Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - [INFO]ACM possible issues

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

[INFO]ACM possible issues
Goto page Previous 1, 2

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:40 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Daniel Fortin wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

 Our community is still young.  It is growing rapidly both in numbers and 

 in experience level. We are far from my first KOSH (1998) when there was 

 only 3 Yaks / CJ flying in the Big show. 


	


Yeah, Pappy, Batman, and me. Pappy led. That was a fun flight.



 	  Quote: 	
		   The RPA (through FAST and FAST standards) trains its members 

 for "airshow" formation. RPA did not come up with the FAST standard, it 

 simply applies it to its operation. Should the RPA break new ground and 

 "invent" an ACM standard? As with FAST, this standard would most likely 

 have an experience level associated with training / qualification 

 (something like: needs a Lead patch, 100hrs Acro, 100hrs Form and 

 advance spin training (my numbers only)). Would this standard prevent 

 two guys who do not meet the requirements from learning on their own the 

 same way FAST prevented two non qualified guys from flying formation?... 

 Oh wait a minute, FAST never prevented two guys from...


	


The hard part of training is to know when the trainee has reached a 

level of competency. What is the test?



 	  Quote: 	
		   At the end of the day, opening this can of worm will only cause more 

 headache to the RPA. ACM has already arrived, nothing we can do about 

 it. The RPA will be faced with a tough choice in the near future; either 

 condone ACM, not promote ACM or come up with a standard and go full 

 fledge with it. Believe it or not, you have a voice in that choice. Let 

 your BOD know in which direction you wnat your RPA to go. Personally, I 

 think we should someone else break that ice.


	


This is how we lose out. We worry about liability and then do nothing. 

Frankly I want to be able to find people who have skills I want and then 

go learn them. What I do with those skills is then up to me.



I don't think it is a tough choice at all. Let people do what they want 

to do and facilitate the flow of information.



-- 

Brian Lloyd                         361 Catterline Way

brian-yak at lloyd dot com          Folsom, CA 95630

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

_________________
Brian Lloyd
brian-yak at lloyd dot com
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 7:59 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Air Combat Maneuvering. Dog fighting.

Doc

 	  Quote: 	
		   [Original Message]

 From: Hans Oortman <pa3arw(at)euronet.nl>

 To: <yak-list(at)matronics.com>

 Date: 3/23/2006 4:08:40 AM

 Subject: RE: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues



 



 Sorry to ask this stupid question: Can anybody explain to me what "ACM"

 stands for???

 It would explain a lot to me...



 Hans

 Dutch Yak Pilot

  

 -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----

 Van: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com

 [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] Namens DaBear

 Verzonden: donderdag 23 maart 2006 6:56

 Aan: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Onderwerp: Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues



 



 Roger,



 The problem is not *if* pilots will do it.  They are doing it.  Sticking

 our collective heads in the sand and saying we don't support it,  don't

 want people to do it, and will not train them to do it, doesn't stop

 that.  Just like you, people are doing ACM in their aircraft.



 Your comment is valid:



 "Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own

dime
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative."

 If two people want to brief it up on their own dime ... it is their

 prerogative.  Qualified?  What is that?  If we don't have a standard set

 of qualifications, programs, etc.  Then everyone is qualified, because

 their is no agreed upon level of qualification.  People flew formation

 before FAST.  People fly formation without going to FAST clinics and

 getting instruction, solo "qual", and then wing/lead patches.  Some do

 it safe, many are just lucky.  But they do it.  Not having clinics

 doesn't stop people from flying ACM, it just stops them from having the

 opportunity to learn the "standards." 



 I agree, someone flying their Yak on a regular basis doing acro is

 different than ACM.  However, I don't agree that a metal fatigue is more

 likely in ACM.  Someone flying a 1985 Yak-52 or 1970 CJ6A, who has no

 idea how much time their aircraft has spent at high G levels, is doing

 acro on a regular basis.  Even competing at IAC events.  Eventually,

 their aircraft could break.  Heck, if they are doing airshows, or even

 just practicing low level and mess something up, they could over G Their

 aircraft multiple times and cause failure.



 I see nothing wrong with teaching people a safe way to brief, fly (with

 safety pilots), and debrief ACM hops.  It is better to teach people the

 safe way to do things, rather than ignore it.  I also don't think it is

 right for people to say, don't teach it, don't condone it, RPA doesn't

 support it, and then for those same folks to go out and do it.  That

 includes multiple people in all levels of our RPA organization.



 Some folks were lucky (and good) and were able to fly fighter jets. 

 Others would like a taste of that, with some guidance from local IPs and

 people that can guide those that are new to this.  It isn't that I can't

 find people to do ACM with/against.  I can find many just at my local

 airport.  However, what I don't have is a standards of flight profiles,

 and standards for level of ability ala FAST.  So, I'm not going to go

 out and fly against people I don't know and trust just like I will not

 fly formation without knowing someones ability and that they understand

 the program.



 I'd much rather our community pilots go to regular ACM clinics, with

 appropriate level (ex-military) IPs, and learn to do it well, safely,

 and with rules we all understand, than to have them doing it on their

 own, without training, without good IPs in the back.  No one is saying

 go to one 3-day ACM clinic and you are going to be a SH ACM pilot.  But

 teaching some basic BFM 1 v 1 stuff over a series of clinics would be

 fun, valuable, and safe.  Having basic level requires before moving to

 next level clinics would be great times for out community of pilots.  We

 have people that have their FAST cards for multiple years, 100+ hours of

 formation including lots of grab-ass extended trail, and they want to

 learn more, improve their skills, and have fun. 



 ACM clinics would prevent more accidents then they would ever cause.



 DaBear

 Roger Kemp wrote:



 >

 >

 >Tim,

 >Honestly I have mixed emotions on having civilians doing ACM. Sure it is

 >nice to see what their military has trained for and get a taste of what

it
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >is like to be a fighter pilot for a day. The problems have come from the

 >type aircraft chosen to present this taste in. It has brought a mirade of

 >headaches to the T-34 and T-6 communities. I really do not want to see

that
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >come to our community. 

 >As for Acro being no worse on the aircraft than ACM, I would have to

 >disagree. In the fighter training community, acro is a stepping stone to

 >something more. In acro, it is you and the airplane flying a set routine.

 >Your attention is on what your aircraft is doing (airspeed and attitudes

 >flown). ACM is a choreography balancing what your aircraft is doing, what

 >your adversary is doing, thinking far enough ahead of your jet to project

 >where you want to be in the airspace, the corner you are trying to paint

 >your opponent into, and oh by the way look inside for a snap shot of 

what
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >your instruments say your plane is doing. If you are pulling the fight

and
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >not pushing, your trying to force your adversary to make a mistake so

 >he/she overshoots giving you an in (if you are defensive that is). The

 >entire time you are dividing you attention between your plane, your

energy
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >state that is, and your opponent. Flying is second nature. The majority

of
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >your attention is employing your jet as a weapons system to kill this

 >bandit, go to his bar and drink his beer.  This is all taking place in a

1
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >v 1, it gets even more dicey in 2v2, 4v4, or you v many. 

 >The whole process of minting a steely eyed young fighter pilot is a

 >building block process that takes place over a 18 mo. course of training.

 >He/She exits the B course are FNG wing man who is trying finish gulping

 >down the fire hose they stuck in it's mouth for the last 18 mo. The

 >building process is only beginning. It is not complete until he/she

leaves
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >the cockpit at retirement. 

 >We can't take a civilian YAK/CJ driver with nothing more than a FAST card

 >and turn them into a "safe" fighter pilot in weekend. We are asking for

 >major trouble if we start doing that. Some Bubba is going to go home

 >thinking that at the end of a 3 day ACM course he is kingkong and put

 >himself or his bud out of control turning themselves into a lawn dart. We

 >just do not need to do that in our community. 

 >Tactical flying is one thing but full up ACM needs to stay where it is

 >now... the military where we train to that level of proficiency.

 >Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own

dime
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative. But do not do it

in
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >the name of the PA and neither should the RPA try to legislate what two

 >consenting  adults do on their on time. The problem will still come if

the
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >intrepid YAK drivers (CJ for that matter) go an shuck a wing. Now we have

 >the undivided attention of the FAA in a light we do not want.

 >That is my 2 cents. Now do I fly ACM with some of my squadron

 >buds...truthfully yes. The ROE is so ingrained that the Knock It Off call

 >is almost automatic when a DLO(desired learning objective) is met. 

 >Learning to fly tactical is allot of fun and does take energy management

of
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   >our aircraft to another level. It truly does introduce the 3 dimension to

 >flying, the vertical. 

 >Doc

 >

 >  

 >

viperdoc(at)mindspring.co
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 8:00 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Thanks from across the pond!

Doc

 	  Quote: 	
		   [Original Message]

 From: Hans Oortman <pa3arw(at)euronet.nl>

 To: <yak-list(at)matronics.com>

 Date: 3/23/2006 4:35:13 AM

 Subject: RE: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues



 



 Thanks Markus, that explains a hell of a lot. I agree with Doc....



 Hans

  



 -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----

 Van: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com

 [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] Namens Markus Feyerabend

 Verzonden: donderdag 23 maart 2006 11:14

 Aan: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 Onderwerp: RE: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues



 



 Hi Hans,



 ACM = Air Combat Maneuvers



 Regards,

 Markus



 > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

 > Von: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 > Gesendet: 23.03.06 11:10:47

 > An: <yak-list(at)matronics.com>

 > Betreff: RE: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues

 > 

 > 

 > Sorry to ask this stupid question: Can anybody explain to me what "ACM"

 > stands for???

 > It would explain a lot to me...

 > 

 > Hans

 > Dutch Yak Pilot

 >  

 > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----

 > Van: owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com

 > [mailto:owner-yak-list-server(at)matronics.com] Namens DaBear

 > Verzonden: donderdag 23 maart 2006 6:56

 > Aan: yak-list(at)matronics.com

 > Onderwerp: Re: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > Roger,

 > 

 > The problem is not *if* pilots will do it.  They are doing it.  Sticking

 > our collective heads in the sand and saying we don't support it,  don't

 > want people to do it, and will not train them to do it, doesn't stop

 > that.  Just like you, people are doing ACM in their aircraft.

 > 

 > Your comment is valid:

 > 

 > "Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own

 dime

 > and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative."

 > 

 > 

 > If two people want to brief it up on their own dime ... it is their

 > prerogative.  Qualified?  What is that?  If we don't have a standard set

 > of qualifications, programs, etc.  Then everyone is qualified, because

 > their is no agreed upon level of qualification.  People flew formation

 > before FAST.  People fly formation without going to FAST clinics and

 > getting instruction, solo "qual", and then wing/lead patches.  Some do

 > it safe, many are just lucky.  But they do it.  Not having clinics

 > doesn't stop people from flying ACM, it just stops them from having the

 > opportunity to learn the "standards." 

 > 

 > I agree, someone flying their Yak on a regular basis doing acro is

 > different than ACM.  However, I don't agree that a metal fatigue is more

 > likely in ACM.  Someone flying a 1985 Yak-52 or 1970 CJ6A, who has no

 > idea how much time their aircraft has spent at high G levels, is doing

 > acro on a regular basis.  Even competing at IAC events.  Eventually,

 > their aircraft could break.  Heck, if they are doing airshows, or even

 > just practicing low level and mess something up, they could over G Their

 > aircraft multiple times and cause failure.

 > 

 > I see nothing wrong with teaching people a safe way to brief, fly (with

 > safety pilots), and debrief ACM hops.  It is better to teach people the

 > safe way to do things, rather than ignore it.  I also don't think it is

 > right for people to say, don't teach it, don't condone it, RPA doesn't

 > support it, and then for those same folks to go out and do it.  That

 > includes multiple people in all levels of our RPA organization.

 > 

 > Some folks were lucky (and good) and were able to fly fighter jets. 

 > Others would like a taste of that, with some guidance from local IPs and

 > people that can guide those that are new to this.  It isn't that I can't

 > find people to do ACM with/against.  I can find many just at my local

 > airport.  However, what I don't have is a standards of flight profiles,

 > and standards for level of ability ala FAST.  So, I'm not going to go

 > out and fly against people I don't know and trust just like I will not

 > fly formation without knowing someones ability and that they understand

 > the program.

 > 

 > I'd much rather our community pilots go to regular ACM clinics, with

 > appropriate level (ex-military) IPs, and learn to do it well, safely,

 > and with rules we all understand, than to have them doing it on their

 > own, without training, without good IPs in the back.  No one is saying

 > go to one 3-day ACM clinic and you are going to be a SH ACM pilot.  But

 > teaching some basic BFM 1 v 1 stuff over a series of clinics would be

 > fun, valuable, and safe.  Having basic level requires before moving to

 > next level clinics would be great times for out community of pilots.  We

 > have people that have their FAST cards for multiple years, 100+ hours of

 > formation including lots of grab-ass extended trail, and they want to

 > learn more, improve their skills, and have fun. 

 > 

 > ACM clinics would prevent more accidents then they would ever cause.

 > 

 > DaBear

 > 

 > 

 > Roger Kemp wrote:

 > 

 > >

 > >

 > >Tim,

 > >Honestly I have mixed emotions on having civilians doing ACM. Sure it

is
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >nice to see what their military has trained for and get a taste of what

 it

 > >is like to be a fighter pilot for a day. The problems have come from

the
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >type aircraft chosen to present this taste in. It has brought a mirade

of
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >headaches to the T-34 and T-6 communities. I really do not want to see

 that

 > >come to our community. 

 > >As for Acro being no worse on the aircraft than ACM, I would have to

 > >disagree. In the fighter training community, acro is a stepping stone

to
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >something more. In acro, it is you and the airplane flying a set

routine.
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >Your attention is on what your aircraft is doing (airspeed and

attitudes
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >flown). ACM is a choreography balancing what your aircraft is doing,

what
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >your adversary is doing, thinking far enough ahead of your jet to

project
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >where you want to be in the airspace, the corner you are trying to

paint
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >your opponent into, and oh by the way look inside for a snap shot of

 what

 > >your instruments say your plane is doing. If you are pulling the fight

 and

 > >not pushing, your trying to force your adversary to make a mistake so

 > >he/she overshoots giving you an in (if you are defensive that is). The

 > >entire time you are dividing you attention between your plane, your

 energy

 > >state that is, and your opponent. Flying is second nature. The majority

 of

 > >your attention is employing your jet as a weapons system to kill this

 > >bandit, go to his bar and drink his beer.  This is all taking place in

a
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   1

 > >v 1, it gets even more dicey in 2v2, 4v4, or you v many. 

 > >The whole process of minting a steely eyed young fighter pilot is a

 > >building block process that takes place over a 18 mo. course of

training.
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >He/She exits the B course are FNG wing man who is trying finish gulping

 > >down the fire hose they stuck in it's mouth for the last 18 mo. The

 > >building process is only beginning. It is not complete until he/she

 leaves

 > >the cockpit at retirement. 

 > >We can't take a civilian YAK/CJ driver with nothing more than a FAST

card
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >and turn them into a "safe" fighter pilot in weekend. We are asking for

 > >major trouble if we start doing that. Some Bubba is going to go home

 > >thinking that at the end of a 3 day ACM course he is kingkong and put

 > >himself or his bud out of control turning themselves into a lawn dart.

We
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >just do not need to do that in our community. 

 > >Tactical flying is one thing but full up ACM needs to stay where it is

 > >now... the military where we train to that level of proficiency.

 > >Now having said all that, if two guys want to brief it up on their own

 dime

 > >and are qualified to do that..it is their prerogative. But do not do it

 in

 > >the name of the PA and neither should the RPA try to legislate what two

 > >consenting  adults do on their on time. The problem will still come if

 the

 > >intrepid YAK drivers (CJ for that matter) go an shuck a wing. Now we

have
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >the undivided attention of the FAA in a light we do not want.

