jaegerx posted:

Hey. They're more reliable than the f35.

Sagebrush posted:

The Russians maybe aren't elegant about the way they do things but they sure are effective. More people have gone into space in Soyuz capsules (the Chevy Cavalier of spacecraft) than any other type.

quote:

During X-15 Flight 191, Adams' seventh flight, the plane had an electrical problem followed by control problems at the apogee of its flight. The pilot may also have become disoriented. During reentry from a 266,000 ft (50.4 mile, 81.1 km) apogee, the X-15 yawed and went into a spin at Mach 5. The pilot recovered, but went into a Mach 4.7 inverted dive. Excessive loading led to structural breakup at about 65,000 feet (19.8 km).

Godholio posted:

Reading a wikipedia article to see how many people have died on Soyuz flights (only 4, apparently), I ran across this:

quote:

s the X-15 climbed, Adams began a planned wing-rocking (rolling) maneuver so an on-board camera could scan the horizon. At the conclusion of the wing-rocking portion of the climb, the X-15 had begun a slow drift in heading; 40 seconds later, when the aircraft had reached its maximum altitude, it was off heading by 15 degrees to the left. As Adams came over the top, the drift briefly halted as the aircraft's nose yawed 15 degrees back to the correct attitude. Then the drift to the left began again; within 30 seconds, Adams' descending flight path was at right angles to the attitude of the aircraft. At 230,000 ft (70,000 m), while descending into the rapidly increasing density of the atmosphere, the X-15 entered a Mach 5 spin.

In the NASA 1 control room, there was no way to monitor the heading of the aircraft, so the situation was unknown to the engineers monitoring the flight. Normal conversation continued between Knight and Adams, with Knight advising Adams that he was "a little bit high," but in "real good shape." Adams radioed that the aircraft "[seemed] squirrelly," and moments later repeatedly told Knight that he had entered a spin. The ground controllers sought to get the X-15 straightened out, but there was no recommended spin recovery technique for the X-15, and engineers knew nothing about the aircraft's supersonic spin tendencies. The chase pilots, realizing that the X-15 would never make Rogers Dry Lake, headed for the emergency lakes, Ballarat and Cuddeback, in case Adams attempted an emergency landing.

Adams held the X-15's controls against the spin, using both the flight controls and the reaction control jets in the nose and wings. He managed to recover from the spin at 118,000 feet and went into an inverted Mach 4.7 dive at an angle between 40 and 45 degrees. In theory, Adams was in a good position to roll upright, pull out of the dive and set up a landing. However, due to high gain in the adaptive control system, the X-15 went into pilot induced oscillation with rapid pitching motion of increasing severity, still in a dive at 160,000 feet per minute. As the X-15 neared 65,000 ft (20,000 m), it was diving at Mach 3.93 and experiencing more than 15 g vertically, and 8g laterally.

The aircraft broke up northeast of the town of Johannesburg 10 minutes and 35 seconds after launch. An Air Force pilot, who was filling in for another chase pilot, spotted the main wreckage northwest of Cuddeback Lake. The aircraft was destroyed, and Adams was killed.

quote:

During X-15 Flight 191, Adams' seventh flight, the plane had an electrical problem followed by control problems at the apogee of its flight. The pilot may also have become disoriented. During reentry from a 266,000 ft (50.4 mile, 81.1 km) apogee, the X-15 yawed and went into a spin at Mach 5. The pilot recovered, but went into a Mach 4.7 inverted dive. Excessive loading led to structural breakup at about 65,000 feet (19.8 km).

Fucknag posted:

What is it with Flight 191 and inverted flight?

Duke Chin posted:

You neglected to feature a "Would you like to know more?" button. Link that up, pretty please Mr. Godholio - I want to read more while I'm at work.



vvv thanks!

Previa_fun posted:

Despite their speed and power I think the only aircraft less suited to precision aerobatics was the F-105:

Godholio posted:

It's cool to think that the Angels and T-birds flew the same basic aircraft for a while.

Psion posted:

in ...oh, 50 years they'll both be flying F-35s!

Ambihelical Hexnut posted:

The WWII glider badge is the chest-hair-havingest of aeronautical ratings.

wdarkk posted:

Speaking of Gaige and hilarious, is it wrong that I want to take the Love Thumper into public games?

Eej posted:

What was the casualty rate of those things anyway? Every time I read about them it's like "oh yeah like almost half of them flew into the ocean/a hill/trees".

Fucknag posted:

link your porn please

Ogrel72 posted:

Eej posted:

What was the casualty rate of those things anyway? Every time I read about them it's like "oh yeah like almost half of them flew into the ocean/a hill/trees".

quote:

At the height of the Glider Program, the American Combat Glider Pilots numbered less than 6,000. 211 of them died in combat, approximately 636 were wounded, and another 140 died in the line of duty, most in training accidents flying their dangerous aircraft. This casualty rate of 987 Glider Pilots, 16.4% of their total number, and roughly 20% of the number who flew in each combat mission, was one of the highest of any combat specialty in World War II.

Ogrel72 posted:

Ambihelical Hexnut posted:

From the innernet:


This says nothing of how many of their passengers became casualties, but I can't imagine it's any better. Keep in mind that doctrine considers a force 'neutralized' if it has suffered 10% casualties. 20% of your pilots per mission is a lot, and the stats look worse when you consider that all 6000 of them were probably not forward deployed at the same time.

Ambihelical Hexnut posted:

From the innernet:


This says nothing of how many of their passengers became casualties, but I can't imagine it's any better. Keep in mind that doctrine considers a force 'neutralized' if it has suffered 10% casualties. 20% of your pilots per mission is a lot, and the stats look worse when you consider that all 6000 of them were probably not forward deployed at the same time.

wdarkk posted:

Speaking of Gaige and hilarious, is it wrong that I want to take the Love Thumper into public games?

hobbesmaster posted:

My grandfather was deployed to the Pacific in anticipation of an invasion of Japan. Just imagine that the glider losses that would have been involved with that.

Based on that wikipedia page I'm now really confused about my grandfather's career since he retired in the mid 60s as a Major but that wikipedia article said that glider pilots were enlisted?

quote:

@helenpidd
Passenger who saw the alleged hoaxer's face as the Tornado jet pitched up alongside the plane. "He was like 'oh poo poo'."

Ogrel72 posted:

FrozenVent posted:

So how long did those markings last on the SR-71? I was under the impression that the paint would get burned to a crispy black pretty fast.