It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

F-22 stall test Video!

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 12:43 PM
link   
i thought the F-22 was supposed to be a sweet handling plane, but after watching this clip I wouldn't want to be the pilot who stalls this plane at low level!

Just watch this video clip and see for yourselves just how nasty the F-22 is in a stall!

www.alexisparkinn.com...

go down the page to F-22 stall test video.




posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 12:51 PM
link   
this isn't a stall video at all so badly named thread on your part. this was earlier on in the raptor testing program and the reason the planes where grounded for a couple months as they investgated the problem. ill look up the reason for the crash but im pretty sure it was a computer flight control system problem.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Didn't find the video... Could somebpdy who got it working re-link it so that it goes directly to the video...??



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Figher Master FIN
Didn't find the video... Could somebpdy who got it working re-link it so that it goes directly to the video...??

You got quicktime FIN?



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by MadGreebo
i thought the F-22 was supposed to be a sweet handling plane, but after watching this clip I wouldn't want to be the pilot who stalls this plane at low level!

Just watch this video clip and see for yourselves just how nasty the F-22 is in a stall!

www.alexisparkinn.com...

go down the page to F-22 stall test video.


Thanks for the link ... the site has some great videos.

As for the F-22 video, it's not surprising considering it was at the airplane's limits. It's never easy to control an airplane at it's limits. Im sure it flies quite well most of the time. In any case, the primary emphasis of the design was stealth.

They gave it enormous wings but unlike the F-14 or SU-27 which theoretically gain a low aspect ratio lifting surface at high AOA due to their wide-body design, the F-22 is pretty much entirely reliant on the wings for lift which means that the aspect ratio of the lifting surfaces at high AOA are closer to conventional aircraft.

SU-27 derivative with canards and thrust vectoring:
www.alexisparkinn.com...



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 04:01 PM
link   
The YF-22 in the video is from many years ago. The aircraft had a software malfunction that was corrected after the crash.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Canada_EH you watching the correct video? theres no crash at all, just a high altitude stall test. its the new raptor variant as you can see from the tail shape and nose. there is no crash at all, just a very very bad stall and spin till recovery.

Follow the link, go into militray, and watch the STALL video not the crash one. Problem solved.

[edit on 4-3-2006 by MadGreebo]


NSA

posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 04:13 PM
link   
In a flight simulator I piloted a F22 and on a vertical climb it stalled out over 50,000 ft. That was even supercruise going full open.

I want to say the ceiling was more like 85,250 ft, but not sure.

F-22 RAPTOR

[edit on 4/3/06 by NSA]



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 11:54 AM
link   
The crash in the video isn't a stall and it wasn't an F-22 -- it was an oscillation on takeoff that resulted from ground effect, pilot error and control law limitations in the computer code that ended the flight test career of the Pratt-powered YF-22.

www.csd.uwo.ca...

Unfortunately, N22YX was involved in a major accident on May 25, 1992 when it belly-flopped onto the runway after 8 seconds of violent pilot-induced oscillations. It slid several thousand feet down the runway and caught fire, destroying some 25 percent of the airframe. Pilot Tom Morgenfeld was uninjured, but the aircraft was deemed too badly damaged for economical repair.

At the time of the crash, Morgenfeld had been carrying out a planned go-around, and he had just switched on his afterburners and had retracted his undercarriage at less than 50 feet off the runway with thrust vectoring active. At a speed of 175 knots, the aircraft began an uncommanded pitchup followed by a severe stick-forward command from the pilot. The aircraft then entered a series of pitch oscillations, with rapid tail and thrust nozzle fluctuations, exacerbated by control surface actuators hitting rate limiters causing commands to get out of synchronization with their execution.

An investigation later showed that Morgenfeld had ignored a test-card that required that the vectoring nozzles to be locked into position in just such a configuration that he had found himself at the time of the crash. However, most engineers had also ignored this instruction since they thought it to be unnecessary. At the time of the accident, the aircraft had made some 760 flights and had logged 100.4 hours in the air.


Nevermind I now have seen the stall test... The pilot lost his lunch in the process.
Looks like a rather nasty falling leaf stall with an initial tail slide. As is evidenced by the tailerons, full forward stick actually seemed to exacerbate the tendency to tumble. It could be an issue with the control laws.

[edit on 6-3-2006 by mustang_dvs]



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 12:41 PM
link   
Ah im glad some one found the right clip... thats a nasty old bird to be flinging round the sky if its going to do that as part of its stall recovery pattern!

I'm interested in just how the F-22 has been allowed to be developed with such a bad stall recovery, as it was touted as the air to air king of the world! Guess it just was an unlucky day for the pilot!

Oh and if you watch the video real close, isn't that just a magnificant view of area 51 right down below in the footage?!



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Finally found the video, for those that still cant its under Test Flights and is called Stall Testing the Raptor not F-22 Stall Video like in the original post. Cool video though, my fav bit is where the pilot says "Holy #" and the copilot replies Copy that hahaha


Anyway i agree that it looks a bit like groom lake there but after comparing clear shots with google earth i've convinced myself its edwards air force base. Check out the tear-shaped bit of dry lake in the video at 29 secs and on google earth at lat 35.000 lon -117.831. The shape and roads etc match up.

-George



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Copilot? Surely not? where was he sat, in the missile bay?



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Sure looks like a sweet handling bird to me.........think I'd prefer to do this in a Su37 myself...........



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 08:00 PM
link   
Um...You understand "stall" is fancy for "the thing that happens that causes planes to crash" right?

Its a plane thats stability is heavily controlled by computers and brought to a speed which no longer creates lift. Id say under the circumstances that plane did AMAZINGLY well.

Pass. two thumbs up. Ready to go. Your reaction would lead us to believe it should be able to supercruise with flowers coming out of its butt or something at stall (crash) speeds.

[edit on 6-3-2006 by skippytjc]



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Well i cant see what the big deal is,

The best planes stall at an AoA of anything over 16 degrees

With greatest lift at 13-15 degrees.

it was clearly over an angle of attack of 15 degress.

any plane is expected to stall at that.

although i dont know the actual angle of attack, im just going on level.

angle of attack doesnt apply from level though, it come from the direction the airflows over the wings



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   
they are just defining the flight envelope for the machine. at what altitude would you want to do a stall test and recovery at? 1500 feet or 15,000 feet



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Actually, they were developing the stall recovery procedures for the F-22's Dash 1. That's why test pilots get paid the (slightly) bigger bucks.



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 03:51 PM
link   
yeah i agree they may be testing stall cpacity and recovery, but the arse drops outta that bird like no tomorrow!

The test pilots understated reaction ( You or I would be screaming like girls by that point!! lol) does him credit...' oh oh, oh no, yowee' I for one would not like to be in an F-22 at a stall, no way ho zay!

Will look for the SU-37 stall footage...its alot more controled than the Raptor ie no falling like a brick.....

Still a sweet to look at fighter though



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 04:44 PM
link   
How can a Flnkers stall be more controlled? Or any other stall copme to that. At the point of stalling there is no control whatsoever, in any aeroplane.

Some planes recover betteer than others thats all, no plane is controllable in a stall.



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 08:29 PM
link   
A Stall is nothing more than a test manuever that every pilot needs to do(or atleast is recommended that every pilot SHOULD do) when aquiring a pilot's liscence(a basic one).

A stall is easy to recover from, nose down, full throttle. Now, there are certain altitudes that this will work at, for instance, you do not want to stall in less than 1000 feet, it can get messy. You want to give your aircraft as much time and space as possible.

It looks to me like the F-22 fell into a flat vertical spin and then easily recovered some few seconds later, I'd guess he was at around 15,000 feet or more, plenty of space for this a test of stalling to take place.

I believe every aircraft is put through stalls during the testing phase, to see how they react, albeit there are many types of stalls and some of them require different methods to pull out of, but pulling out of a general stall is relatively simple, nose down, throttle full.

I don't know why everyone is making it out to be like something spectacular, yeah it's awsome to see a bird like that fall into a spin, but not like the pilot's life was in any immediate danger(that is, if he knew what he was doing).

There is no co-pilot, the pilot was in constant communication with the tower, and the F-22 was tested at Edwards Air Force base I believe, where over 160 aircraft first flew, so it's not suprising that an aircraft like the F-22 would be over there and not over at Groom Lake.

Just my 2 cents. And the Su-37 is the technology demonstrator for the Advanced Su-35, an Su-27 derivative with canards, thrust vectoring, and advanced avionics. I believe the best Su-27 variant out there is the Su-30MKI.

Shattered OUT...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join