From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,b15ce5ed141cce4a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Ada Success Story II Date: 1997/03/07 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 223849744 Distribution: world References: <97030510245774@psavax.pwfl.com> Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-03-07T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <01bc29a4$11a606c0$5e6700cf@default> "Larry J. Elmore" writes: Well, we have definitely strayed off subject area here, but one final comment... > Jon S Anthony wrote in article > ... > > In article <97030510245774@psavax.pwfl.com> "Marin David Condic, > 561.796.8997, M/S 731-93" writes: > > > > > never designed with the intent of utilizing the nozzle. Ultimately > > > - if the nozzles do what you'd like - you'd be able to remove all > > > the control surfaces off the back of the airplane. > > > > Speaking as an acro pilot, this sounds mighty scary! Would this sort > > of thing really offer the sort of control capability to get you out of > > spins and such? Hmmm, OTOH, spinning a jet is pretty much going to > > kill it anyway, so maybe this is simply irrlevant... > > There's a number of planes flying now, such as the X-29, that are > inherently unstable in flight and require continuous monitoring and flight > control adjustments by their computer control systems. This is a highly > desirable feature in a fighter plane (makes it very maneuverable as > compared to safe, stable planes), Right. Actually, acro ships are pretty unstable. Ever fly a Pitts or Extra? They're not so wild as to _require_ computer control like the X-29 or EFA (outside of a GPS and a COM, there's not much electronics, period), but they do require constant attention. Fade out for a second and the things will just take off on ya. > I suppose one could do away with some of the control surfaces on > planes with vectoring nozzles, but I just don't see it happening in > the real world. What happens if your engine flames out? You'd > probably have no chance to attempt to relight it, you'd just have to > punch out immediately. I suspect thrust vectoring would work best in > conjunction with control surfaces on a plane specifically designed > for it. This seems right to me too. BTW, even punching out would probably not be under your control. My understanding is that the EFA is so unstable that any control loss would be so violent and disorienting that you would not be quick enough to punch out on your own. > I think the F-15X has only 2-D vectoring (vertical). That's my understanding as well. > Anyone know if Ada was used for the X-29 avionics? Wow, an Ada relevant comment! :-) /Jon -- Jon Anthony Organon Motives, Inc. Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 jsa@organon.com