What's new

Chengdu J-10 Multirole Fighter Air Craft News & Discussions

J10 doing cobra...




Do mind that it is a clean configuration... Personally I am curious whether they switched off the FBW or not... Well, now you have this baby soon able to handle IRST, IFR, HMS, AESA and doing some nasty flying. I think I would have this one instead of the block60. F16 had its era but if you have to stay subsonic to be nasty then you are having tough times with fast attacks and high altitude combat.
 
Last edited:
.
J10 doing cobra...




Do mind that it is a clean configuration... Personally I am curious whether they switched off the FBW or not... Well, now you have this baby soon able to handle IRST, IFR, HMS, AESA and doing some nasty flying. I think I would have this one instead of the block60. F16 had its era but if you have to stay subsonic to be nasty then you are having tough times with fast attacks and high altitude combat.
Good God Almighty...If the initials 'FBW' is to mean 'fly-by-wire', you cannot 'switch' it off. I doubt if this aircraft has dual flight control system. Either the FCS is an mech-elec-hydraulic system or a FBW-hydraulics system. Where in the world did this silly notion came from?
 
.
Good God Almighty...If the initials 'FBW' is to mean 'fly-by-wire', you cannot 'switch' it off. I doubt if this aircraft has dual flight control system. Either the FCS is an mech-elec-hydraulic system or a FBW-hydraulics system. Where in the world did this silly notion came from?

For your info... If the Flanker does do something like this they switch off the FBW for short period... Just for fun, can you use brains or do I post something complex?

Here from the net (where you are smart enough to use google and search whether it is possible...)

>>>At one point I also practised a couple of emergencies. One of them was a stall at an extreme nose-high attitude. The aircraft, as expected by the IP, came out of control and began doing some uncontrollable oscillations, which are rather hard to explain without actually showing with my hand or with a model. The procedure for getting out of this is this: first step is to release the stick, and give the FBW system the chance to figure out and try to get the aircraft out of this situation. You have to allow it 10 seconds to do so, and believe me those 10 seconds felt like a whole life time! You have to remember that the aircraft is falling out of the sky like a brick during these 10 seconds. Then if the 10 seconds pass, and the situation hasn’t changed, you have to take action. First thing to do is to hit and hold the ‘FBW manual-override’ switch to disengage the FBW system. Then, you have to try to increase the oscillations, yes increase! You have to actually help the aircraft do what it’s doing and not work against it. This may sound insane, but by doing so, you will get the F16 into some very high- and very low-nose attitudes, where at one point, the aircraft is pointing vertically down. When this happens, you make sure to keep that attitude, and that will result in the aircraft regaining air speed and will therefore be flyable again.
 
.
J10 doing cobra...




Do mind that it is a clean configuration... Personally I am curious whether they switched off the FBW or not... Well, now you have this baby soon able to handle IRST, IFR, HMS, AESA and doing some nasty flying. I think I would have this one instead of the block60. F16 had its era but if you have to stay subsonic to be nasty then you are having tough times with fast attacks and high altitude combat.

now that some thing really facinating!! :smitten: isnt it!! :yahoo:
well i agree with you sir munir that it may serve us even better that the block 60z F16.
people may say that it is a new plane and F16 is matured with all its problems ironed out but still we must remember that by the time we start getting J10 chinaes would have gained five six years experience and i guess it is enough time for things to get smooth!
J10 is an extremly agile plane, we have seen it doing vertical take offs, sharps turns and now the cobra!!! chines sure have developed one hell of a machine :china: . jsut get an AESA fitted and it surely stand in the league of the top 4.5 generation planes like the EF, rafale and all!
regards!
 
.
The best F16 offered is the block60 and I think that it raped the idea of the F16. It is no longer lightweight. There is hardly room left to put electronics in. And we have seen it brake in the air or bursting tyres when landing. I think it had its time and it is better to develop a whole new plane like FC20. The FC20 incorporates all technology till today. It is not based on subsonic agile WVR dominator... It is much more.
 
. . . .
For your info... If the Flanker does do something like this they switch off the FBW for short period... Just for fun, can you use brains or do I post something complex?

Here from the net (where you are smart enough to use google and search whether it is possible...)

>>>At one point I also practised a couple of emergencies. One of them was a stall at an extreme nose-high attitude. The aircraft, as expected by the IP, came out of control and began doing some uncontrollable oscillations, which are rather hard to explain without actually showing with my hand or with a model. The procedure for getting out of this is this: first step is to release the stick, and give the FBW system the chance to figure out and try to get the aircraft out of this situation. You have to allow it 10 seconds to do so, and believe me those 10 seconds felt like a whole life time! You have to remember that the aircraft is falling out of the sky like a brick during these 10 seconds. Then if the 10 seconds pass, and the situation hasn’t changed, you have to take action. First thing to do is to hit and hold the ‘FBW manual-override’ switch to disengage the FBW system. Then, you have to try to increase the oscillations, yes increase! You have to actually help the aircraft do what it’s doing and not work against it. This may sound insane, but by doing so, you will get the F16 into some very high- and very low-nose attitudes, where at one point, the aircraft is pointing vertically down. When this happens, you make sure to keep that attitude, and that will result in the aircraft regaining air speed and will therefore be flyable again.
I worked on the F-16 for five years and prior to that on the F-111 also for five years. I doubt, that given what I have seen from you so far, that you can post a source that is too complex for me to grasp. So either you have no sources to back up your argument, or that you misunderstood what your sources said. If you misunderstood the technical aspects of your sources, then we can see who is cannot understand complex issues.

So show everyone your sources.
 
.
I worked on the F-16 for five years and prior to that on the F-111 also for five years. I doubt, that given what I have seen from you so far, that you can post a source that is too complex for me to grasp. So either you have no sources to back up your argument, or that you misunderstood what your sources said. If you misunderstood the technical aspects of your sources, then we can see who is cannot understand complex issues.

So show everyone your sources.

Gambit,

I believe what Munir is referring to is FBW both as a FBW system and as FCS. The system has build-in checks that will not allow you to do maneuvers that potentially gets you into irrecoverable postion. The computer code on the system just won't allow you to do so.

For example, take the case of airbus which also uses FBW systems. If you pitch the nose up too high, the FCS automatically increases engine power without you having to touch it. It also won't allow you to go beyond a certain AoA. Same is the case if you try to roll it..it just won't let you turn upside down.

However, at any time during the flight, you can manually override these instructions. The idea here is that in an emergency situation, you might need to do maneuvers that are beyond "safe limits" established by the manufacturers. This was even talked about in the recent Air France Airbus A330 accident over the Atlantic where people suggested that FBW could have maintained restrictions over the pilot but Airbus refuted the idea saying you can override those at any time. If you remember, a similar thing happened to a recent Qantas flight, where due to bad sensor data, the auto-pilot took a sudden dive. To get out of this situation, they had to not only turn off the auto-pilot but also override these "safe limits" to get out of the situation.

As for the source, here is what Munir was talking about.

F16 simulator report
 
. .
Gambit,

I believe what Munir is referring to is FBW both as a FBW system and as FCS. The system has build-in checks that will not allow you to do maneuvers that potentially gets you into irrecoverable postion. The computer code on the system just won't allow you to do so.

For example, take the case of airbus which also uses FBW systems. If you pitch the nose up too high, the FCS automatically increases engine power without you having to touch it. It also won't allow you to go beyond a certain AoA. Same is the case if you try to roll it..it just won't let you turn upside down.

However, at any time during the flight, you can manually override these instructions. The idea here is that in an emergency situation, you might need to do maneuvers that are beyond "safe limits" established by the manufacturers. This was even talked about in the recent Air France Airbus A330 accident over the Atlantic where people suggested that FBW could have maintained restrictions over the pilot but Airbus refuted the idea saying you can override those at any time. If you remember, a similar thing happened to a recent Qantas flight, where due to bad sensor data, the auto-pilot took a sudden dive. To get out of this situation, they had to not only turn off the auto-pilot but also override these "safe limits" to get out of the situation.
Overriding safety limiters is a far cry from...
Personally I am curious whether they switched off the FBW or not...
When I had my flight in an F-111E over the UK, I was in the WSO's seat, we had a request from the French to assist them in testing their new defense radar. We were in a four-ship flight and was authorized to do anything to help the French out. Even though I was not a pilot, I was well familiar with the F-111's avionics that I overrode the TFR's safety limits and we were 12-15meters over the Channel. I tuned the TFR sufficiently sensitive that we were picking up surface waves. It made for a very bumpy flight as the TFR interpreted the waves to be 'terrain'. The French never picked us up until we broke horizon, which pretty much mean weapons release and that radar would have been dead.

When I had my flight in an F-16D over the Gulf of Mexico, the pilot overrode the FCS limiters and I experienced +9gs turns. It helped that we were clean, which was unusual for a D. I know what safety limiters are.

As for the source, here is what Munir was talking about.

F16 simulator report
I know...I found it easily enough. Too bad he interpreted it to mean turning off the FCS then implied may be I cannot understand technically complex topics.
 
.
View attachment c23c71cc74182516dfbfe65d1c167522.jpg

194560b73902a485f22ac95e7ef4f780.jpg


935d78e8df8cc0445c86318eceb7d774.jpg
 
.
Good God Almighty...If the initials 'FBW' is to mean 'fly-by-wire', you cannot 'switch' it off. I doubt if this aircraft has dual flight control system. Either the FCS is an mech-elec-hydraulic system or a FBW-hydraulics system. Where in the world did this silly notion came from?

Overriding safety limiters is a far cry from...


Lots of people refer to the complete system of pilot command +FCC+Sensors+automatic correction as "fly-by-wire" as opposed to just replacing the hydraulics by electrical wires.

I don't think Munir meant replacing electrical wires by hydraulics when he talked about turning FBW but actually overriding the FCC manually, which is definitely possible.

"Turning off" or manually over-riding the FCC is a bit more than just over-riding safety limits, which I gave just as an example. I am in a hurry now, but if you want I can explain that in detail later.

So I guess we all agree to manual over-riding of the FBW system, right?

Originally Posted by Munir View Post
First thing to do is to hit and hold the ‘FBW manual-override’ switch to disengage the FBW system.
 
.
Well, if we switched the definitions then I say sorry for that but Mean_bird explained it terrific so I thanked him twice. It is indeed not the whole systems of actuators etc that is inactive but the automatic correction at high level. If a sensor makes a big mistake then you would end up dead... I think the Royal Dutch Airforce vcould do a funny trick when up and very high by switching off the fbw on their f16MLU's. Heard that also from Flanker pilots. After the trick they always turned it back on. Anyway, nice to know to have someone with more then words. I have some experience in destructive and non destructive testing and maintenance. Non weapon (ejection seat included) and non avionics.

Did had some university lectures about latest fbw but was happy to dump that knowledge... I think in the pre jf17 they could turn off the fbw computers one by one... And somehow the f22 must have it how else do the reboot the computers during flight?
 
.
Back
Top Bottom