connies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (3 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7804 times:
My uncle Tony started in the RAF as a pilot in 1942. Flew until late 560s, although obviously not front-line at that point. He will often opine that the Spit was by far the closest thing to second nature he ever flew. For the jet age, it was the Hunter.
I saw a NatGeo documentary yesterday, Future Dogfights (it was Dog Fight weekend on the Dutch version of NatGeo) and it showcased the integrated avionics of both the F-22 and F23, while this doesn't equate to easy handling it did show how life for the pilot was much easier as they didn't have to compile information from multiple sources themselves. I think this also goes for the Typhoon and Raffaele.
But you're probably right, since the F-16 the handling is "artificial" anyway.
The Typhoon has a quadruplex digital fly-by-wire control system providing artificial stability, as manual operation alone could not compensate for the inherent instability and feature a unique, totally carefree handling with envelope and manouver protections.(which can be overcomed partlially at war-settings)
In 2004, United States Air Force Chief of Staff General John P. Jumper said : The Eurofighter is certainly, as far as smoothness of controls and the ability to pull (and sustain high g forces), very impressive.
I'm sure the handling of the Spitfire was good, but none of the propeller fighters of the last generations were particularly easy to fly I think. Huge propeller torque, bad visibility on the ground, weak landing gear on the Spit...
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
Geezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (3 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5932 times:
If you are aiming your question at the modern stuff..................................I'm not a pilot, don't even know how to fly, but we have a family member who was flying F-15's for 6 years before transitioning to the F-22A 2 1/2 yrs ago; the first time I met him last Xmas, I asked him a bunch of question about that topic; what he told me; he was VERY big on the Eagle while he was flying it in Germany, ( even had an opportunity to "strap on" a Mig-29 while he was there )
I'm reluctant to say much about planes from different countries, because there are guys from "everywhere" on this forum, and I don't want to "rub anyone" the wrong way; when I asked my "friend" about the Mig as opposed to the Eagle, his answer was pretty "diplomatic" ! Like, "been training in the Eagle for a couple of years, know all about it's performance and capabilities, then only got to "scratch the surface" in the Mig for a few minutes. Everything he said about the Mig was positive; he ended that subject by saying.......if I ever have to go in combat in the Eagle, facing a Mig driver of equal training in his machine...........the Eagle will be "bringing him home" when it's all over with. ( Can't get much more diplomatic than that ! )
He also said that the Russian pilots were " extremely worthy adversaries" !
Then we got to the Raptor; he said the Raptor is hands down, the easiest plane there is to "fly"; ( which is definitely not the same as " going to war" against other highly trained crew from "other places"; this young guy was so much "different" from the standard "fighter jock" types I have talked with over the years it was amazing. Very small guy, probably less than 150 lbs, and probably about my height, and I have "shrunk" from 5' 8" to my present 5' 7"; he said there are "bigger guys" flying Raptors, but the thing is pretty "tight", not much room for the "driver". But as far as "performance"..........think of an NFL team Vs. a Jr. college !
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein