ObiWanKenobi
New Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2011
- Messages
- 57
- Likes
- 286
You are largely correct, it's more of an issue of prescription rather than structural design. F-15s and F-16s were rated for 7G when they entered service - those same airframes rated for 9 now.G-Ratings are typically conservative and mostly aimed at prolonging the life of an aircraft. Sometimes OEM's might specify airframe life depending on the in service G-rating during peacetime and wartime situations. Peacetime limits can be lower, and thus specify the highest airframe hours while wartime ratings will be dependent on how much the structure has been loaded and frequent inspections for structural damage which will cause a corresponding reduction in service life. Eg: Lets say a particular aircraft has a airframe ultimate load factor of +11/-4. To prevent any aircraft exceeding that, I design a FCS with a g-limiter that limits inputs exceeding anything +9/-3 so that the airframe remains within limits. Now I build a few test frames that repeatedly loads the structure for different load factors to determine service life. Once I've done that, I can publish it in the manuals for the same and the aircraft certified as such, so that the peeps in the field know what they must do if an aircraft ever does exceed the prescribed limits.
However, FCS doesn't usually limit G loads - that would be undesirable. They could limit AoA at higher loads but fighter pilots always have the ability to exceed. A USAF F-15 pilot once exceeded 11G to prevent himself from running into the ground - probably resulted in injury, and the aircraft never flew again - but he lived (my source for this story is a podcast I listen to about actual fighter pilots).
Things may be different for Tejas who knows.