the air forces know the secret for uber piloting the sports world doesnt

[Moony]

Originally Posted by raaaid

why should i name another, one plane designer thought as me

so you dont agree that sensitivity is related with run

edit:

a force is a resistance to move, exactly what the f16 stick has, if you dont like the name force feed back thats all right we may call it the force onwards

Raaaid is dougal...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25N-4zrk390

[raaaid]

modern fighters have a short stick run is a true statement since the f16 has a short stick run and its a modern fighter, i didnt say all

its like if i say women are pretty, it doesnt mean all

[Fjordmonkey]

Originally Posted by raaaid

ive seen many FIGHTERS in movies and all used short sticks

your confusing run with force feedback

f16 has a stick with extreme short run AND A STRONG FORCE FEED BACK

sensitivity is related with run not feed back

so the f16 and many other stick SHORT RUN give away my point of the high sensitivity advantage

the only sensible point ive seen so far except childish bias is that high sensitivity in racing is limited for safety reasons

No. ABSOLUTELY NOT! If you don't believe me, go look up the history of the F16, the TCTO's for the F16's, and the horrendous amount of information on the F16's flightcontrol-system.

The F16's stick moves 1/4th of an inch. That 1/4th of an inch is built into the system to give pilots a deadband so that they don't input unwanted commands, especially in pitch. ABSOLUTELY NO force feedback is in the stick of an F16. AT ALL. Period. That's one of the things that catch new pilots on the Viper off when they transition from the T38 Talon (which is based on the F5) to the Viper. So I'll say this again: The F16's flight-control system is based on FORCE of the input, not the TRAVEL of the input. That's one of the key differences between the stick in an F16 and for example an F18. Both are fly-by-wire designs, but the F18's stick move in a more traditional manner.

But hey! Don't believe me all you want. I don't know jack shit about the F16's, even though I served as an F16 groundcrew during my RNoAF servicetime (yes, this is irony, since you seemingly need to have things fed to you with very small spoons). I've seen, touched and handled every single part of the F16's airframe and systems through that, I've spent more time with my nose in the TCTO's for the aircraft, and I'd daresay I know a TAD more about the F16 than you do. So stop talking out of your butt, and try to understand that there are people here with far greater knowledge, even hands-on knowledge, with the aircraft.

[raaaid]

youre trowing random facts again and trying to apply the autority criteria in your favour

what of this statements is false?

statement number 1:

the f16 stick has an extreamly short run


statement number 2:

a high or low sensitivity depends on the stick run

statement number 3:

the f16 has a short run which it implies it has high sensitivity

edit:

your making a sophism in your point:

the control is based on the force

oh yeah to move it farther you have to apply more force

then so its a 109 stick based on the force to move it farther you have to apply more force

a sophism

[Fjordmonkey]

Originally Posted by raaaid

youre trowing random facts again and trying to apply the autority criteria in your favour

Nothing of what I've said is random in any way, shape or form. If you doubt me, go look it up.

Originally Posted by raaaid

what of this statements is false?

statement number 1:

the f16 stick has an extreamly short run

Not false. What YOU fail to recognize, however, is that the 1/4th of an inch of travel on the stick is deadband. Nothing happens inside that 1/4th of an inch, AT ALL. Once you reach the limit of that 1/4th of an inch, where the stick doesn't move anymore, THEN the flight-control system starts translating the FORCE (basically the weight you put on the stick) you input into control-surface deflection, which again makes the aircraft roll/pitch.

Originally Posted by raaaid

statement number 2:

a high or low sensitivity depends on the stick run

Which is NOT true for the F16's stick.

Originally Posted by raaaid

statement number 3:

the f16 has a short run which it implies it has high sensitivity

Which again is NOT true, because the travel of the stick has absolutely nothing to do with the maneuvering of the aircraft what so ever. Again, when you reach the LIMIT of that travel, the WEIGHT (i.e. force) you put on the stick is what defines how large the effect on the controlsurfaces will be. High weight (i.e. pulling hard on the stick) equals a faster and higher response from the aircraft.

