PDA

View Full Version : Ever landed without Ailerons?



P.FunkAdelic
11-06-2008, 03:50 AM
I was just flying online when a hit killed my aileron control completely. Of course at this point I was on a collision course with the enemy's main airfield! Suddenly 2 fighters are on me and I do everything I can to not get killed, and maneuvering without any roll makes it hard enough not to put your nose in the dirt. On top of this I had already lost maybe %50 of my elevator responsiveness. Without pitch trim I wouldn't have even climbed out of a steep dive.

Sadly I didn't record me escaping the two fighters but I did record my final approach and landing and how I managed to land.
landing track (http://files.filefront.com/noaileron190ntrk/;12268623;/fileinfo.html)

Not sure if I'd rather have this than no elevators. But at least with elevator loss you'd still have throttle and trim to work with. I only had rudder which made things very complicated.

I'm quite happy with my landing abilities suffice to say. Now if I could only avoid getting this damage to begin with. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

K_Freddie
11-06-2008, 04:06 AM
Would landing this P40 pass the test... A screen grab from the person who 'robbed' me of my tail.
Got it down on aerolon and throttle control, needless to say I hadn't realised the extent of the damage.
No record, no track, no charts.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif, just this pic http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
http://www.vanjast.com/IL2Pics/P40.jpg

SterlingX
11-06-2008, 04:07 AM
I've landed with ruder only and cheese-grater wings on more than one occasion.
No ailerons is more of a slight disadvantage in a dogfight http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Vanderstok
11-06-2008, 05:00 AM
Yeah, more than once. I think landing without ailerons is in fact easier than landing without rudder because you then have no control once on the ground...

Darth_Reagan
11-06-2008, 05:08 AM
I've landed a TB3 once using only the engines, no rudder, ailerons or elevator. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

P.FunkAdelic
11-06-2008, 05:14 AM
Originally posted by K_Freddie:
Would landing this P40 pass the test...
Actually...

http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/9876/noruddermw5.png

rnzoli
11-06-2008, 05:17 AM
Il-2 also is the type of aircraft which often requires landing with minimal controls... I did it once with only rudder, flaps and engine http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Aileron is very much needed for dogfighting, but in normal attitudes, rudder is sufficient to control bank and turn.

ImMoreBetter
11-06-2008, 06:13 AM
I've lost all three of my control cables in a 190, made it back to my airbase using only engine torque and flaps.

The landing didn't go so well. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

TinyTim
11-06-2008, 06:13 AM
Originally posted by rnzoli:
Il-2 also is the type of aircraft which often requires landing with minimal controls... I did it once with only rudder, flaps and engine http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Same here. IL2, only rudder, no elevators or ailerons. Belly landed on a landing strip tho.

TheCrux
11-06-2008, 06:34 AM
Yes, in a Ki-61 on 'Zekes vs Wildcats'. After losing the right aileron during a skip-bombing dive at 800+ kmh and then having the other one blasted away by AA, I controlled my roll axis by balancing rudder and engine torque. Was really proud of myself as I remember.

HayateAce
11-06-2008, 07:17 AM
Landed on the gear in a P38 with only throttle and rudder, no aileron or elevator.

AllorNothing117
11-06-2008, 09:10 AM
Have landed with...

-no alerons
-no rudder
-no elevators (fluke)
-one Engine
-no Engines
-No gear

haha don't know how I did it.

Pigeon_
11-06-2008, 09:37 AM
How about landing with only aelerons? I did it in a P-40. I had no control of elevators, rudder, prop pitch and throttle. I have to look up the track somewhere... I'm sure I recorded one.

p51srule
11-06-2008, 09:54 AM
Ive landed only with rudder and flaps, with swisscheese wings. But I was wonder what about the trim, So if we lose elevators or alirons or both we lose trim too? whats with that, I can remember from reading a book about how a pilot lost his elevators and used his trim to fly the plane back to england.

P51srule http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

"speed is life in a dogfight"

Pyrres
11-06-2008, 11:04 AM
I once landed TB3 without any control of the plane, the engines had died, all controls had been shot off, so just for the fun of it I decided to stay in the aircraft and see where it would end up (was flying about 1500m height). It ended up making a perfect landing, no bouncing or anything, perfect 3point landing. Of course did not record it cause I was so amazed what had just happened.

SeaFireLIV
11-06-2008, 11:16 AM
I`ve done it a few times. had one only a week a go... Not easy. Crash landed a gladiater. It burned, jumped out just in time before it exploded.

general_kalle
11-06-2008, 12:28 PM
all combinations can be done aslong as you have ailron or rudder and Engine or Elevator

TinyTim
11-06-2008, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by Pyrres:
I once landed TB3 without any control of the plane, the engines had died, all controls had been shot off, so just for the fun of it I decided to stay in the aircraft and see where it would end up (was flying about 1500m height). It ended up making a perfect landing, no bouncing or anything, perfect 3point landing. Of course did not record it cause I was so amazed what had just happened.

Something similar once happened online on UKD2 if I recall correctly. A guy bailed out of his Fw200, but the uncontrolled plane performed a flawless emergency landing... I think there was a track or a video link of that floating around somewhere.

buzzsaw1939
11-06-2008, 02:24 PM
This is an erea where the game is all wrong!

Loseing ailerons, no sweat, use rudder to bank.

Loseing rudder, tricky, need a long runway.

Loseing elevator, can be done if you have trim, not modeled.

Loseing tail, impossible! changes center of gravity, resulting in dive, CTR-E.

K_Freddie
11-07-2008, 01:47 PM
Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
Loseing tail, impossible! changes center of gravity, resulting in dive, CTR-E.

Not that impossible.. Although one cannot see it, in my pic I still have the right tail plane (minus an elevator) and every else is gone.
This is of course plane dependent, but the weight of the rudder and tail planes is compensated for by the tail plane - having lost all and with a section of the tail plane still there, balances things a bit. Apply a touch of flaps and you prevent the plane from flipping backwards.
To land this was a delicate balancing act of either nosing over or flipping backwards. Luckily there was no crosswinds and buffets as in RL.
All in all I think it was a fairly good model of reality.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

SlickStick
11-07-2008, 02:20 PM
The P-40 shot is a graphics bug in this game. Notice the wires still "connected" to nothing.

I've had this graphic happen before after getting shot in the tail, yet I still had full rudder authority.

Mr_Zooly
11-07-2008, 03:31 PM
no ailerons is easy when landing at an airbase, you should try landing on a carrier.

Woke_Up_Dead
11-07-2008, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by Mr_Zooly:
no ailerons is easy when landing at an airbase, you should try landing on a carrier.

A baby-carrier, in a P-38J!

Uufflakke
11-07-2008, 05:12 PM
Landing without ailerons is a piece of cake compared to what happened with this pilot today: during his flight he suffered a stroke and suddenly became blind. But he managed to land savely with radio assistance by a RAF pilot.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/north_yorkshire/7715345.stm

mortoma
11-07-2008, 09:05 PM
I have landed without rudder, aileron and even elevator. And all of them many times. One of the best landings I ever made in a ME-110 was without elevator, believe it or not. I could not even tell when my wheels hit. I just got it right.

Although I will admit that most of the time when I attempt to land without elevator, I end up off the end of the runway on my nose with a bend prop. But I almost always survive.

buzzsaw1939
11-08-2008, 01:37 AM
Originally posted by K_Freddie:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
Loseing tail, impossible! changes center of gravity, resulting in dive, CTR-E.

Not that impossible.. Although one cannot see it, in my pic I still have the right tail plane (minus an elevator) and every else is gone.
This is of course plane dependent, but the weight of the rudder and tail planes is compensated for by the tail plane - having lost all and with a section of the tail plane still there, balances things a bit. Apply a touch of flaps and you prevent the plane from flipping backwards.
To land this was a delicate balancing act of either nosing over or flipping backwards. Luckily there was no crosswinds and buffets as in RL.
All in all I think it was a fairly good model of reality.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Freddie, here's a small test for ya, set up a pendulem, balance it with a small weight on one end and a heavy wieght on the other, then take off the small weight and see what happens. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

SterlingX
11-08-2008, 03:08 AM
Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K_Freddie:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
Loseing tail, impossible! changes center of gravity, resulting in dive, CTR-E.

Not that impossible.. Although one cannot see it, in my pic I still have the right tail plane (minus an elevator) and every else is gone.
This is of course plane dependent, but the weight of the rudder and tail planes is compensated for by the tail plane - having lost all and with a section of the tail plane still there, balances things a bit. Apply a touch of flaps and you prevent the plane from flipping backwards.
To land this was a delicate balancing act of either nosing over or flipping backwards. Luckily there was no crosswinds and buffets as in RL.
All in all I think it was a fairly good model of reality.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Freddie, here's a small test for ya, set up a pendulem, balance it with a small weight on one end and a heavy wieght on the other, then take off the small weight and see what happens. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not entirely true. Most WW2 fighters have their CoG behind the wings and the tailplane provides lift to balance this out. When half the tailplane gets shot away you get less upward lift from it and you need down trim to keep the plane going straight, as in the game.
The I16, I think, is the one where the CoG was farthest to the back, of all (pre-)WW2 designs.

LovroSL
11-08-2008, 06:58 AM
The most tricky one to land is no elevator. It can be done if the plane after loosing the elevators and engaging flaps wants to fly up bacuse going down is easy- just use the rudder skid (no need for ailerons), but if the bird just wants to go down- Ctl+e all the way http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

Bearcat99
11-08-2008, 10:38 AM
I have.. a few times.. if you keep your speed up you can still use your rudder.... I also have come down with no rudder.. it is interesting that in this sim if you loos your rudder once you land you can still turn on the ground. (As it should be... )

buzzsaw1939
11-08-2008, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by SterlingX:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K_Freddie:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:
Loseing tail, impossible! changes center of gravity, resulting in dive, CTR-E.

Not that impossible.. Although one cannot see it, in my pic I still have the right tail plane (minus an elevator) and every else is gone.
This is of course plane dependent, but the weight of the rudder and tail planes is compensated for by the tail plane - having lost all and with a section of the tail plane still there, balances things a bit. Apply a touch of flaps and you prevent the plane from flipping backwards.
To land this was a delicate balancing act of either nosing over or flipping backwards. Luckily there was no crosswinds and buffets as in RL.
All in all I think it was a fairly good model of reality.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Freddie, here's a small test for ya, set up a pendulem, balance it with a small weight on one end and a heavy wieght on the other, then take off the small weight and see what happens. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not entirely true. Most WW2 fighters have their CoG behind the wings and the tailplane provides lift to balance this out. When half the tailplane gets shot away you get less upward lift from it and you need down trim to keep the plane going straight, as in the game.
The I16, I think, is the one where the CoG was farthest to the back, of all (pre-)WW2 designs. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sterlingx, you seem to know something I don't, so I'll take your word for it, but sense aft COG in the most dangerous condition for any aircraft, I'm curious why they would design any plane that way! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

SterlingX
11-09-2008, 12:54 AM
Originally posted by buzzsaw1939:


Sterlingx, you seem to know something I don't, so I'll take your word for it, but sense aft COG in the most dangerous condition for any aircraft, I'm curious why they would design any plane that way! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Lower stick forces in a turn, more maneuverability, basically. But if the CoG moves too far aft you can get elevator stick forces reversal if/when the tailplane begins stalling, as with the P-51 when fully loaded with fuel.

buzzsaw1939
11-09-2008, 12:13 PM
Ah yes, I can see where stick forces and maneuverability would help in a heavey fighter, kind of a trade off!

