Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 35 of 37

Thread: Turning radius comparison.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    8,166

    Default Turning radius comparison.

    __________________________________________________ ________________________

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Hills of Vermont, USA
    Posts
    36,522

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    So the F-16 must wear out front tires faster, eh?

    More seriously, that's quite a difference!
    "If it ain't broke, you're not trying." - Red Green

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    105,485

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    you got a diagram showing the sr71 turning radius?

    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Posts
    16,057

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    My 86 Saab had the turning radius of a Peterbilt.
    The Algorithm Is Watching

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Douglasville, Ga
    Posts
    6,766

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    The 48 ford with mustang 2 front end turns a whole lot tighter than the 42 with stock box. May have to convert it at some point.
    Tom

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Saint Helena Island, SC
    Posts
    10,756

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Be interesting to see the F22 comparison with its vectored thrust.
    Fight Entropy, build a wooden boat!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Baltimore Maryland
    Posts
    11,580

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by Reynard38 View Post
    Be interesting to see the F22 comparison with its vectored thrust.
    I imagine the G force the pilot can take might be the limiting factor.
    Ratus ratus bilgeous snipeous!

    You must be the change you wish to see in the world."
    Mahatma Gandhi

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Central Coast, Ca
    Posts
    29,214

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    F1 Sopwith Camel turns tighter than most...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Do you have a warrant?
    Posts
    8,633

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Even I thought a 104 was a bit better than that, but yeah, low wing area, a bit more than just enough to keep it flying, designed for speed. "Speed is life", but not in the case of a 104. But in fairness, it was designed as a bomber interceptor, not a fighter.
    When you can take the pebble from my hand, it will be time for you to leave.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    105,485

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob (oh, THAT Bob) View Post
    "Speed is life", but not in the case of a 104.
    especially not if you're german
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Do you have a warrant?
    Posts
    8,633

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    especially not if you're german
    Oh you heard about that.

    How do you get an F-104 cheap?

    By a piece of land and wait for a '104 to crash on it.
    When you can take the pebble from my hand, it will be time for you to leave.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Do you have a warrant?
    Posts
    8,633

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Bow View Post
    My 86 Saab had the turning radius of a Peterbilt.
    Possibly due to front drive. London taxis had incredibly tight turning radius as the front wheels would really whip around, made possible by rear wheel drive. It took a while before they had C.V. joint halfshafts that would turn tight, but I'm still not sure they can equal a non-driven axle. And also, those London taxis, designed primarily for low speeds with little lateral weight transfer, had perfect Ackermann steering geometry.
    When you can take the pebble from my hand, it will be time for you to leave.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    105,485

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    bob, i bet you loved analyzing the four wheel steer honda's back in the day

    including their low speed opposite steer and high speed parallel steer modes
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Shore, Auckland, NZ
    Posts
    3,138

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    London taxi turning circle is matched by the Triumph Herald at 25 ft. My little front-drive hatchback turns tighter than most but still only manages 9m (29.5 ft).
    'When I leave I don't know what I'm hoping to find. When I leave I don't know what I'm leaving behind...'

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Do you have a warrant?
    Posts
    8,633

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    bob, i bet you loved analyzing the four wheel steer honda's back in the day

    including their low speed opposite steer and high speed parallel steer modes
    I didn't analyze it but did admire the simplicity of the Honda system, all mechanical but slightly off-center would go same direction as front wheels, then further off center would counter-steer for great parking characteristics. Conversely, the Nissan Super HICAS system on the 1990 300ZX was electronically controlled servo-hydraulics, worked great, but I wondered about durability and fault modes.
    When you can take the pebble from my hand, it will be time for you to leave.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    13,031

    Default Turning radius comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    you got a diagram showing the sr71 turning radius?


    Google is your friend, from the SR-71 Flight Manual, now declassified, comes this chart.

    Figure 50 nautical miles to over 100 nautical miles, based on speed, bank angle, ambient air temperature. A quick glance through the manual suggests that their are bank angle restrictions based on altitude and weight as well (gotta have enough power to be able to maintain level flight).

    https://aviation.stackexchange.com/q...us-of-an-sr-71

    http://www.sr-71.org/blackbird/manual/

    You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA USA
    Posts
    13,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Bow View Post
    My 86 Saab had the turning radius of a Peterbilt.

    I got to drive a friend's M-B 240D years ago - the best cab ever made. As you turned the wheels, the camber increased and drastically decreased the turning radius. At lock, if you got out and looked, the front wheels looked comical, like maybe there had been some catastrophic suspension failure.

    Makes sense, considering that the design operating environment were European medieval cities.

    We had a Saab 9000, and it had a great turning radius.

    My 2004 Honda CR-V has a great turning radius, not better than that 240D, but I can make a U-turn on a pretty ordinary (I.e., narrow) 2-lane Seattle street.

    My wife's Mazda 5, on the other hand, sucks.
    You would not enjoy Nietzsche, sir. He is fundamentally unsound. P.G. Wodehouse (Carry On, Jeeves)

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    Norwich, Norfolk, UK
    Posts
    199

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    My old land rover would runs rings round that lot...

    Very large rings round the outside of everyone..
    Just an amateur bodging away..

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    U.K
    Posts
    1,204

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Not nearly as bad as the mrs Volvo V70, my 110 is a nippy little town car in comparison (when it works)

    Quote Originally Posted by The Q View Post
    My old land rover would runs rings round that lot...

    Very large rings round the outside of everyone..

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    513

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    you got a diagram showing the sr71 turning radius?

    During the cold war the SR-71's from Mildenhall (UK) did frequent high altitude&speed run's along the East German border. They started their (90 degrees) turn at the Dutch-German boundary with is approximately 180 NM from the East German boundary, probably just to annoy the East German air defense. The diagram above shows a much tighter turn was possible.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Deepest Darkest Wales
    Posts
    22,743

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by CK 17 View Post
    How did you get them into a Wilson cloud chamber?
    I'd much rather lay in my bunk all freakin day lookin at Youtube videos .

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Texas ya'll
    Posts
    1,748

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by Reynard38 View Post
    Be interesting to see the F22 comparison with its vectored thrust.
    or the F-35. My friend's daughter was flying the F-16 until about 8 months ago. Now she's in the F-35. I'll ask...

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Bay of Islands,N.Z.
    Posts
    27,380

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    The turning circle of an E type jag is like the 104 in practical terms. I found that out back in 06 or so, sharpens the senses when you realise you aren't going to make it without a three point.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    The Garden State
    Posts
    8,239

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by AnalogKid View Post
    London taxi turning circle is matched by the Triumph Herald at 25 ft. My little front-drive hatchback turns tighter than most but still only manages 9m (29.5 ft).

    My old volvo 850 could do it in 33.5'. I thought that was damn good for a mid-sized front wheel drive sedan.
    "If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping with a mosquito"

    -Dalai Lama

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Hills of Vermont, USA
    Posts
    36,522

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Audi seems to have figured it out - 19 ft for the Quattro (AWD).
    "If it ain't broke, you're not trying." - Red Green

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    8,166

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Pless View Post
    especially not if you're german
    The Germans used it as a ground attack aircraft...if you can believe it.
    __________________________________________________ ________________________

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    8,166

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    During a particularly bad weather day I found myself being “controlled” by an individual who was slowly becoming overwhelmed by the situation. Very heavy, very high altitude I was very unexpectedly told to perform a tight 360 to the left. I rolled into a 15 degree bank. By the time that turn was done I was given 2, maybe 3 frequency changes as I left his sector and went into the next one, and then the next one, and then the next. It was mayhem.
    __________________________________________________ ________________________

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Texas ya'll
    Posts
    1,748

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    So the answer from the daughter F16/F35 pilot was as expected...
    "Dad, I'm embarrassed that you could even think to compare an all-out fighter to a stealth bomber masquerading as a fighter." (my friend was an F16 pilot himself)

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    105,485

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    ouch
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    8,166

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    __________________________________________________ ________________________

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Shore, Auckland, NZ
    Posts
    3,138

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    All those Lockheed execs (for pushing a plane not suitable for the intended use) and German politicians (for taking the bribes) with too much blood on their hands. The F-104 would be a thing of wonder (how did that pencil fly with those tiny, tiny wings) but the German accident rate just ruins the plane for me.
    'When I leave I don't know what I'm hoping to find. When I leave I don't know what I'm leaving behind...'

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Shore, Auckland, NZ
    Posts
    3,138

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    I've been trying to find stats for the EE/BAC Lightning, but can't get any objective info.

    Wiki only says this:
    The Lightning was fully aerobatic and was capable of rates of roll far in excess of that which could be normally tolerated by a pilot.
    While I also found this
    “Yes, short legs, but a great turning radius and excellent acceleration.” Major Bill Beardley, USAAF.
    A much earlier design than the F-4, a near contemporary of the F-104 (which flew earlier but the concept originated a little later) and surprisingly maneuverable for an aircraft designed as a point interceptor rather than a dogfighter. I think the roll rate will be down to the ailerons being fully perpendicular to the straight-ahead direction of travel.

    'When I leave I don't know what I'm hoping to find. When I leave I don't know what I'm leaving behind...'

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Norwich,United Kingdom
    Posts
    7,565

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    There used to be a Lightning squadron a few miles from here.One of the rumours that escaped was that they enjoyed surprising U2 pilots by dropping down past them at great speed.Their more usual task was hurtling out over the North Sea to wave at Russians.

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    513

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by AnalogKid View Post
    All those Lockheed execs (for pushing a plane not suitable for the intended use) and German politicians (for taking the bribes) with too much blood on their hands. The F-104 would be a thing of wonder (how did that pencil fly with those tiny, tiny wings) but the German accident rate just ruins the plane for me.
    There was one situation in which the 104 was unbeatable, at very low level with maximum thrust there was no other aircraft in the world that could follow or intercept her.
    According to a legendary story ( I'm not sure if the story is true) a well known Dutch fighter pilot accidentally tried this in East Germany , almost all the Warsaw pact fighters in the DDR scrambled but the F-104 was just to fast and got away to the West unharmed.

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Valley of the Sun
    Posts
    105,485

    Default Re: Turning radius comparison.

    yeager on his way to 108,000 ft in the nf104
    note the rocket in the tail
    on this same flight, it was the first time as a test pilot yeager would ever eject

    173BBDB6-374A-44E2-BA88-079873F62BD6.jpg

    bad muther****er!
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •