Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 119

Thread: Cockpit visibility and Sukhoi factories

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Boom View Post
    russian helmets are indeed heavier than western ones, vishnu som, who has used both commented on that. however, he also mentioned that they were much more comfortable than the US helmets.

    as for the rest of hottie's comments about cranking head and camera angles, he is simply fishing in cloudy water. no pilot likes to turn his head 180 degree to look backwards and lose his all important situational awareness for even a moment, however bubbly his canopy may be. not since the days of mig alley at any rate.
    OK then, but how much heavier?

    On the same subject, some former US pilot riding the Mig-29 or was it Su-27UB..? stated the Russian Ejection seats(more comfortable and perform better when ejecting) and the tubes connecting to the G-suite is 'better' than the US version. The point was that it was faster and easier to connect as i recall.

    EDIT: On the Russian seats, it migh be due to more space in the Su-27UB cockpit..
    I remember the dear test pilot Anatoly Kovochur falling asleep at an leg over to Malaysia in his Su-27PD..
    Oh.. and also a report by a retired US pilot flying with Anatolyin a Su-27UB or Su-30, in which he state that the back seat view is far better than any two-seater fighter back in the US..

    I'll try to dig it up again.
    Last edited by haavarla; 17th October 2011 at 09:19.
    Thanks

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    898
    I don't think he weighed it or the american helmet. it might have been mentioned in his write-ups, I will try to locate those.

    I don't remember what he said about the suits but did mention that the f-16 cockpit was very cramped and uncomfortable. why don't you PM him ? he might answer us here.
    HAL - one step ahead of IBM

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by haavarla View Post
    Oh.. and also a report by a retired US pilot flying with Anatolyin a Su-27UB or Su-30, in which he state that the back seat view is far better than any two-seater fighter back in the US..

    I'll try to dig it up again.
    of course, the Su-30 uses a stepped cockpit, so the rear seater gets a much better forward view. Look at good ol Rahul there in the back, he can clearly see over Habib's head or look down and find his bald spot



    of course the rear view is another story. not too many two seat versions of single seat aircraft have good rear views. Obviously that guy won't be noticing that hot chinese girl on his 6.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Dijon , France
    Posts
    1,038
    TR1 :
    good luck cranking your head around to the point that 360 degree vision actually plays a role, especially in a combat scenario. If even possible, it would have zero utility.
    Boom :
    no pilot likes to turn his head 180 degree to look backwards and lose his all important situational awareness for even a moment, however bubbly his canopy may be
    I think that you are both wrong . In dogfight , the pilot always try to never loose eye contact with the target . He moves his head in all directions very quickly and only look ahead to verify the HUD and the c0ckpit mirrors (if any) .
    Like in this video Rafale vs F-16 at RedFlag (at 1:50+) :
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZfm2dtyyPI

    This is one of the reasons why helmets and HMS must be as light as possible .

    Cheers .
    I say what I mean and I do what I say .

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    26
    Yo Guys and Girls, why need rear views when have HMs? I means like F-35)
    Last edited by J-20B Snoopdog; 17th October 2011 at 19:13. Reason: F-35 hms

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluewings View Post
    TR1 :


    Boom :


    I think that you are both wrong . In dogfight , the pilot always try to never loose eye contact with the target . He moves his head in all directions very quickly and only look ahead to verify the HUD and the c0ckpit mirrors (if any) .
    Like in this video Rafale vs F-16 at RedFlag (at 1:50+) :
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZfm2dtyyPI

    This is one of the reasons why helmets and HMS must be as light as possible .

    Cheers .
    So very true.
    I've seen many vids of this, including an Instructors aviation series from US where the pilots in their F-18 crank their heads in all direction.. it looks quite akwards to say the least.
    They pay far more attention on the enemy visually than looking in their HUD.
    This is natural. If it is in BVR, it is of course another matter.

    Anyway, what is the US helmet weight.. anyone?
    Thanks

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by haavarla View Post
    So very true.
    I've seen many vids of this, including an Instructors aviation series from US where the pilots in their F-18 crank their heads in all direction.. it looks quite akwards to say the least.
    They pay far more attention on the enemy visually than looking in their HUD.
    This is natural. If it is in BVR, it is of course another matter.

    Anyway, what is the US helmet weight.. anyone?
    JHMCS is about 1.9 kg

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,724
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluewings View Post
    TR1 :


    Boom :


    I think that you are both wrong . In dogfight , the pilot always try to never loose eye contact with the target . He moves his head in all directions very quickly and only look ahead to verify the HUD and the c0ckpit mirrors (if any) .
    Like in this video Rafale vs F-16 at RedFlag (at 1:50+) :
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZfm2dtyyPI

    This is one of the reasons why helmets and HMS must be as light as possible .

    Cheers .
    Thanks for the vid Blue, and it exactly proves my point. Never in the vid do they crank their heads to a point that they could not in the Flanker while maintaining vision. That was my whole point, someone else went on a heavy helmet tangent.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by TR1 View Post
    Thanks for the vid Blue, and it exactly proves my point. Never in the vid do they crank their heads to a point that they could not in the Flanker while maintaining vision. That was my whole point, someone else went on a heavy helmet tangent.
    you underestimate the role of helmets in affecting pilots performance. even JHMCS may be too heavy, let alone the Russian ones.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21614872

    Aviat Space Environ Med. 2011 May;82(5):559-63.
    Neck pain among fighter pilots after the introduction of the JHMCS helmet and NVG in their environment.
    Lange B, Torp-Svendsen J, Toft P.
    Source

    Air Tactical Command, Karup, Denmark. brittlange@dadlnet.dk
    Abstract
    INTRODUCTION:

    Neck pain is a common complaint among fighter pilots. With implementation of the joint helmet mounted cuing system (JHMCS), the strain on the pilot's neck has increased.
    METHODS:

    We surveyed 58 F-16 pilots from the Royal Danish Air Force by anonymous questionnaires. More than half of these pilots used JHMCS regularly.
    RESULTS:

    The response rate was 100%. Of the pilots, 97% experienced neck pain in flight or shortly after flying, 83% within the last year. Right side neck pain was significantly more frequent than left side, odds ratio 3.25. There was a strong tendency toward predominant right-sided shoulder pain. The pilots reported that combined rotation and extension movements were especially hazardous. Only 1 in 10 pilots moved his head independent of G-load. Neck pain influenced operational flying, especially the ability to perform a "check six" movement sufficiently, and affected flying with high G loads as occurs in basic fighter maneuvers and air combat maneuvering.
    DISCUSSION:

    To avoid neck problems the majority of pilots aim to avoid certain head movements and to fix their neck before exposing themselves to high +Gz loads. With the implementation of JHMCS, two conflicting goals are evident and working at cross-purposes. A pilot's head should remain stationary while exposed to high +Gz loads. However, maximizing the advantages of JHMCS encourages the pilot to move his head sharply while exposed to high +Gz loads. Training programs to help the pilots cope with these challenges are warranted.

    PMID:
    21614872
    [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Dijon , France
    Posts
    1,038
    Excellent response J-20 Hotdog , precise and factual

    Cheers .
    I say what I mean and I do what I say .

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,724
    Quote Originally Posted by J-20 Hotdog View Post
    you underestimate the role of helmets in affecting pilots performance. even JHMCS may be too heavy, let alone the Russian ones.
    Actually, I did not say one thing about helmet weight. I could care less, since the subject matter was visibility afforded by cockpit, not helmets.

    How hard is it to understand what I repeated a dozen times?
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Dijon , France
    Posts
    1,038
    TR1 :
    Thanks for the vid Blue
    You 're welcome .
    A good rear view is very immportant . The Flankers don 't provide the best rear view I believe .

    Cheers .
    I say what I mean and I do what I say .

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,724
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluewings View Post
    TR1 :


    You 're welcome .
    A good rear view is very immportant . The Flankers don 't provide the best rear view I believe .

    Cheers .
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIJTczPeW8w

    It sure does.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Malmesbury UK
    Posts
    3,257
    Quote Originally Posted by J-20 Hotdog View Post
    That's the backseater in a Su-27UB/Su-30MKI - so his rear view is obviously restricted.

    An unfair comparison.

    Quote Originally Posted by J-20 Hotdog
    the Zsh-7, which weighs 2.3kg,
    Again you are not comparing like with like.....

    The new Russian helmet for the T50 is the ZSh-10........



    Dunno what it weighs - but is probably an improvement on the previous ZSh-9 - as used by Su-27 pilots.

    Ken
    Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast.
    Flankers (& others) website at :-
    http://flankers.co.uk/

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    898
    Blue, how many times did the pilot turn his head to look 180 degree behind him ? human beings can't even see exactly backwards unless in peripheral vision. not unless you twist your body as well. for the 30-40 degree arc behind the pilot craning your neck is not the best way, especially with a heavy helmet. I won't wait long for designers to switch to cameras to cater for SA in that aspect.
    HAL - one step ahead of IBM

  16. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Dijon , France
    Posts
    1,038
    TR1 :
    It sure does.
    I stand corrected . Excellent rear view

    Boom :
    Blue, how many times did the pilot turn his head to look 180 degree behind him ? human beings can't even see exactly backwards unless in peripheral vision. not unless you twist your body as well.
    Well , we are not going to argue on few degrees here and there , are we ? He does twist his upper body on some occasions , mind .
    Anyway , I am sure that you understood what I meant Sir .

    I won't wait long for designers to switch to cameras to cater for SA in that aspect.
    It 's called EODAS and it 's on the F-35 .
    http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/so...odasvideo.html

    Cheers .
    I say what I mean and I do what I say .

  17. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by Flanker_man View Post
    That's the backseater in a Su-27UB/Su-30MKI - so his rear view is obviously restricted.

    An unfair comparison.
    talk about strawman. If you're going to reply to a message that was written for some one else, you should at least read the original message
    Originally Posted by haavarla View Post
    Oh.. and also a report by a retired US pilot flying with Anatolyin a Su-27UB or Su-30, in which he state that the back seat view is far better than any two-seater fighter back in the US..

    I'll try to dig it up again.
    He was obviously trying to compare two seaters to two seaters. Or in your language 2 to 2!

    also note that I also said
    of course the rear view is another story. not too many two seat versions of single seat aircraft have good rear views. Obviously that guy won't be noticing that hot chinese girl on his 6.

    Again you are not comparing like with like.....

    The new Russian helmet for the T50 is the ZSh-10........



    Dunno what it weighs - but is probably an improvement on the previous ZSh-9 - as used by Su-27 pilots.

    Ken
    another strawman that requires you to re-read the original post

    PETALING JAYA: Malaysian pilots flying the Sukhoi 30 MKM aircraft will be
    using the Indian version flight helmet. Russian Federal Service Military co-operation director Mikhail Dimitriev said the Royal Malaysian Air Force had decided to use the
    Indian Air Force version of the helmet.
    “We understand the weight issue for the Malaysian flyers and the Indian
    Air Force SU30MKI helmet suits their requirements,” he told reporters at
    the Defence Services Asia (DSA) 2006 exhibition in Subang yesterday.
    It was learnt that the RMAF was looking at the French MSA Gallet LA100
    flight helmet and Ulmer ECT-76VD oxygen mask as standard equipment for
    the 18 SU-30MKMs when they come on line in the middle of this year.
    The aircraft deal, valued at RM3.42 billion, includes weapons, support
    equipment and a new avionics suite from Thales. The French flight helmet and oxygen mask combination, however, is not the only contender as the RMAF is looking at several options but sources say the French combination is in the lead after it was picked to replace the Russian Zsh-7AP/KM34DII sets used by the RMAF’s MiG-29N fleet. In 2004, the RMAF complained that the Russian equipment was too heavy. In a high-G environment, the Zsh-7, which weighs 2.3kg, exerted
    tremendous load on the neck and spine. Add a helmet-mounted sight (HMS)
    and the helmet weighs a neck-snapping 4.8kg. Targeting with the HMS on the Zsh-7 was also a problem as the helmet tends to “pull away” because of the high-G loads experienced during air combat manoeuvres.”
    Does Malaysia operate T-50s or new Russian helmets?

  18. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluewings View Post
    TR1 :


    You 're welcome .
    A good rear view is very immportant . The Flankers don 't provide the best rear view I believe .

    Cheers .
    here's a better video of the Su-27 cockpit from a more clearer angle

    http://youtu.be/hyBV5qJlI2A?t=2m53s

  19. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by TR1 View Post
    Actually, I did not say one thing about helmet weight. I could care less, since the subject matter was visibility afforded by cockpit, not helmets.

    How hard is it to understand what I repeated a dozen times?
    You did not mention an issue about helmet weight, but you mentioned an issue about lack of head cranking and I already explained to you, Russian helmets are heavy.. making frequent turning of heads painful. The articles have shown air forces interested in lighter helmets because of the limitations a heavy helmet places on them. limitations such as how they operate.

    Also some one else pointed out the importance of HMDs now, which means you'll be moving your head more often than relying with just a normal dash mounted HUD

  20. #50
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    22
    By the way, the HGU-55/P used by the US air force only weighs 1.01kg. That is the base weight before the addition of a helmet cover or helmet mounted sight

  21. #51
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    3,476
    Quote Originally Posted by haavarla View Post
    Oh.. and also a report by a retired US pilot flying with Anatolyin a Su-27UB or Su-30, in which he state that the back seat view is far better than any two-seater fighter back in the US..

    I'll try to dig it up again.
    I have to disagree, the two seat Su-27UB or Su-30 rear view is not that great than say these American two seaters






    the two seat Flanker's view is more comparable to this bird from the derriere

  22. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,826
    The US pilot obvious meant the Su-30 has much better view of the frontal hemisphere compaired to any US two seater jet..

    Last edited by haavarla; 19th October 2011 at 06:49.
    Thanks

  23. #53
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Malmesbury UK
    Posts
    3,257
    Quote Originally Posted by J-20 Hotdog View Post
    I have to disagree, the two seat Su-27UB or Su-30 rear view is not that great than say these American two seaters
    Again, you are not comparing like-with-like.

    The Su-30 is derived from the Su-27UB - which was designed as a trainer - albeit combat capable.

    As such, there was no requirement for a rear view.

    I agree that the rear view from the Su-27UB/Su-30 is not good - you only have to see how far back into the rear of the canopy the backseater is located.

    His forward view is stunning however - as it was designed to be for an instructor.

    Rear view was not needed.

    The same can be said of the Typhoon - it's a trainer (although in this case the view forward isn't anything to write home about )

    Ken
    Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast.
    Flankers (& others) website at :-
    http://flankers.co.uk/

  24. #54
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    ShangHai
    Posts
    557
    Quote Originally Posted by Flanker_man View Post
    His forward view is stunning
    Would you mind to explain what does stunning mean here?
    The truth usually between two extremes, the key is when and where.

  25. #55
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Malmesbury UK
    Posts
    3,257
    Quote Originally Posted by emile View Post
    Would you mind to explain what does stunning mean here?
    Quite good...... sorry - overuse of hyperbolae.......

    For a rear seater, the forward view of the instructor over the front student is one of the best in its class.

    There - is that better ???

    Ken
    Flanker Freak & Russian Aviation Enthusiast.
    Flankers (& others) website at :-
    http://flankers.co.uk/

  26. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    5,247
    I think emile honestly didn't know
    http://translate.google.com/#auto|zh-CN|stunning
    or would you understand the following ?
    惊艳 驚艷
    the missile will require about five times the G capability of the target to complete a successful intercept.
    -Robert L Shaw

  27. #57
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,542
    @hotdog, the rear view from this little birdie isn't exactly awesome is it ?


  28. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    138
    Quote Originally Posted by haavarla View Post
    The US pilot obvious meant the Su-30 has much better view of the frontal hemisphere compaired to any US two seater jet..
    thats not the angle of the cockpit in flight though.

  29. #59
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    138
    Quote Originally Posted by Twinblade View Post
    @hotdog, the rear view from this little birdie isn't exactly awesome is it ?

    Can't the F-35 pilot see everything in a full 360 degrees like the airframe just wasn't there?

  30. #60
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,475
    Quote Originally Posted by Twinblade View Post
    @hotdog, the rear view from this little birdie isn't exactly awesome is it ?

    Ha ha. Very pithily put "little birdie" just about sums it up nicely without creating too much antagonism. I am supposed to be a silent observer so will go back to my routine.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

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

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES