Just another day at work
June 22, 2015 5:46 AM Subscribe
That's an incredibly long set, holy cow. It's amazing to see just how physical the performance is, too.
And then at one point, upside down and in a weird attitude, she just takes both hands off the controls to wave at the camera.
posted by backseatpilot at 6:04 AM on June 22, 2015
And then at one point, upside down and in a weird attitude, she just takes both hands off the controls to wave at the camera.
posted by backseatpilot at 6:04 AM on June 22, 2015
That looked like work and she didn't seem to get much pleasure out of It.
posted by unliteral at 6:14 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by unliteral at 6:14 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
maybe she started just like this girl from a previous FPP.
posted by Pendragon at 6:16 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Pendragon at 6:16 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
I kept waiting for the cat.
I think Nolo would be up for it.
posted by rongorongo at 6:33 AM on June 22, 2015
I think Nolo would be up for it.
posted by rongorongo at 6:33 AM on June 22, 2015
That looked like work and she didn't seem to get much pleasure out of It.
On the contrary, I think this is a textbook case of being in a state of flow. Total immersion and intense concentration.
posted by blahblahblah at 6:33 AM on June 22, 2015 [13 favorites]
On the contrary, I think this is a textbook case of being in a state of flow. Total immersion and intense concentration.
posted by blahblahblah at 6:33 AM on June 22, 2015 [13 favorites]
Ditto. That's not lack of pleasure, that's total absorption.
posted by leotrotsky at 6:42 AM on June 22, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by leotrotsky at 6:42 AM on June 22, 2015 [2 favorites]
Yeah, she's hauling an aircraft through some fancy moves and constantly checking her bearings against the ground below. The woman is working it!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:56 AM on June 22, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:56 AM on June 22, 2015 [3 favorites]
The athleticism here! I've done unusual attitudes + spin recovery training for sailplanes, sans aerobatics, so I know something of what 10 seconds of those kind of forces feel like. Several minutes? Damn. She's good.
Wish we had a PIP ground perspective of the program, but you can sort of sort it out by watching the ground go by..
posted by Alterscape at 7:08 AM on June 22, 2015 [2 favorites]
Wish we had a PIP ground perspective of the program, but you can sort of sort it out by watching the ground go by..
posted by Alterscape at 7:08 AM on June 22, 2015 [2 favorites]
I have the wrong job.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 7:30 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 7:30 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
Actual pilots: How much of the way she favors rotating the aircraft in the same direction because it's a radial?
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:45 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:45 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
Wow, she's amazing. Great find!
posted by mochapickle at 8:11 AM on June 22, 2015
posted by mochapickle at 8:11 AM on June 22, 2015
Actual pilots: How much of the way she favors rotating the aircraft in the same direction because it's a radial?
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:45 AM on June 22 [+] [!]
Don't think it's because it's a radial, but good observation. Horizontally-opposed and in-line motors do this too.
Most single-engine propeller-driven aircraft have a left-turning tendency. It's due to a number of factors, but torque, something called p-factor and adverse yaw all have something to do with it. Basically, it's easier to roll/stall to the left than to the right in most singles.
That's a very general thing, though, and those effects can vary in many ways with different wings, powerplants and airframes. That's important to know, because most pilots train specifically to the airframe they're flying at the time, and not all rules apply equally to all aircraft.
That being said, the "box" that she's flying in, orientation to the observers and other things might be affecting the direction she's choosing for the maneuvers, too. Dunno.
posted by Thistledown at 8:30 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:45 AM on June 22 [+] [!]
Don't think it's because it's a radial, but good observation. Horizontally-opposed and in-line motors do this too.
Most single-engine propeller-driven aircraft have a left-turning tendency. It's due to a number of factors, but torque, something called p-factor and adverse yaw all have something to do with it. Basically, it's easier to roll/stall to the left than to the right in most singles.
That's a very general thing, though, and those effects can vary in many ways with different wings, powerplants and airframes. That's important to know, because most pilots train specifically to the airframe they're flying at the time, and not all rules apply equally to all aircraft.
That being said, the "box" that she's flying in, orientation to the observers and other things might be affecting the direction she's choosing for the maneuvers, too. Dunno.
posted by Thistledown at 8:30 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
How much of the way she favors rotating the aircraft in the same direction because it's a radial?
Radial engine, you mean? No, the engine doesn't contribute much to the turning tendencies of an airplane; the propeller is a much bigger driver (sorry) of that. However, I highly doubt that it influences her choices about which way to bank the plane; much more likely is that she's favoring the dominant side of her body.
posted by backseatpilot at 8:32 AM on June 22, 2015
Radial engine, you mean? No, the engine doesn't contribute much to the turning tendencies of an airplane; the propeller is a much bigger driver (sorry) of that. However, I highly doubt that it influences her choices about which way to bank the plane; much more likely is that she's favoring the dominant side of her body.
posted by backseatpilot at 8:32 AM on June 22, 2015
Marry me, Svetlana Kapanina!
posted by GallonOfAlan at 8:44 AM on June 22, 2015
posted by GallonOfAlan at 8:44 AM on June 22, 2015
Is it just my imagination, or does that plane turn on a dime? What sort of aircraft is it?
posted by vanar sena at 8:55 AM on June 22, 2015
posted by vanar sena at 8:55 AM on June 22, 2015
спасибо, товарищи!
What sort of aircraft is it?
All the ground videos I could find show something from the Sukhoi 26 family.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:01 AM on June 22, 2015 [2 favorites]
What sort of aircraft is it?
All the ground videos I could find show something from the Sukhoi 26 family.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:01 AM on June 22, 2015 [2 favorites]
The way she handles the joystick is amazing. I've never seen a video that shows the handling of the joystick so clearly. Not that i've looked for them but still, usually cockpit videos are closeups of the pilot and don't show the hands. Also,what's that lever on her left side? Is that the thrust lever or something?
posted by I-baLL at 9:56 AM on June 22, 2015
posted by I-baLL at 9:56 AM on June 22, 2015
Marry me, Svetlana Kapanina!
Hell with that, train me to be a pilot Svetlanna Kapanina!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:09 AM on June 22, 2015 [4 favorites]
Hell with that, train me to be a pilot Svetlanna Kapanina!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:09 AM on June 22, 2015 [4 favorites]
Engine throttle, with a button on top to control "smoke".
posted by achrise at 10:10 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by achrise at 10:10 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
Brandon: Here's the first piece of advice she'll give you.
posted by I-baLL at 10:11 AM on June 22, 2015
posted by I-baLL at 10:11 AM on June 22, 2015
Hmm, also, should the fpp link be edited to start at the beginning of the video? Or at least to the point of take-off?
posted by I-baLL at 10:20 AM on June 22, 2015
posted by I-baLL at 10:20 AM on June 22, 2015
This video from 2013 is of Svetlana Kapanina doing extreme aerobatics, filmed from the ground. The best would be a side-by-side video with both angles.
posted by chavenet at 10:46 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by chavenet at 10:46 AM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
Ah, here's one: can't see the joystick but it gives the right effect. Wow.
posted by chavenet at 10:49 AM on June 22, 2015
posted by chavenet at 10:49 AM on June 22, 2015
A note on terminology:
Video games use joysticks; airplanes use sticks or yokes.
It's aerobatics, not acrobatics or (gag) stunt flying.
If you want to nerd out a bit, you can learn about the Aresti catalog of maneuver symbols.
posted by LastOfHisKind at 10:53 AM on June 22, 2015
Video games use joysticks; airplanes use sticks or yokes.
It's aerobatics, not acrobatics or (gag) stunt flying.
If you want to nerd out a bit, you can learn about the Aresti catalog of maneuver symbols.
posted by LastOfHisKind at 10:53 AM on June 22, 2015
This is a pretty amazing video. You can see why only one in million have the skills and concentration to do this. It is extremely difficult to maintain three dimensional awareness at all times and know exactly which way to move the stick next. Many, many hours of visualization and memorization.
It also shows the structural strength of the aerobatic airplane. You would never get away with those kind of violent stick movements on most planes. She has to be very careful to be aware of airspeed when doing it to prevent failure. American Airlines Flight 587 in 2001 was determined to have crashed because the rudder detached as a result of too aggressive use of the rudder controls by the pilot.
posted by JackFlash at 11:17 AM on June 22, 2015
It also shows the structural strength of the aerobatic airplane. You would never get away with those kind of violent stick movements on most planes. She has to be very careful to be aware of airspeed when doing it to prevent failure. American Airlines Flight 587 in 2001 was determined to have crashed because the rudder detached as a result of too aggressive use of the rudder controls by the pilot.
posted by JackFlash at 11:17 AM on June 22, 2015
One of the first questions I get asked when someone finds out I'm a pilot is if I can do a barrel roll (thanks, Starfox!). The answer is, "Yes, but only once."
Aerobatic planes have some subtle differences from regular aircraft to allow them to do the maneuvers that are required of them. There's obviously the structural strength needed to hold up to the g-loading, but to pull those kinds of g's in the first place you need oversized control surfaces to quickly snap the plane around. A high-powered engine/prop combo is also required - you'd pick something that provides a lot of thrust for climb and is maybe not as efficient at cruise. Constant speed props are also modified with counterbalances on the blades to prevent the propeller from overspeeding in low-g maneuvers that drain the oil of the prop governor.
The engine also needs to be able to operate at any attitude, including upside down. A normal piston engine is designed to be lubricated and cooled by pumping oil from the sump at the bottom of the engine; if you turn it over, the oil pump is pretty quickly going to suck air and the engine will seize. Fuel systems are going to have the same problem. An inverted fuel and oil system solves this by adding "flop tubes" which have a small weight on them and fall with the fuel when the plane turns over, as well as some extra ports and check valves to make sure fuel and oil are always flowing no matter the orientation of the plane.
On the aerodynamics side, a regular airplane is again designed "shiny side up" and the wings reflect that. The geometry of the airfoil and the orientation of the wings is all optimized for right-side-up flight - adding a dihedral to the wing geometry is common for stability, and adding camber to an airfoil increases its efficiency. A small incidence angle on the wings (usually a couple of degrees) allows the nose of the plane to point a little lower in flight for better visibility.
But you can't do any of those things if you want to fly upside down! So you build your plane with symmetric airfoils, at zero incidence, with no camber. There are two advantages to this - first, the plane flies basically the same whether it's right side up or not. Second, the plane is much more neutrally stable (as opposed to being positively stable, which tends to damp out transients) which increases the maneuverability of the plane. The big downside, of course, is because the plane is much less stable it won't recover as gracefully from stalls and spins or other upsets. But recovery means something slightly different for aerobatics.
Incidentally, when done correctly a barrel roll is a +1g maneuver - fairly benign from an aerobatic standpoint. The risk to the Cessnas I fly would be uncovering the fuel ports in the tanks since they are high-wing aircraft and the fuel system is all gravity fed. You'd also probably tumble the gyro in the attitude indicator. Most likely the engine would quit for a few seconds while upside down and then restart... probably. There are some aerobatic Cessnas, though.
posted by backseatpilot at 12:12 PM on June 22, 2015 [6 favorites]
Aerobatic planes have some subtle differences from regular aircraft to allow them to do the maneuvers that are required of them. There's obviously the structural strength needed to hold up to the g-loading, but to pull those kinds of g's in the first place you need oversized control surfaces to quickly snap the plane around. A high-powered engine/prop combo is also required - you'd pick something that provides a lot of thrust for climb and is maybe not as efficient at cruise. Constant speed props are also modified with counterbalances on the blades to prevent the propeller from overspeeding in low-g maneuvers that drain the oil of the prop governor.
The engine also needs to be able to operate at any attitude, including upside down. A normal piston engine is designed to be lubricated and cooled by pumping oil from the sump at the bottom of the engine; if you turn it over, the oil pump is pretty quickly going to suck air and the engine will seize. Fuel systems are going to have the same problem. An inverted fuel and oil system solves this by adding "flop tubes" which have a small weight on them and fall with the fuel when the plane turns over, as well as some extra ports and check valves to make sure fuel and oil are always flowing no matter the orientation of the plane.
On the aerodynamics side, a regular airplane is again designed "shiny side up" and the wings reflect that. The geometry of the airfoil and the orientation of the wings is all optimized for right-side-up flight - adding a dihedral to the wing geometry is common for stability, and adding camber to an airfoil increases its efficiency. A small incidence angle on the wings (usually a couple of degrees) allows the nose of the plane to point a little lower in flight for better visibility.
But you can't do any of those things if you want to fly upside down! So you build your plane with symmetric airfoils, at zero incidence, with no camber. There are two advantages to this - first, the plane flies basically the same whether it's right side up or not. Second, the plane is much more neutrally stable (as opposed to being positively stable, which tends to damp out transients) which increases the maneuverability of the plane. The big downside, of course, is because the plane is much less stable it won't recover as gracefully from stalls and spins or other upsets. But recovery means something slightly different for aerobatics.
Incidentally, when done correctly a barrel roll is a +1g maneuver - fairly benign from an aerobatic standpoint. The risk to the Cessnas I fly would be uncovering the fuel ports in the tanks since they are high-wing aircraft and the fuel system is all gravity fed. You'd also probably tumble the gyro in the attitude indicator. Most likely the engine would quit for a few seconds while upside down and then restart... probably. There are some aerobatic Cessnas, though.
posted by backseatpilot at 12:12 PM on June 22, 2015 [6 favorites]
And here's a cockpit view of some simple maneuvers with a little bit of talking. The constant squealing in the background is the stall horn.
posted by backseatpilot at 12:24 PM on June 22, 2015
posted by backseatpilot at 12:24 PM on June 22, 2015
You can see why only one in million have the skills and concentration to do this. It is extremely difficult to maintain three dimensional awareness at all times and know exactly which way to move the stick next.
I was thinking that by this point vast amounts of her brain must be devoted to intuitively processing differential equations at rates that would make supercomputers jealous.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 1:13 PM on June 22, 2015
I was thinking that by this point vast amounts of her brain must be devoted to intuitively processing differential equations at rates that would make supercomputers jealous.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 1:13 PM on June 22, 2015
when done correctly a barrel roll is a +1g maneuver - ... The risk to the Cessnas I fly would be uncovering the fuel ports in the tanks since they are high-wing aircraft and the fuel system is all gravity fed.
Forgive me but this sounds inconsistent. I thought the definition of a +1g maneuver was that the vector always pointed towards the pilot's feet (to use a shortcut description). Gravity-fed systems should still operate "normally". Negative g values would cause problems in systems not designed for aerobatic flight.
There's a video in this blog posting of iced tea being poured normally from pitcher to glass during a barrel roll.
posted by achrise at 1:21 PM on June 22, 2015
Forgive me but this sounds inconsistent. I thought the definition of a +1g maneuver was that the vector always pointed towards the pilot's feet (to use a shortcut description). Gravity-fed systems should still operate "normally". Negative g values would cause problems in systems not designed for aerobatic flight.
There's a video in this blog posting of iced tea being poured normally from pitcher to glass during a barrel roll.
posted by achrise at 1:21 PM on June 22, 2015
You can see why only one in million have the skills and concentration to do this. It is extremely difficult to maintain three dimensional awareness at all times and know exactly which way to move the stick next.
I was thinking that by this point vast amounts of her brain must be devoted to intuitively processing differential equations at rates that would make supercomputers jealous.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 4:13 PM on June 22 [+] [!]
Nah. It's not that complicated. You learn to fly aero maneuvers like you learn to do anything else. She's not solving these equations as she goes....instead, she picks up airspeed and pulls back on the stick to a near vertical attitude and watches as the airspeed indicator winds back, and then, when it hits a certain point, she does hard left rudder and right aileron.
The tail comes around counter-clockwise and the airplane rotates in the vertical plane, points downward, and gravity does the rest. She pulls back on the power and the stick as it comes down and returns to level flight.
It's a set of movements maintained and corrected by sensory input. Kind of EXTREME, but no different than running an obstacle course or driving a car. Just....faster, with higher stakes. :)
posted by Thistledown at 2:53 PM on June 22, 2015
I was thinking that by this point vast amounts of her brain must be devoted to intuitively processing differential equations at rates that would make supercomputers jealous.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 4:13 PM on June 22 [+] [!]
Nah. It's not that complicated. You learn to fly aero maneuvers like you learn to do anything else. She's not solving these equations as she goes....instead, she picks up airspeed and pulls back on the stick to a near vertical attitude and watches as the airspeed indicator winds back, and then, when it hits a certain point, she does hard left rudder and right aileron.
The tail comes around counter-clockwise and the airplane rotates in the vertical plane, points downward, and gravity does the rest. She pulls back on the power and the stick as it comes down and returns to level flight.
It's a set of movements maintained and corrected by sensory input. Kind of EXTREME, but no different than running an obstacle course or driving a car. Just....faster, with higher stakes. :)
posted by Thistledown at 2:53 PM on June 22, 2015
That looked like work and she didn't seem to get much pleasure out of It.
Would anyone say this about a male pilot? I just... I don't think so.
Anyway, this is really cool-- thanks, elgilito.
posted by easter queen at 3:12 PM on June 22, 2015 [2 favorites]
Would anyone say this about a male pilot? I just... I don't think so.
Anyway, this is really cool-- thanks, elgilito.
posted by easter queen at 3:12 PM on June 22, 2015 [2 favorites]
She's not solving these equations as she goes...
Not consciously, but to be able to make inevitable minor corrections I'd expect that *something* in her brain is rapidly solving the relevant system of equations very quickly. Like how something in your brain is really good at calculating the equations describing how a given impulse applied to an object at a certain point on its surface moves as a result, in a moving fluid, under gravity. And you know that because you can play catch. The ground videos make it look like she's programmed her cerebellum into a fluid-mechanics processor.
What I am saying is that her performance is impressive as all hell.
It also shows the structural strength of the aerobatic airplane. You would never get away with those kind of violent stick movements on most planes.
Even the ones where you could -- high performance combat aircraft -- are so much larger and faster that maneuvers with similar g-loadings look comparatively sedate, though the vectored-thrust planes are getting there... Pugachev's cobra looks like ipecac in motion.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 3:31 PM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
Not consciously, but to be able to make inevitable minor corrections I'd expect that *something* in her brain is rapidly solving the relevant system of equations very quickly. Like how something in your brain is really good at calculating the equations describing how a given impulse applied to an object at a certain point on its surface moves as a result, in a moving fluid, under gravity. And you know that because you can play catch. The ground videos make it look like she's programmed her cerebellum into a fluid-mechanics processor.
What I am saying is that her performance is impressive as all hell.
It also shows the structural strength of the aerobatic airplane. You would never get away with those kind of violent stick movements on most planes.
Even the ones where you could -- high performance combat aircraft -- are so much larger and faster that maneuvers with similar g-loadings look comparatively sedate, though the vectored-thrust planes are getting there... Pugachev's cobra looks like ipecac in motion.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 3:31 PM on June 22, 2015 [1 favorite]
That explosion of squee at 18 minutes was great, even if I agree that she's in flow the rest of the time as opposed to not enjoying what she does.
posted by Iteki at 3:21 AM on June 23, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Iteki at 3:21 AM on June 23, 2015 [1 favorite]
done correctly a barrel roll is a +1g maneuver
Yes, as nicely demonstrated by the amazing Bob Hoover. I linked to the middle of the video, but it's worth watching the whole thing if this is your cup of tea, as it shows his amazing energy management airshow routine: "I start out with shutting off both engines..."
posted by exogenous at 10:22 AM on July 7, 2015
Yes, as nicely demonstrated by the amazing Bob Hoover. I linked to the middle of the video, but it's worth watching the whole thing if this is your cup of tea, as it shows his amazing energy management airshow routine: "I start out with shutting off both engines..."
posted by exogenous at 10:22 AM on July 7, 2015
« Older Always check your aircraft for cats before takeoff | "Their little heads are exploding" Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by demonic winged headgear at 5:56 AM on June 22, 2015 [18 favorites]