I have done no finite element analisys on any of the planes mentioned, so there's no way of knowing, really.

 

Why is everybody so intent on putting data here for which there is no means of verification and being so c%cksure about it? Why should I believe such stuff on the basis of "Some guy on the internet said so"?

 

 

Yes there are WAYS just reading the document provided.

 Dassault aircrafts are stressed at 1.9, this is 1.9 X 9 g, industrial standards are 1.5, on the F-35 this is even lower since thay are all limited structuraly to 9.0 g a Rafale or Mireage 2000 CAN pull more than 9 g, (11 g to be precise) in case of emergency and suffer no eccesive structural stress.

 

  In sone extreme cases this limit was incidentaly passed, the aircrafts was "bent" but restaured to flying conditions later.

 

  The fact that people doesn't know doesn't MEAN facts aren't what they are, it just make them ignorants...

 

  Regards, PlG

How does the pilot cope with 11G maneuvers ? Even though they certainly sustain those for a very short time.

  Pilot have been known to cope with more and recover quickly as well as die from g locks at 6 g.

  Physiology is not an exact science but a variable even from a day to the following and the same pilot.

 

  BTW to give you an idea try RedBull racing they take 9 g all day long without g suits.

Sustained turns are more dangerous to the pilot than instantaneous ones . Being able to put the aircraft 's nose where the target is very quickly (crab slide) avoids taking the Gs and getting the kill .

The M2000 was and still very good at it but the Rafale is the new benchmark .

 

Cheers .

""avoids taking the Gs and getting the kill""

 

Sorry , read : avoids taking the Gs and you get the kill .

 

Cheers .

Spot on +1

 

<sigh!>

 

Actually, a high G onset rate brought about by loading up the jet too quickly even if only for a brief time can be more debilitating than high sustained Gs.  A high G onset rate can bring about a GLOC condition even when the maximum Gs sustained are in what is usually a safe range.

 

G onset like any other g datas is measured by m/sec2 = g.

 

At Edward AFB its is computed using the following datas:

 

2.300 ft geometric altitude and 32.136 ft/sec2 g value.

 

As everyone writing on the subject should know, gravity varies with altitude but also geographic location with noticeable variations ranging from, 0.26 to - 0.27.

 

  As i have spent some time at BA-102 myself, knows its location (as well as that of the video meeting and aircraft type bases, btw not Dijon-based 5F but 2000DA) I can certify that local g values are within these parameters.

 

  Much the same way, i can safely assume that Maximum load values are perfectly valid in this particular case...

 

  The amount of g pulled here is below the level requiered to cause structural damages to the airframe by at least two units.

 

Regards, PlG

You choose what you want to believe, who you want to trust. The main necessity here is that no one lacks respect toward others.

 

Claiming absolute negative BS against Rafale because BW and FS have been boring with very positive opinions about Rafale is stupid too.

Insulting the others because "they are wrong while i'm right" is stupid too.

 

You're free to choose.

 

Another thing i may want you to believe, since i trust the guy who told me this for obvious reasons :

Dassault has been working a 90hPa "Combat-Edge"-like equipment to make Rafale pilots capable of sustaining 11G so as to increase their survivability in case of emergency as well as for combat. This equipement finally was not adopted because it was not confortable (temperature).

 

The true software limit on Rafale is... 8G (Gs and G-onset are limited to protect the backseater). Once you pull stronger on the stick, you're free up to 11G, but pilots  usually do not exceed 9G, which is usually enough, and already extremely demanding.

 

 The BW claims about 10 to 11G in demonstration surprise me, but i can't deny them.

 

Claiming that new gen aircraft will fail above 9G is stupid, or just jealousy. Why would the Libelle G-suit could help a pilot in sustaining 12G if the aircraft can't do it ?