Originally Posted by raaaid

edit:

your making a sophism in your point:

the control is based on the force

oh yeah to move it farther you have to apply more force

then so its a 109 stick based on the force to move it farther you have to apply more force

a sophism

You're comparing a wire-and-pulley system to a computer-controlled system. You might as well compare a squirrel and a pig. They're both mammals, but that's where the comparison ends.

Why is this so hard for you to grasp? Either you're being a deliberate troll, or you're as intelligent as my right shoe.

[hegykc]

The F-16 doesn't have stick travel connected with airplane maneuverability .

You can easily have a 30cm stick that exerts more sensitivity than a 5cm one.
It is not connected at all.

[raaaid]

Originally Posted by Fjordmonkey

Not false. What YOU fail to recognize, however, is that the 1/4th of an inch of travel on the stick is deadband. Nothing happens inside that 1/4th of an inch, AT ALL.

i dont believe that

i googled f16 stick and dead zone- band and i call that bs, i know you never pilot with a big dead zone

oh man do you find curious people over the net

have you got any link of an f16 stick having a dead zone?

utter bs, lets see if my intuition is right

edit:

In regard to the amount of movement: I think the F-16 has the least
amount of movement of any control stick so far implemented on a
production aircraft. In fact, initially it was designed to have no
movement. On other aircraft it varies and it often depends on the
length of the control stick. For example, the Gripen has a very short
stick and the rotation point is just beneath the wrist. I can't
remember how many degrees it deflects, but I do know that it feels
very natural. Since it is short, the linear movement of the stick at
the hand will obviously be quite small.

from:


http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Arch.../msg00017.html

[Fjordmonkey]

Originally Posted by raaaid

i dont believe that

i googled f16 stick and dead zone- band and i call that bs, i know you never pilot with a dead zone

oh man do you find curious people over the net

have you got any link of an f16 stick having a dead zone?

utter bs, lets see if my intuition is right

You can read the following links if you don't believe me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General...ighting_Falcon

http://f-16.net/articles_article13.html

You can also read this for a pilot-perspective on the comparison between the F18 and the F16. It touches upon the deadband, and MAY just be something that you MAY FINALLY understand what the hell you're talking about, although I doubt that.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/air-war...rspective.html

If you need more proof, go download the F16 TCTO for the Flightcontrol-system. It's explained in far greater detail than I currently bother with. You're hell-bent on labeling anything that goes against your so-called knowledge as false anyway, so I don't think I'll bother with either you nor your posts again.

You're nothing but a troll, and a bad one at that, and should simply be banned from these forums.

[Hood]

Originally Posted by raaaid

i dont believe that

i googled f16 stick and dead zone- band and i call that bs, i know you never pilot with a big dead zone

oh man do you find curious people over the net

have you got any link of an f16 stick having a dead zone?

utter bs, lets see if my intuition is right

edit:

In regard to the amount of movement: I think the F-16 has the least
amount of movement of any control stick so far implemented on a
production aircraft. In fact, initially it was designIed to have no
movement. On other aircraft it varies and it often depends on the
length of the control stick. For example, the Gripen has a very short
stick and the rotation point is just beneath the wrist. I can't
remember how many degrees it deflects, but I do know that it feels
very natural. Since it is short, the linear movement of the stick at
the hand will obviously be quite small.

from:


http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Arch.../msg00017.html

You really are an idiot, questioning something that is patently true and so well documented and evidenced. Your quote doesn't help as it has already been stated that the stick has a tiny movement. Originally it had no movement.

Now do a search referring to an F16 sidestick or side controller then post an apology to Fjordmonkey.

Hood

[raaaid]

this link mentions not dead band:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General...ighting_Falcon

this one neither:

http://f-16.net/articles_article13.html

this one is the only i found mentioning dead band and anyone will understand he is talking of effective run NOT A DEAD ZONE

http://www.defence.pk/forums/air-war...rspective.html

so its you who is the troll and is pretending to work with f16 as many have done in this forae

at least your smart enough not to impersonate an officer which is a criminal ofence

man i have some experience pilot you cant pilto with a dead band thats why i know youre a bser

how the hell do you take up fuel with a 6 mm DEAD ZONE