rattle, thunder, thunder, wow

I spent two months at Nellis AFB doing the op-eval tests of the v22. Our work spaces were towards the end of the runway and only about one taxiway away. I thought I was going to be crazy by the time I left there. I mean who launches a dozen f16s at 11 at night? Those damn things were so loud that in our bird with the apu running, extremely loud in itself, and our david clarks on you still had to stop talking until after they left.
We very quickly learned to love the a-10s. :D
Kinda funny how some people think one is louder than another, but I personally believe the f16 to be the most obnoxious over the other jets Ive heard (ea-6, f15, f18, f22, a10, av8b, and a few foreign jets that I dont know the names of)

Only thing louder, and only bc of the proximity I think is when you're on a LHD and a av8 goes screaming by you about 20 ft away. It literally hurts.
 
mjg407 said:
Not sure about the burner part, but older century generation fighters, and even F-4s were pure turbojets. Now they are actually (with the exception of the prowler) a turbofan. Makes them a wee bit quieter.
Click to expand...

For my money there is very little cooler than the old century series jets, with the F-105 being my favorite.
 
Boris Badenov said:
Yeah it's pretty great until it's hour 9 of recurrent ground and you're just trying to keep your eyes open and remember the correct letter answers for the test long enough you can go back to the econolodge, down a couple of bud lights and show up at ohmygodoclock to further delve in to the particulars of the TPE331 (or whatever). Like pilots are smart enough to understand that crap. I doze for dollars and they're trying to explain to me how this spline thingie ratchets in to the other thingie and somehow allows the "engine-oil" to do stuff that doesn't appear to have anything to do with the engine or even the prop, at least not directly. And then Maverick and his buddies have to show the russkies how it's done and deafen me when I'm already in a psychotic state of caffeine/nicotine overload? Your tax dollars at play. Go bomb someone!
Click to expand...
And this:

Boris Badenov said:
I'll take the silence of totalitarianism.
Click to expand...
Stop, you're killing me. I can see your wit is as sharp as your intellect. Even though you're a pilot.

I wonder if you wouldn't make more dough playing the lounges in Vegas. For reals.
 
WacoFan said:
Mike - Educate a dummy - what is the difference between the afterburners on the F-105, 106 (and I assume all century fighters) and current afterburners? You mention a "Hard-light" afterburner - what is that and what are they today? Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Generally speaking, ABs in current engines use fuel spray manifolds or spray bars to meter the fuel for AB ignition. Akin to a Throttle Body Injection system in a car, they provide smooth AB ignition and acceleration, depending on being in min or max burner, or in the case of some Pratt motors, the number of injectors used depends on which portion of burner you're in...min to max. The pattern of how the manifolds are used/lit in the augmentor duct will provide the smooth acceleration and light off. The AB only provides additional thrust to the engine at the exhaust end by introducing raw fuel to in, the engine itself isn't actually turning any faster (at military power is the fastest it'll turn). It's not unusual to see 10,000 lbs or more of additional thrust when using AB, with the resulting sharp increase in fuel flow, of course.

In the older J57s (F-100/F-101/F-102), J-79s (F-104), and most noticably the J-75s (F-105/106), the AB was ignited by the turbine in the engine. The delay it took for this "light-off" to happen, combined with the raw fuel being dumped in the AB section to be lit off, produced a "BA-BOOM!" noise when the AB "explosively" lit off, the characteristic "hard light".....definitely no metered fuel injection there.

Clear as mud?:D
 
MikeD said:
Generally speaking, ABs in current engines use fuel spray manifolds or spray bars to meter the fuel for AB ignition. Akin to a Throttle Body Injection system in a car, they provide smooth AB ignition and acceleration, depending on being in min or max burner, or in the case of some Pratt motors, the number of injectors used depends on which portion of burner you're in...min to max. The pattern of how the manifolds are used/lit in the augmentor duct will provide the smooth acceleration and light off. The AB only provides additional thrust to the engine at the exhaust end by introducing raw fuel to in, the engine itself isn't actually turning any faster (at military power is the fastest it'll turn). It's not unusual to see 10,000 lbs or more of additional thrust when using AB, with the resulting sharp increase in fuel flow, of course.

In the older J57s (F-100/F-101/F-102), J-79s (F-104), and most noticably the J-75s (F-105/106), the AB was ignited by the turbine in the engine. The delay it took for this "light-off" to happen, combined with the raw fuel being dumped in the AB section to be lit off, produced a "BA-BOOM!" noise when the AB "explosively" lit off, the characteristic "hard light".....definitely no metered fuel injection there.

Clear as mud?:D
Click to expand...

Makes sense actually...and seems to be more fun the old way!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top