The Phantom was dangerous as hell. If the stab aug wasn't working, you could depart controlled flight in about a million ways in a billion different flight conditions. Worst was if you were practicing nuclear delivery and were fast (480 kts) and low (100 ft) and the aircraft spontaneously started porpoising - you'd be in the dirt by the third oscillation. If stab-aug failed and you were at any altitude and pulling G hard in an alternating nose-up then nose-down turn, as you tried to transition from one (nose-down) to another (nose-up) attitude, the Phantom would snap roll inverted and you'd be in an unrecoverable inverted flat spin. There were many ways you could screw up in a Phantom. You never used aileron to roll, you used rudder to induce the roll, otherwise you'd encounter adverse yaw and you'd flip over snap rolled in the opposite direction of the turn, and again into an inverted flat spin and screwed. Later model Phantoms had improvements that would give you a little more margin, but the -B and -C models would kill you in a thousand different ways even when you were in a benign flight profile if the stab-aug disengaged.
Couldn't use the ailerons to initiate a turn? Wouldn't the stab-aug have taken care of at least part of that? And wouldn't it have been more speed/alpha dependent? Otherwise we'd have to have trained many pilots to reverse their coordination that they learned previously. I know by experience a plane like a Piper Tomahawk *won't* turn using ailerons below about 75 knots. I'd have to kick in some rudder. And planes like the F-101 and English Electric Lighting would begin to tumble/cartwheel with rapid rolls using full aileron deflection (that's not from experience). I'm not trolling, mind you. I just like learning when it comes to aerodynamics.
Iven C Kincheloe recipient Don McCracken won his award in 1962 against John Glenn for the flat spin program, getting out of numerous inverted flat spins, using the ram and engines cut off.
was literally impossible to get out of a flat spin in F4's, it had its extremely cool aspects as a plane but it handled poorly compared to others and was terrible at turns.
Even with zero aerodynamic qualifications, and having never studied the plane myself, it's always looked and seemed like it would perform terribly as you've mentioned. Can just tell.
Don’t tell the Blue Angels that. They frequently conducted turns. I also hear that it was used in Vietnam to turn as well. There is a difference between handling vice in certain conditions and handling poorly.
Go ahead and do like the other Bloke in the F-106: eject, and the momentum of the seat being fired will push the nose down and take the aircraft out of the flat spin. The Delta Dart landed intact by itself in a snowy slope; a Phantom I cannot tell, but it's worth a try... 😀
@@_baller When the aircraft is into a flat spin there is no airflow over the control surfaces. Yes, there is when entering the flat spin, but once the aircraft is flat spinning and rotating toward the ground, there is no airflow; therefore, all control surfaces are ineffective. There have been several cases in General Aviation of pilots entering a flat spin and out of desperation to get the nose down, crawling out onto the cowling.
The Phantom was dangerous as hell. If the stab aug wasn't working, you could depart controlled flight in about a million ways in a billion different flight conditions. Worst was if you were practicing nuclear delivery and were fast (480 kts) and low (100 ft) and the aircraft spontaneously started porpoising - you'd be in the dirt by the third oscillation. If stab-aug failed and you were at any altitude and pulling G hard in an alternating nose-up then nose-down turn, as you tried to transition from one (nose-down) to another (nose-up) attitude, the Phantom would snap roll inverted and you'd be in an unrecoverable inverted flat spin. There were many ways you could screw up in a Phantom. You never used aileron to roll, you used rudder to induce the roll, otherwise you'd encounter adverse yaw and you'd flip over snap rolled in the opposite direction of the turn, and again into an inverted flat spin and screwed. Later model Phantoms had improvements that would give you a little more margin, but the -B and -C models would kill you in a thousand different ways even when you were in a benign flight profile if the stab-aug disengaged.
to be expected. the F4 was a new era to the US jet line. and we learned much from it. as you can see with the F-104/F-105/F-106.
not to mention the F-14. a vast step up in the multi role fighter/bomber role.
Couldn't use the ailerons to initiate a turn? Wouldn't the stab-aug have taken care of at least part of that? And wouldn't it have been more speed/alpha dependent? Otherwise we'd have to have trained many pilots to reverse their coordination that they learned previously. I know by experience a plane like a Piper Tomahawk *won't* turn using ailerons below about 75 knots. I'd have to kick in some rudder. And planes like the F-101 and English Electric Lighting would begin to tumble/cartwheel with rapid rolls using full aileron deflection (that's not from experience). I'm not trolling, mind you. I just like learning when it comes to aerodynamics.
I flew the C model and never had any issues. A little over dramatic I would say.
@@marilyn3583 Only at very high AOA was the use of the rudder required due to adverse yaw.
Jerry Gentry front seat, Burt Rutan in seat at Edwards in the late 60's.
Iven C Kincheloe recipient Don McCracken won his award in 1962 against John Glenn for the flat spin program, getting out of numerous inverted flat spins, using the ram and engines cut off.
was literally impossible to get out of a flat spin in F4's, it had its extremely cool aspects as a plane but it handled poorly compared to others and was terrible at turns.
Even with zero aerodynamic qualifications, and having never studied the plane myself, it's always looked and seemed like it would perform terribly as you've mentioned. Can just tell.
Don’t tell the Blue Angels that. They frequently conducted turns. I also hear that it was used in Vietnam to turn as well. There is a difference between handling vice in certain conditions and handling poorly.
@@mline250 it was a great jet, dont mistake what I said. It just didnt turn well and was almost (but not 100%) impossible to get out of a flatspin.
Go ahead and do like the other Bloke in the F-106: eject, and the momentum of the seat being fired will push the nose down and take the aircraft out of the flat spin. The Delta Dart landed intact by itself in a snowy slope; a Phantom I cannot tell, but it's worth a try... 😀
I read somewhere that ejecting is like being punched in the stomach and kicked in the butt at the same time.
This is video is interesting, but what would be truly interesting is a video of a flat spin test with a jet fighter that didn't go wrong!
czcams.com/video/XwDnOXmYAiA/video.html
When you try War Thunder simulator battle for the first time in an F4c
attack the D point
Literal flying brick
Top Crash! ✈️
OOF
To get into a flat spin you pitch up, to get out you pitch down, it's not that hard...
There is no air flow over the control surfaces; therefore, they are ineffective and useless.
@@lonestarhog7407 when you pitch down yeah
@@_baller When the aircraft is into a flat spin there is no airflow over the control surfaces. Yes, there is when entering the flat spin, but once the aircraft is flat spinning and rotating toward the ground, there is no airflow; therefore, all control surfaces are ineffective.
There have been several cases in General Aviation of pilots entering a flat spin and out of desperation to get the nose down, crawling out onto the cowling.
@@lonestarhog7407 that's why you pitch down you bum
@@_baller You can't "pitch down" since there is NO airflow over the elevators. Capiche'?