Comments on: Forward Wing Jet

By: Wally

Wally — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 06:45:19 +0000

Agreed with Phyreblade, its the sort of aircraft that when just in cruise or doing basic aerobatics is difficult to control, let alone doing combat maneuvers. Thats that the Fly-by Wire system is all about, making the controls more “Natural” or as expected by the pilot.

Fighters like this will probably become more common place, especially as computer technology comes along and our understanding of composites!

By: Phyreblade

Phyreblade — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 05:42:12 +0000

@reboot
Actually I believe they use a combination of integrated circuitry and firmware, as they need to be able to easily update the programming on the various components of the fly by wire systems without needing to replace all of the hardware…

By: Phyreblade

Phyreblade — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 05:37:01 +0000

@mgear
Actually the reliability of the computer system is not the issue at all. As Reboot pointed out, the computer systems on these things are actually very reliable. The real problem lies in the design of the plane itself.
Though the forward swept wing design gives the x-29 greater maneuverability at lower speeds, it also means that it is more sensitive to any control inputs and environmental forces. This, in turn means that many, many more minute control corrections are required to keep it stable in flight than your average jet. So much more, that the computer is a necessity in order to keep the plane under control, as it would be impossible to make all of these adjustments manually.
The same is true of many modern stealth planes. Many of them have the aerodynamics of a brick, and could not be flown without a computer making constant control adjustments in the background.

By: reboot

reboot — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 00:39:25 +0000

I didn’t mean to start another Windows vs. Mac vs. Linux comparison. :p
There doesn’t even need to be an operating system at all on fly-by-wire controls, the necessary functions could be entirely hard coded onto silicon. I don’t know if that how they actually do it in the aviation industry, but it could be done, if that was the best solution.

By: Excelsior

Excelsior — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 00:30:33 +0000

Hmm. I know this is more prime area for linux users, but I must say my PC has been much more reliable than my Mac.

By: reboot

reboot — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 00:28:25 +0000

Fly-by-wire is not inherently inferior to mechanical controls. Either will become inoperable if damaged. In fact its easier to have a back up fly-by-wire, than it is to have backup mechanical controls.
People are so used to their personal computers (ie Windows) crashing without explanation that they are conditioned to think all computer systems are equally unreliable.

By: mgear

mgear — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 23:43:16 +0000

@Phy

So, when you say “can’t be flown without a computer” do you mean “the plane, by its design has a non-optional fly-by-wire system” OR “there is no purely-mechanical system that’s humanly operable, to fly a plane of this design”?

Surely there’s a backup in place if something is damaged, or in that case do you basically wait till it’s safe and eject, becuase w/o that computer, it’s a flying brick?!?!

By: Hepathos

Hepathos — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:29:00 +0000

IT’S STARSCREEEEAAAAMMMM!!!

By: pvera

pvera — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 15:28:57 +0000

If you live close to DC, there’s a 1:1 scale model at the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum, www.nasm.si.edu/imagedetail.cfm?imageID=1171

By: Webster Smogpule

Webster Smogpule — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 09:57:10 +0000

*Excellent* library of photos at NASA:
www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/X-29/index.html