I used to deal with it daily, the only advantage I could see with aft COG was slower landings! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

And if it's modeled in game, that would explain a lot of the complaints about spinning so easily! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

mortoma
11-09-2008, 01:05 PM
One thing I forgot to mention is I have shot down aircraft in all three scenarios, even with no elevator. Once in a P-47 and once in a Russian cannon Hurricane. They were offline AI though. Very easy to still fly and fight with no rudder. But no aileron gets tougher and no elevator tougher yet!!!

Vipez-
11-09-2008, 02:40 PM
IMHO landing without ailerons is quite easy compared to landing without elevators http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Sturm_Williger
11-10-2008, 06:17 AM
I once managed to land a Betty bomber having lost elevators and ailerons to flak.

Probably easier in a "heavy" as everything happens a bit slower, nevertheless, I was inordinately pleased with myself. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Choctaw111
11-10-2008, 08:15 AM
Many times.
The hardest is no elevator, controlling your decent with your throttle.

mortoma
11-10-2008, 09:40 AM
Originally posted by Choctaw111:
Many times.
The hardest is no elevator, controlling your decent with your throttle. I will often modulate my flaps too, my own personal technique. But yes, throttle control is key. When attempting to get kills with no elie, I'll also roll my aircraft a lot while using some flap at the same time. Roll right-side up to gain height and roll upside-down to go lower. This is how I got my two kills with no elevator. Only wish they would have been against humans online instead of AI!!

TX-EcoDragon
11-10-2008, 12:00 PM
Originally posted by SterlingX:
Not entirely true. Most WW2 fighters have their CoG behind the wings and the tailplane provides lift to balance this out.


Who told you this? It's not so. The aircraft would generally be un-flyable in that condition, as would any conventionally designed, non fly by wire aircraft.

There are critical stability and maneuverability consequences of such a design, and there are very few cases where a lifting wing and tail can be employed. Check out the Rutan LongEZ to see a design in which all horizontal flying surfaces provide lift - the "tail" must be mounted in front of the main wing as a "canard", and designed so that it stalls before the main wing, otherwise there would be no nose down pitching moment when the critical angle of attack was reached, and stalls would be impossible to recover from. The result is an aircraft which is impossible to stall at all. These aircraft are efficient travelling machines, but they have extremely limited maneuvering capability beyond what is needed in a transport type aircraft, and are visually distinctive by their tail in front construction.

Even in a case where the tail generated lift, the weight shift as a consequence of the missing tail components would be significant.


Just look at Gabor Varga's accident at Malta to see the unfortunate consequences of the loss of the tail on the Yak 55 - and any other conventionally designed aircraft.

blairgowrie
11-10-2008, 12:24 PM
TX-EcoDragon,

Please check your PT's.

TX-EcoDragon
11-10-2008, 12:34 PM
Will do. . .

SterlingX
11-10-2008, 01:36 PM
@TX-EcoDragon

I read it in a book about the I16. It mentioned a ratio number of CoL to CoG distance over CoL to tail distance. For the I16, it claimed, this ratio was 15%, if I remember correctly, which was more than any other fighter.
This is not behind the wing literally, it's behind the center of lift, assuming I have understood it right.

stalkervision
11-10-2008, 01:47 PM
done it many a time. I once owned a 'rudder only" RC plane. It had a glow plug engine but didn't even have a throttle! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

TX-EcoDragon
11-10-2008, 01:57 PM
Perhaps it was mentioning the CG placement at some % of the MAC (mean aerodynamic chord), this is usually 25%-30%. . .I've got no idea. But it is true that the i16 has poor longitudinal stability as a consequence of an aft CG coupled with a short tail moment. Though this will happen long before the CG moves aft of the CL.

StellarRat
11-10-2008, 08:20 PM
I've landed without ailerons before, I've landed without elevators before, I've landed without a rudder before, but I've never been able to land with two of the three control surfaces gone. Anyone that has landed with two sets of control gone has a lot to be proud of. Although, there was that Israeli pilot that landed without an entire wing in an F-15...I wouldn't have believed it except there are pictures...amazing.