Filing a complaint. AV-8B without fuel , and silent engine, does not deadstick very well. Too susceptible to pull of gravity.

[DmitriKozlowsky]

Filing a complaint. AV-8B without fuel , and silent engine, does not deadstick very well. Too susceptible to pull of gravity.

In a race to the bottom between AV-8B without gas, and dead engine, and a brick. I think Harrier wins every time. Even X-15 and F-104 could glide a bit to a safe deadstick.

[Dr Zaius]

Given the number of other issues Razbam has to fix (theres rather a lot) this seems a bit of an odd thing to ‘file’ a complaint with, also (and be honest) how many times have you ever run out of gas?

[ChickenSim]

I'm assuming this is a joke post, but in the unlikely event that it's not, there is no "dead sticking" a Harrier. 

 

If you run out of fuel, your engine dies. If your engine dies, your hydraulic pumps stop working, and whatever pressure is left in your accumulators must be spent leveling the aircraft and preparing for ejection, because you're going to lose all control authority very soon.

 

Poe's Law seems to be making its way to DCS.

[Marsvinet]

As Chicken stated, the checklist for a dead engine in the Harrier is quite easy to learn: 1. Eject, eject, eject!

[DmitriKozlowsky]

I jest , of course. Love the Harrier and RAZBAM. But I am still trying to argue with simulated laws of physics and aerodynamics. If USAF/NASA pilots could dead stick X-15, F-104, and Shuttle Orbiter, there has to be an aerodynamic survival formula for Harrier. The Laws are winning, for now. 25-0 score.

My starting parameters are;

Clean Harrier 1200 lbs of fuel, 420 KIAS, 10K AGL, no engine, windmilling only.  Without power Harrier has flying qualities of a washing machine.

[DmitriKozlowsky]

Aircraft has in-flight start capability. If the only procedure for loss of engine power in forward flight is ejection, why even have in-flight start systems for engine. Engine surging and compressor stalls are , rare events, but common enough that pilots are trained to deal with both, by in-flight engine restart.

[shagrat]

31 minutes ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

Aircraft has in-flight start capability. If the only procedure for loss of engine power in forward flight is ejection, why even have in-flight start systems for engine. Engine surging and compressor stalls are , rare events, but common enough that pilots are trained to deal with both, by in-flight engine restart.

IIRC that is the reason why restart requires a minimum altitude... and that was quite high. Aerodynamics and weight of the AV-8B is more pointing towards a glide path of a brick, than a glider.

[ChickenSim]

7 hours ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

Aircraft has in-flight start capability. If the only procedure for loss of engine power in forward flight is ejection, why even have in-flight start systems for engine. Engine surging and compressor stalls are , rare events, but common enough that pilots are trained to deal with both, by in-flight engine restart.

 

It certainly does, and I took the risk of simplifying because I couldn't tell if the post was serious, but you have a certain amount of time to keep the engine windmilling and maintain *some* hydraulic pressure in the accumulators while you attempt to airstart the engine. 

 

Once these opportunities have passed though, there are no mechanical linkages or reversion options for "gliding it in." If you can't get the engine relit, maneuvering the aircraft into a safe ejection speed/altitude/attitude is about the only option with whatever control authority you have left.