dark light

H

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • H
    Participant

    Ah thank you very much TonyT. I’ll check it out.

    H
    Participant

    I am trying to ask specifically about the numbers tbf, as much as I’d love a phantom vs lightning argument, I have a feeling it would devolve into “you’re wrong, I’m right, nananana boo boo” very quickly.

    H
    Participant

    Ah, thank you for your feedback, I think I understand what you mean now. Unless I were to find the Vx and Vy for each aircraft, I can’t definitively say that one aircraft out-climbs the other, but would it be fair to say that if each aircraft climbs according to their flight manuals, the Phantom has the advantage in a sustained climb and then give an explanation of Vx and Vy? 

    I would like to note, I’ve found that the Phantom slightly out-accelerates the Lightning from 0.65 mach to 0.9 mach, despite the aforementioned disadvantages it’s at with its configuration. I’ve heard from some places on the internet that British flight manuals tend to use modest estimates based on performance data, do you think this may be the case?

    Thank you for all of your help.

    H
    Participant

    Orcal. The Lightning’s climb is at 450 knots, until the plane reaches 0.87 mach, at which it continued until 36,000 ft. The Phantom climbs at 322 knots, until it reaches 0.93 mach, which is what the manuals say they should climb at. Also both manuals mention ICAO and I don’t see anything to do with ICA.

    H
    Participant

    Oracal. I compared the time from sea level to 36,000 ft, for both aircraft using reheat, both at ICAO. Sorry if I didn’t make that clear.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)