 > >That is my 2 cents. Now do I fly ACM with some of my squadron

 > >buds...truthfully yes. The ROE is so ingrained that the Knock It Off

call
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >is almost automatic when a DLO(desired learning objective) is met. 

 > >Learning to fly tactical is allot of fun and does take energy

management
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   of

 > >our aircraft to another level. It truly does introduce the 3 dimension

to
	


 	  Quote: 	
		   > >flying, the vertical. 

 > >Doc

 > >

 > >  

 > >

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 >  

 >  

 >  

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 > 

 >  

 >  

 >  

 > 

 > 

 > 

 ______________________________________________________________

 Verschicken Sie romantische, coole und witzige Bilder per SMS!

 Jetzt bei WEB.DE FreeMail: http://f.web.de/?mc=021193

wlannon(at)cablerocket.co
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:39 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

---

gus.fraser(at)gs.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:06 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

How about this then, from the designers mouth, My SP-91s wing was tested to

60G, at 60G the wing tip only moved 80mm, when the load was removed it

returned to 0 indicating no bending took place. The Russians go overboard on

this. The fact that the Russians use 100% is well known. See the trouble is

that you can tell a Russian pilot what the G limit is but he wont believe

you. See Russian pilots see these limits as more of a... guide line.



Gus  



--

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:45 pm Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Walter Lannon wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   Where did you find that information?


	


To be honest, I don't remember. I *think* it was from our discussion 

with Bushi Cheng at MTW and OSH but it could have come from Yakity-Yaks. 

Unfortunately, again, I don't remember.



 	  Quote: 	
		   It is certainly not true for the CJ6. Some years ago Joe Howse received 

 the CJ design limit loads from the Beijing Aeronautical Technology 

 Research Centre in order to convince Transport Canada that the CJ did 

 indeed meet aerobatic requirements.

 This document deals with limit loads in various flight conditions and 

 only refers to design ultimate loads with the statement that the 

 structural safety factor is at least 1.5. This is precisely the same 

 requirement as Western standards (FAA Part 23).

 The turning/rolling limit for the CJ is +3.6 G's, same as our 60% of 

 limit load.

 The CJ is NO different in this area than any Western military trainer of 

 the 1950's era.  Having some experience in this area I can tell you that 

 the CJ structure is not overly impressive, it appears to be quite 

 adequate but I advise my customers to use a general limit of 4 G's. I do 

 the same with all old military trainers.

 IMHO the T34 wing structure is far stronger BUT fatigue resistance 

 design was poorly handled.


	


In that case I won't repeat the statement. Thank you for correcting my 

misunderstanding.



Brian Lloyd

brian HYPHEN yak AT lloyd DOT com

Steve Dalton

Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Posts: 8

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:16 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

 	  Quote: 	
		  >>Subject: Re: [INFO]ACM possible issues  

>>I just dont see that ACM is more risky than aerobatics when done properly.   

>>ACM guys....break the silence...I know you are out there!  

   
	


There have been several very good comments made here about metal fatigue, pulling wings off (and the consequences for us all), and about whether the RPA should be involved in BFM/ACM training.  May I add my two cents worth about risk and training for BFM/ACM?  

   

Comparing the risk of Acro vs. ACM:    

   

I flew the F-4, F-16 and T-38 (about 1,000 hours in each) and was an IP/Evaluator in each.  I remember sending T-38 solo students out to fly all the acro they wanted.  They had about 150 hours total time and they were flying a plane that had a 500 KIAS entry speed for a loop and needed almost 10,000’ to split-s.  I don’t remember any of these rookies killing themselves doing solo acro.  They tended to kill themselves (and their instructors) in the traffic pattern and during formation training (hint, hint).  

