first, then, when perfected, we may see our pilotless airliners.

plutocrat03
Posts: 132
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 9:45 pm

Re: Ep #296: "He'll See the Big Board!"

Postby plutocrat03 » Mon Jul 30, 2012 9:22 pm

That is not my understanding of the A/B systems.

One difference come from complaints from Boeing drivers. If you give full control input on traditional aircraft, the aircraft delivers full control output. On an A/B when you give full control input, the computers confer and decide on how much output to give you based on the flight envelope.

It's been a while since I delved in the details, but that is the gist as I understand it.


Return to “Episodes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest