g500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 726 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 5078 times:
Is it wise to do a "break away" fighter jet style in a high-performance commercial jet like a G-V? (Granted it looks like it was during an airshow).. I like the spotter's comments
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 4633 posts, RR: 7 Reply 1, posted (4 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 5025 times:
Well it is not a "Gulfstream V" but rather a C-37A, the difference being the former is a civilian jet and the latter is a "spec'd for the government" version of the jet. It quite likely has additional systems that may allow things like this without problems (not that I actually know).
I guess the real question is what are the differences between a "stock" G-V and the C37A?
Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
BMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 14358 posts, RR: 26 Reply 2, posted (4 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4779 times:
Quoting g500 (Thread starter): Is it wise to do a "break away" fighter jet style in a high-performance commercial jet like a G-V?
No reason not to, especially if the aircraft is lightly loaded. Passengers may not appreciate it and it isn't something you'd probably want to do on a regular basis, but occasionally it's probably just fine.
Quoting tugger (Reply 1): I guess the real question is what are the differences between a "stock" G-V and the C37A?
As far as the airframe goes, nothing I think. The C-37 has some additional avionics and maybe some extra bolt on type equipment, but I don't believe the engines, airframe, etc. are appreciably beefed up over a bone stock G-V.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
RDH3E From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 1063 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (4 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4640 times:
Quoting g500 (Thread starter): Is it wise to do a "break away" fighter jet style in a high-performance commercial jet like a G-V? (Granted it looks like it was during an airshow).. I like the spotter's comments
If a 707 can do a barrel roll, I'm sure this is perfectly acceptable in the Gulfstream.
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 4633 posts, RR: 7 Reply 5, posted (4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3999 times:
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 2): As far as the airframe goes, nothing I think. The C-37 has some additional avionics and maybe some extra bolt on type equipment, but I don't believe the engines, airframe, etc. are appreciably beefed up over a bone stock G-V.
I am thinking it may have different oil and fuel elements that make it safer to do this kind of thing.
Of course probably the real reason this plane can do this is because unlike g500 above, the pilot doesn't worry about not keeping his job because quite frankly the "company" that owns the plane doesn't care that much about doing damage to it. I meant hey can always get another one if they need to.....
Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
n53614 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 229 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3847 times:
An overhead approach, while awesome-looking, really isn't that big of a deal. I have personally seen a C-5, C-17, two C-130s, a KC-135 and an E-3 do an overhead approach.
flymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 6298 posts, RR: 6 Reply 7, posted (4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3822 times:
Just YouTube airliners at air shows. What an empty 757 or even 747 can do is impressive. Remember these airplanes are made to withstand a lot more than even a horrible flight with terrible turbulence.
"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
Acey559 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1341 posts, RR: 2 Reply 8, posted (4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3789 times:
I know the chief pilot at John Deere and he mentioned to me one day that the wing on the G-V/550 is so big that you could do an 80-90 degree back and hardly even feel it. I think he was slightly exaggerating but he said the big wing is so comfortable that aggressive maneuvers like that aren't nearly as uncomfortable as you'd think they'd be or like they might be on an airliner or other corporate jet with a smaller wing. As a side note, that's one CLEAN plane! I always appreciate how corporate flight departments take care of their equipment (understandably) compared to the planes I fly.
g500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 726 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3702 times:
Quoting Acey559 (Reply 8): I know the chief pilot at John Deere and he mentioned to me one day that the wing on the G-V/550 is so big that you could do an 80-90 degree back and hardly even feel it. I think he was slightly exaggerating but he said the big wing is so comfortable that aggressive maneuvers like that aren't nearly as uncomfortable as you'd think
the G-V/550 wing is pretty darn long..... G-V/550 vref speeds are usually around 115-120, because of the long wing.
dragon6172 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1160 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (4 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3416 times:
Considering there is no reference in the photo to determine the bank angle, it probably was not as steep as is being assumed here. GV/C-37 max bank angle is listed as being 60 degrees, and I am guessing these pilots did not exceed that limit.
kiadprthd From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 118 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (4 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 3101 times:
When I saw this picture, it reminded me when I was down at Norfolk Naval Base for work last summer. We were on one of the piers walking to a morning meeting and I happened to look out over the bay and saw an inbound Navy C-37. I was somewhat surprised to see as it got closer, it still had its gear up and had maybe 5-10 degrees of flaps down, but was going well above 200kts. It flew above us at around 1,000 feet and once they got a little past midfield, the pilot did a carrier break and came around to land. I had never seen that performed by a Gulfstream, and thought it was the coolest thing to see. I want to say the bank angle was between 30-45 degrees, but I may be wrong. A few mintues later after the C-37 landed, an E-2 and a couple F-18s did some breaks and the C-37 was just as smooth and agile as they were in the break.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11715 posts, RR: 52 Reply 14, posted (4 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2889 times:
Quoting n53614 (Reply 6): An overhead approach, while awesome-looking, really isn't that big of a deal. I have personally seen a C-5, C-17, two C-130s, a KC-135 and an E-3 do an overhead approach.
Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 11): A properly executed barrel roll is a 1G maneuver throughout the roll.
An overhead pattern is also just a 1G maneuver. It is no big deal for the airplane.
titanmiller From United States of America, joined exactly 7 years ago today! , 86 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (4 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2711 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 14): An overhead pattern is also just a 1G maneuver.
A 45º overhead would produce 1.4g (as would any level 45º banked turn). The KC-135 is rated to 2.5g in certain conditions.
Max Q From United States of America, joined May 2001, 3293 posts, RR: 19 Reply 16, posted (4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 2547 times:
Quoting titanmiller (Reply 15):
A 45º overhead would produce 1.4g (as would any level 45º banked turn). The KC-135 is rated to 2.5g in certain conditions.
So is just about every commercial jet Aircraft.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 726 posts, 
, 86 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