   

However, I remember far too many experienced fighter pilots killed in BFM/ACM missions.  I realize the planes we fly are much different, but the concepts of BFM/ACM are the same.  Doesn’t matter if you’re in a Fokker or an F-22, if you make a small mistake, you’re dead.  And I don’t mean the other guy shot you down.  These experienced, highly trained and proficient pilots flew into each other or the ground, during peacetime training.  Few of us “Yakkers” are experienced, highly trained, or proficient in BFM/ACM.  So, IMHO, flying BFM/ACM is MUCH riskier than doing loops and rolls by yourself.  

   

ACM training clinics:  

   

Based on experience, I must say, and I’m very serious, that this is no different than teaching brain surgery to a pilot through the use of weekend clinics.  Yeah, after a couple clinics you could probably safely cut someone’s head open.  But, would you really know what the heck you’re doing?  Would you really know what to do when the “unexpected” occurs?  If you haven’t cracked a skull open in several months, would you feel proficient?  Confident?  Clueless perhaps?  Would you want to be the patient?  Or in our case, the other pilot in the BFM engagement flying against a clueless, non-proficient, hardly trained rookie.  But, hey, he did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night. J  

   

A military fighter pilot flies all the time.  He/she IS experienced, highly trained and proficient.  He/she HAS developed a good g-tolerance.  It took him/her YEARS of CONSTANT training to get there.  And they STILL have BFM/ACM accidents!!  

   

Thanks for listening,  

Steve Dalton  

Yak-52TW  

N52SD

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:45 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Another very good post Steve.

 Dennis

  

 [quote]   ---

fish(at)aviation-tech.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:03 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Group,



I am not taking a stand on either side of this this discussion, but I would

like to point out one thing.



I keep hearing the military trains 20 yr old to fly this way. When I went through

Flight Engineer School (Little Rock AFB, AR), it was a total imersion class.

We ate/drank and thought of nothing but flying 24 hrs a day, 6 1/2 days a week

(fri or Sat night out), for a year. This has a direct effect on your learning/performance

when flying.



I found that after a two week break in flying, my performance was degraded on

my next flight.



Most current jet fighters have fatigue indexes and are pulled from service well

before reaching the end of their index. Some are rebuilt using new components

to extend thier service life (F-18, unk about others), and some are scrapped.

On C-130's we always had a list of restrected aircraft because of fatigue. They

were allowed to fly, but with severe limitations.



Just someting to consider, with ACM/FAST.



Fly Safe

John Fischer



[quote]



Another very good post Steve.

Dennis



  ---

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:22 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

There are two parts to this discussion and I want to make sure they are 

clearly delineated so that we don't get confused. The first part 

consists of the actual risks associated with flying ACM and primarily 

consists of:



1. pilot training requirements to ensure that the pilots participating 

have enough background that they are not likely to hurt themselves, 

their buddies, or anyone on the ground;



2. stresses, loading, and life cycle limits to aluminum aircraft structures;



3. legal and regulatory limitations.



We seem to have a lot of people weighing in on these topics. I don't 

think anyone disagrees at this point that:



1. people can do stupid things and hurt themselves;



2. you can break your airplane;



3. someone might sue you or someone at the FAA might get a bee in their 

bonnet and decide to persecute you for some reason (or no reason at all 

as they a wont to do).



The second part has to do with whether RPA should "sanction" this 

activity. This is completely independent of the risks involved. As I 

have stated before, the responsibility for safe flight always remains 

with the pilot, not any organization. It is the pilot's decision whether 

or not to participate in ACM activity.



The only reason I can see for RPA to take a stand one way or the other 

is to provide some legal protection from liability. Given that RPA has 

no assets and no value to speak of (financially speaking) I would 

venture that it is not likely to be the target of a lawsuit should 

something happen. No one would bother to sue the RPA because they could 

never get anything from it.



So, if there are members who are interested in learning the basics of 

ACM and there are members willing to teach the basics of ACM, I suggest 

that it makes sense for the RPA to passively facilitate.



-- 

Brian Lloyd                         361 Catterline Way

brian-yak at lloyd dot com          Folsom, CA 95630

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

dsavarese(at)elmore.rr.co
Guest

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:23 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

"I found that after a two week break in flying, my performance was degraded 

on my next flight."



That is why it is also called a perishable skill.

Dennis





---

aerobaticgirl(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:45 pm Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Did I miss something?  60Gs?  I am most dearly hoping that you meant 6Gs, cuz....ouch!  

   

  Smash



"Fraser, Gus" <gus.fraser(at)gs.com> wrote:

  [quote]--> Yak-List message posted by: "Fraser, Gus" 



How about this then, from the designers mouth, My SP-91s wing was tested to

60G, at 60G the wing tip only moved 80mm, when the load was removed it

returned to 0 indicating no bending took place. The Russians go overboard on

this. The fact that the Russians use 100% is well known. See the trouble is

that you can tell a Russian pilot what the G limit is but he wont believe

you. See Russian pilots see these limits as more of a... guide line.



Gus 



--

aerobaticgirl(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:13 pm Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Dude, seriously, coming from the ACM, BFM, upsidedown-do-it-f'in-right community.  Nothing dangerous there...more danger in BS formation old-school complacency.  No diggin' just statin' truths.  Boys ( and I use that generically) that know what they are doin' and can keep visual, pull lead, pull trail and understand about closure rates/angles of intercept, sweet!  

   

  I was once told by someone that I had temporaral distortion....think about that for a moment....the IN ability to tell time...if you want to break it down...no one thinks they have that problem.  Haveyou ever been in an auto accident?  Ever found yourself in a sitation where you know you didn't deserve to be wrong,time seemed to slow down to nothing?  That is tempoal distortion.  

   

  Point to be had is:  take a reality check and know your limitations.  Pre-brief all form flights, even  if they have been done a million times.  Pretend there is a nebie in the group all the time and if not, laugh about the good times later after a brewskie.

   

  Small Thoughts, from a Little Big Mouth Girl  

   

  Perception is *your reality*

   

  Smash

  [quote]--> Yak-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd 



DaBear wrote:



 	  Quote: 	
		   So teach people what rolling G is, the consequences, and how to do ACM

 without rolling G. Sorry Brian, but people (qualified and not yet

 instructed) are doing it today. Hiding behind the illusion that lack of

 ACM training and clinics will prevent someone from doing ACM is in the

 same vein of if we outlaw guns, we will not have any gun crime.


	


Yo! Bear! Who do you think you 		Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

brian

Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 643
Location: Sacramento, California, USA

Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:27 am Post subject: [INFO]ACM possible issues

Sarah Tobin wrote:



I am replying to this because it was in reply to a message I sent. OTOH, 

I am not sure you were specifically addressing this to me.



 	  Quote: 	
		   Point to be had is:  take a reality check and know your limitations.  

 Pre-brief all form flights, even if they have been done a million 

 times.  Pretend there is a nebie in the group all the time and if not, 

 laugh about the good times later after a brewskie.


	


Seems reasonable to me. Anything we can do to *help* others to fly 

safely seems to me to be a good thing.



I think I have said this before but most people still seem to read me 

wrong. I think people should be able to do what the way to do in their 

own airplane. That includes acro, ACM, form, ground attack, spot 

landings, wearing flowered tropical shirts, or whatever floats your 

boat. I think that other people should then leave them alone. As long as 

it doesn't cause risk to those around you then, what the hey, knock 

yourself out!



What I just don't understand is why this attitude gives heartburn to so 

many people on this list? Is this an ex-military thing that somehow I am 

against you if I'm not with you or what? I agree, my approach to a lot 

of what we take for granted is unorthodox. I like to think that it is 

because I think about it and then go try it out to see. (Kind of like 

the crosswind landing thing with flaps in a CJ6A -- unorthodox but it 

works.)



So I would really like to understand how this works before I give up.



-- 

Brian Lloyd                         361 Catterline Way

brian-yak at lloyd dot com          Folsom, CA 95630

+1.916.367.2131 (voice)             +1.270.912.0788 (fax)



I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .

- Antoine de Saint-Exupery

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Yak-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum