What's a "Cloverleaf" Maneuver?
Stephen Harding
pilot named Lawrence in a P-38 versus Adolf Galland in
a Ta-152 (or was that an FW 190D??), Lawrence mentions
a "cloverleaf" maneuver that apparently positioned him
well against Galland.
From the context of the story, I gather it was something
a P-38 was especially good at because of it's twin engine
control. Galland was apparently surprised by the maneuver.
Anyone know what this maneuver actually was, and if a P-38
was especially good at it?
CC, I think the story came from you! Care to comment?
Don't know why it's taken me so long to ask, but I just
gotta know now!
SMH
Mark
http://yarchive.net/mil/p38.html
"Although the Spitfire could execute a tighter turning
circle than the P-38, Lowell was able to use the P-38's excellent stall
characteristics to repeatedly pull inside the Spit's turn radius and ride
the stall, then back off outside the Spit's turn, pick up speed and cut
back in again in what he called a "cloverleaf" maneuver."
This is not your 'traditional' description of a cloverleaf as taught in
pilot training. That is a climb (with decreasing airspeed) followed with
bank angle slowly increasing so that the nose will fall thru the horizon
while inverted. From there you perform (more or less) a split S. You
should now be heading 90 deg to your original heading. Then repeat. You
can do four of these in a row and ta da you get your cloverleaf!!!!
But I don't think that's what he's talking about here...
The Lowell description is more akin to flying in "lag" to pick up airspeed
then pulling your nose to "lead" (with resulting loss of energy aka
airspeed/altitude). I guess after doing a couple of these, you could
picture a cloverleaf if looking down from above the turn :)
Mark
"Stephen Harding" <har...@cs.umass.edu> wrote in message
news:3F401183...@cs.umass.edu...
Ed Rasimus
>In a description of an alledged fight between American
>pilot named Lawrence in a P-38 versus Adolf Galland in
>a Ta-152 (or was that an FW 190D??), Lawrence mentions
>a "cloverleaf" maneuver that apparently positioned him
>well against Galland.
>
>From the context of the story, I gather it was something
>a P-38 was especially good at because of it's twin engine
>control. Galland was apparently surprised by the maneuver.
>
>Anyone know what this maneuver actually was, and if a P-38
>was especially good at it?
A cloverlead is a basic aerobatic maneuver consisting of a pull up
with a roll 90 degrees so as to place the aircraft 90 degrees of turn
away from the original heading as it passes through wings level
inverted. The recovery from inverted is like the second half of a
loop, followed by three more pull-ups and rolls until four "leafs" of
the cloverleaf are completed. Typically only one or two leafs are
flown in practice.
Think of it as a vertical turning maneuver. If Lawrence was defending
against Galland, it wouldn't have been particularly difficult for
Galland to follow him through. If Lawrence was offensive, it might
have been a maneuver (unseen) allowing him to reduce heading crossing
angle or overtake, increasing spacing and allowing him to drop into a
shooting position.
It's more likely that the maneuver was a variant of the "barrel-roll"
attack which is a large barrel-roll used to simultaneously reduce
aspect angle (the angular position off the tail of the target
aircraft--not heading crossing angle, usually referred to as "angle
off") and take spacing on the defender. Think of this as two aircraft
on nearly parallel tracks--one pulls up and rolls toward the other
while the target aircraft proceeds straight ahead. The attacker flies
a longer path while slowing down and then speeding back up thereby
allowing the defender to move forward relative to the shooter.
End of BFM (Basic Fighter Maneuver) lesson for today.
Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (ret)
***"When Thunder Rolled:
*** An F-105 Pilot Over N. Vietnam"
*** from Smithsonian Books
ISBN: 1588341038
robert arndt
Fw-190Ds that protected the Me-262s from loitering Allied aircraft:
http://www.pasadenamodelers.com/THEAERONUT.htm
Rob
Corey C. Jordan
wrote:
The pilot involved was Col. John Lowell, Commanding Officer of the 364th
Fighter Group (briefly).
Lowell nearly killed Galland, who escaped only because Lowell elected to
break off having flown well past his fuel window. During a fighter pilot reunion
sometime after the war, Galland overheard Lowell telling the story and
confronted him saying something similar to; "It vas you who nearly keeled me!"
They compared notes and agreed that they had in fact fought each other that day.
As to the cloverleaf maneuver; a description was posted to RAM in 1998:
"During the late winter of 1944 ocurred the famous dual between a
Griffon-engined Spitfire XII and a P-38H of the 364FG. Col. Lowell few the
P-38, engaging the Spitfire at 5,000 ft. in a head-on pass. Lowell was
able to get on the Spitfire's tail and stay there no matter what the
Spitfire pilot did. Although the Spitfire could execute a tighter turning
circle than the P-38, Lowell was able to use the P-38's excellent stall
characteristics to repeatedly pull inside the Spit's turn radius and ride
the stall, then back off outside the Spit's turn, pick up speed and cut
back in again in what he called a "cloverleaf" maneuver. After 20 minutes
of this, at 1,000 ft. altitude, the Spit tried a Spit-S (at a 30-degree
angle, not vertically down). Lowell stayed with the Spit through the
maneuver, although his P-38 almost hit the ground. After that the
Spitfire pilot broke off the engagement and flew home. This contest was
witnessed by 75 pilots on the ground.
The cloverleaf was a horizontal maneuver that took advantage of the P-38's
exceptionally gentle stall characteristics. It was a low-speed maneuver. The
pilot would tighten his turn until he actually stalled out, ease off and let
the plane unstall itself, then tighten back up into a stall, ease up....
Viewed from above, the pattern the airplane flew through the air looked
something like a cloverleaf, and this simile was used in teaching the maneuver."
Lowell was an exceptional pilot finishing the war with 7.5 victories.
My regards,
Widewing (C.C. Jordan)
http://www.worldwar2aviation.com
http://www.netaces.org
http://www.hitechcreations.com
Corey C. Jordan
C. Jordan) wrote:
>After 20 minutes
>of this, at 1,000 ft. altitude, the Spit tried a Spit-S (at a 30-degree
>angle, not vertically down). Lowell stayed with the Spit through the
>maneuver, although his P-38 almost hit the ground.
After posting this I was a bit troubled by the statement that a Spitfire Mk.XII
attempted a split-S from 1,000 ft. AGL.
So, I jumped into Hitech Creation's WWII combat sim and tried the maneuver
in a Spitfire Mk.Vc, Spitfire Mk.IX, Spitfire Mk.XIV and a P-38L.
As far as I'm concerned, it's improbable at best. Here's the minimum altitude
required to safely execute a split-S in each type beginning at 250 mph TAS,
throttle pulled back to idle.
Spitfire Mk.Vc: 1,300 ft
Spitfire Mk.IX: 1,450 ft
Spitfire Mk.XIV: 1,600 ft
P-38L-1-LO: 1,700 ft.
The single biggest factor here is weight. That determines peak velocity
through the maneuver. In each case the heavier the fighter, the higher the peak
speed during the maneuver. Indeed, you can't dive at "30 degrees" simply because
you must pull the stick all the way back and keep it there to avoid contacting
the ground.
Had the original writer said 2,000 ft, I could accept that, but 1,000 ft is
entirely too low to have any hope of avoiding a pancake at best, or
a nose down auger at worst.
vincent p. norris
>exceptionally gentle stall characteristics.
C.C., I vaguely recall reading, many years ago, that Tom McGuire died
as a result of stalling his P-38 in a turn at a low altitude, which
gave me the impression that the P-38 must have had rather un-gentle
stall characteristics.
Is my memory playing tricks on me?
Thanks. vince norris
Michael Williamson
It isn't, but McGuire didn't stall his aircraft straight ahead.
He entered an accellerated stall at close to 90 degrees of bank
while still carrying external fuel tanks which were partially
full. The aircraft stalled (and departed, IIRC) due (most likely)
to the external tanks. According to a flight members report,
McGuire was able to recover the aircraft to controlled flight,
but didn't have the altitude to recover from the dive before
impacting the terrain. Note that standard procedure was to drop
external tanks before entering combat due to their degradation
on aircraft performance. I believe that Bodie's _The Lockheed
P-38 Lightning_ has this narrative (my household goods are
in long term storage at the moment, so I could be mistaken).
Mike Williamson
MLenoch
>Mk.XII
>attempted a split-S from 1,000 ft. AGL.
Good notice of this error. Minimum altitude in Mustang would be 2000' to give
some safe margins for recovery. Its laminar wing is not as capable of minimum
radii "half-loops" as the Spitfire's wing. I'm not sure if this correlates with
any sim modeling.
VL
PS: Throttle to idle does not get the minimum radius. Maximum G limit AND
minimum TAS provide minimum radius "loops". The maximum G is the structural
limit and the minimum speed at which the maximum G could be obtained is the
target TAS. This target TAS sometimes requires the addition or subtraction of
power to obtain and or sustain. In the Mustang it is 270 mph.
Hope this helps.
Corey C. Jordan
Here's what I tried. Using the simulator, I took a P-51D-15-NA with 25% fuel.
I climbed to 2,000 feet and adjusted throttle till airspeed was stable. After
rolling inverted I pulled off the power and pulled through the half-loop.
Testing was done over water so that I had a consistant and reasonably level
surface below.
At 200 mph TAS, I cleared the water by 8 feet..... Way too close!!
At 250 mph TAS, I cleared the water by 85 feet. Better but still little margin.
At 270 mph TAS, I cleared the water by 220 feet. Much better.. plenty of room.
Unlike the first two, I was able to pull 6G+ at 270 mph.
Looks like they got the physics about right.
Corey C. Jordan
McGuire is believed to have used differential throttle to induce a faster roll
in and tighter radius. If he did use that method there is an inherent danger
associated with inducing a torque reaction. Normally, the P-38 does
not suffer from torque induced rolling. However, turning hard into the engine
not making power is probably a bad idea anyway. Couple that with about 200
gallons (1,200 lbs) of avgas hanging on your wings, and being below 1,000 ft
AGL, and you're asking for heartache if you get into an accelerated stall. With
power up on only one engine with damn little room to recover in a 17,000 lb
airplane, even the most skilled pilot is in deep Bandini. Under those
circumstances, the big Lightning will not simply mush out of the stall. I would
think he would induce a snap roll and he would be too low to recover from that.
Mark
post)
Mark
"Corey C. Jordan" <Wide...@worldwar2aviation.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3f42ec89...@netnews.worldnet.att.net...
Ed Rasimus
>On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 23:09:39 GMT, Wide...@worldwar2aviation.nospam.com (Corey
>C. Jordan) wrote:
>
>>After 20 minutes
>>of this, at 1,000 ft. altitude, the Spit tried a Spit-S (at a 30-degree
>>angle, not vertically down). Lowell stayed with the Spit through the
>>maneuver, although his P-38 almost hit the ground.
>
>After posting this I was a bit troubled by the statement that a Spitfire Mk.XII
>attempted a split-S from 1,000 ft. AGL.
>
>So, I jumped into Hitech Creation's WWII combat sim and tried the maneuver
>in a Spitfire Mk.Vc, Spitfire Mk.IX, Spitfire Mk.XIV and a P-38L.
>
>As far as I'm concerned, it's improbable at best. Here's the minimum altitude
>required to safely execute a split-S in each type beginning at 250 mph TAS,
>throttle pulled back to idle.
>
>Spitfire Mk.Vc: 1,300 ft
>Spitfire Mk.IX: 1,450 ft
>Spitfire Mk.XIV: 1,600 ft
>P-38L-1-LO: 1,700 ft.
Note in your original post and again in the lead to this elaboration
the parenthetical notice that the maneuver was "at a 30-degree angle,
not vertically down."
Just as the description of what Lowell was doing isn't technically a
"Cloverleaf", so also this is not a "split-S." It's a descending hard
turn, almost what is referred to in more modern terminology as a
"sliceback". Whenever you use some descending vertical in a turn, you
decrease your turn radius gaining some radial G from gravity.
To return to the original description of Lowell's maneuver, it sounds
as though he was exercising a series of high and low yo-yos. First, to
control overtake and reduce angles, he pulls the nose up to slow and
minimize overshoot of the target's turning circle. Then from high
slightly outside the target flight path in a lag pursuit position, he
rolls over and lowers the nose to take a cut across the target's
circle and gain closer. A high yo-yo, followed by a low yo-yo.
Corey C. Jordan
>Note in your original post and again in the lead to this elaboration
>the parenthetical notice that the maneuver was "at a 30-degree angle,
>not vertically down."
>
>Just as the description of what Lowell was doing isn't technically a
>"Cloverleaf", so also this is not a "split-S." It's a descending hard
>turn, almost what is referred to in more modern terminology as a
>"sliceback". Whenever you use some descending vertical in a turn, you
>decrease your turn radius gaining some radial G from gravity.
>
>To return to the original description of Lowell's maneuver, it sounds
>as though he was exercising a series of high and low yo-yos. First, to
>control overtake and reduce angles, he pulls the nose up to slow and
>minimize overshoot of the target's turning circle. Then from high
>slightly outside the target flight path in a lag pursuit position, he
>rolls over and lowers the nose to take a cut across the target's
>circle and gain closer. A high yo-yo, followed by a low yo-yo.
It's not a yo-yo maneuver Ed, it's purely a horizontal exercise. Let's see if I
can explain it this way for those unfamiliar with the ACM.
Picture a purely circular race track, You have two cars racing around the track,
one on the inside of the track, the other up along the outer wall. Periodically,
the car to the outside of the track pulls down to the inside edge. However, his
tires lose grip and he slides back up to the outer wall again.
In the instance where Lowell was dueling with the Spit XII, both aircraft were
flying in a lufberry. Periodically, Lowell would pinch in, momentarily pulling
lead. However, his P-38 would rapidly scrub off speed and begin to mush,
whereupon he would ease off the elevators and assume his position to the outside
of the Spitfire's turning circle.
This maneuver will only work once or twice, because the Spitfire's smaller
turning radius will eventually prevail. One could certainly pull the nose high
into a yo-yo and cut across the Spit's turn radius, diving into a low yo-yo to
repeat the process. Naturally this assumes that the Spit driver doesn't reverse
out of his lufberry and counter your yo-yo with a rolling scissors. Yet, with
that huge Griffon turning a 5-bladed prop, the Spit XII was loath to roll
against torque (though not as bad as the Mk.XIV) at low speeds. It's difficult
to force an overshoot when it takes forever (relatively speaking) to reverse
direction. Then again, the P-38 was sluggish on the ailerons at low speeds
itself, although a boot full of rudder helps some and will aid in scrubbing
speed. But, either way, the Spitfire has a clean stall speed nearly the same as
the P-38L with the fowlers nearly all the way out.
Ed Rasimus
OK, I've got the picture now. Having not read the original account, I
was trying to visualize based on the postings and my own
super-imposition of what a "cloverleaf" is.
I recall an experience a lot of years ago in trying to teach a bit of
BFM to a couple of friends at Falcon Field outside Mesa AZ. One was an
AF associate, former KC-135 driver and was then a T-37 instructor with
me; the other was a former crop-duster type, then a TWA 707 captain
(and eventually the founder and namesake of Dillon Precision--the
company that makes probably the most famous ammunition reloading
pressses in the world.) These two guys had each bought a Canadian
surplus Harvard (equivalent to a US T-6.)
They were trying to learn how to fly formation and it routinely
degenerated into a rat race with the tanker driver always losing. I
was brought in as the "ringer" to ride with my co-worker and beat
Dillon.
Problem was, when it came to slow speed, low dynamic range fighting,
my jet fighter tactics weren't the answer and Dillon soundly and
repeatedly trounced me.
We'd wind up in a cranking, turning, one-circle fight and Dillon's
crop-duster experience would have him pulling lead into me until he'd
stall, then with deft application of top rudder he'd manage to keep
the nose up for a second longer than I could. I'd drop out of the
stall and he'd ease off to take a bit of lag spacing then pull back
into his lead. Nibble, nibble, nibble and eventually he'd have a good
extended gun solution.
Sound like what you're describing in the Lowell fight.
MLenoch
>company that makes probably the most famous ammunition reloading
>pressses in the world.)
Mike Dillon?
Is he still around?
VL
Ed Rasimus
Yes. The event I relate was around '69 or '70. I'm pretty sure he's
still kicking.
One of the neat things we did at the time was get approval for a piece
on jet undergraduate pilot training for Air Progress magazine. We
carried Mike, who wrote the piece and Nyle Leatham, who photographed
on two T-37 formation flights. Flight one we got formation shots of
the little jet as well as spin photos and a lot of traffic pattern
shots---the local UPT training commandoes were aghast when we started
flying formation traffic patterns for the pictures.
The second flight was a rendezvous with a PT-18 Stearman for a
formation shot of the classically painted bi-plane and the T-37. We
had a tough time getting the Tweet slowed down to fly formation with
the Stearman--finally had to drop gear and flaps, then pull the
spoiler circuit breaker to get the last couple of knots scrubbed off
without stalling.
We finished the sequence with a bootleg photo of the Stearman, my
KC-135 buddy's Havard (T-6) and the Tweet in a three-ship. Wish I had
a copy of that one.
mjma...@tampabay.rr.com
[snipped for brevity]
>We'd wind up in a cranking, turning, one-circle fight and Dillon's
>crop-duster experience would have him pulling lead into me until he'd
>stall, then with deft application of top rudder he'd manage to keep
>the nose up for a second longer than I could. I'd drop out of the
>stall and he'd ease off to take a bit of lag spacing then pull back
>into his lead. Nibble, nibble, nibble and eventually he'd have a good
>extended gun solution.
A former Navy F-4 pilot, fellow trike pilot and good friend emailed
me this story that is very similiar (e.g: application of "top rudder")
that you describe above Ed:
Subject: Marseille ..' A Dead Man Walking ' .. But, Perhaps The ' Best
Dog Fight' Pilot
With the Messerschmitt's left wingtip pointed vertically toward the
water below, the Hurricane fighter stood virtually motionless in front
of a young German's windscreen. Viewed through the metal framed
canopy of the Messerschmitt 109, a British Hurricane with its red
centered cockade was starkly recognizable against the cloudless
North African sky.
Pulling back on the stick, gut-wrenching turn tightening, the young
German's slim body presses firmly into his seat. Underneath his
leather and mesh flight helmet, beads of sweat roll down his face ..
burning his eyes as they remain open and fixed on the Zeiss optical
gun sight.
3 G's .. 3.5 G's .. 4 G's.
The strain increases. Tired and aching at the end of day's mission
that was full of air combat, the young German's arm muscles begin to
fatigue under the strain. But there are no distractions allowed. The
quarry must not escape.
After a swift look inside, with a slight input of right rudder, Jochen
.. as he's known by his friends .. corrects the aircraft's slight
skid.
The Messerschmitt emits a tiny shudder as its airspeed rapidly bleeds
off from 300 knots indicated down to 140. Physics now demands the
aircraft's nose to drop as its lift falls away. In apparent defiance
of this law of nature, Jochen applies judicious top rudder and the 109
hangs precariously. Then, there's a metallic ' clang ' as the
Messerschmitt's leading edge slats automatically slam into an
extended position providing more lift.
Like an artist ' working' materials, the 22 year old ' works' his
aircraft as if part of his own body, while sweat pours down his back
.. and the shoulder harness bites into his neck .. stinging. These
minor distractions, no longer affect the German ace; he's been there
before. The only thing important is .. one more victory !
Looking behind him, the RAF pilot sees the Messerschmitt now perched
ominously off his left hind quarter .. its propeller spinner slowly
pulling lead .. setting up for the proper firing position. Fear grips
the British pilot as he now realizes this was no rookie enemy behind
him. And every evasive maneuver he'd attempted was flawlessly
countered .. with the young German closing distance with each turn.
As Jochen's Messerschmitt closed in, and the Hurricane disappeared
beneath its nose. Jochen cocked his head slightly to the left as he
calculated where his ordinance and the enemy would coinside. It ..
was .. time !
The control column shook in his right hand from a quick two-second
burst. The cockpit filled with the smell of cordite, as several pounds
of per second of machine gun and cannon projectiles hurtle into the
Hurricane. Intuitively positive his aim had been correct, the German
rolled inverted, diving away.
The 7500 pound British Hurricane, a sheet of flaming metal, thundered
vertically into the Mediterranean...
by Major Robert Tate, USAF [edited and abridged]
-Mike Marron
Ed Rasimus
>>Ed Rasimus <ras...@adelphia.net> wrote:
>
>[snipped for brevity]
>
>>We'd wind up in a cranking, turning, one-circle fight and Dillon's
>>crop-duster experience would have him pulling lead into me until he'd
>>stall, then with deft application of top rudder he'd manage to keep
>>the nose up for a second longer than I could. I'd drop out of the
>>stall and he'd ease off to take a bit of lag spacing then pull back
>>into his lead. Nibble, nibble, nibble and eventually he'd have a good
>>extended gun solution.
>
>A former Navy F-4 pilot, fellow trike pilot and good friend emailed
>me this story that is very similiar (e.g: application of "top rudder")
>that you describe above Ed:
>
>Subject: Marseille ..' A Dead Man Walking ' .. But, Perhaps The ' Best
>Dog Fight' Pilot
>
--remainder of a great story snipped for brevity--
That's beautiful....just f***ing beautiful. It captures the essence
perfectly. Skill, art, terror, dedication. Ahhh, if I could write like
that....
vincent p. norris
Never heard of that one, Ed. How did it differ from the PT-17?
vince norris
Walt BJ
The P38 got a good deal of prop-induced lift from the wash of both
props at low speeds - max power, of course. And if maneuver flaps were
installed (P38F15 et seq), that was even better for its low-speed
capabilities. A good friend of mine used to call flying on the edge
like that 'milking a mouse'.
Walt BJ
Ed Rasimus
Suffering a senior moment, my tired and aching mental synapses
cross-referenced my early flying day in the PA-18 Piper Super Cub with
the brief encounter described with a PT-17 Stearman.
vincent p. norris
>cross-referenced my early flying day in the PA-18 Piper Super Cub with
>the brief encounter described with a PT-17 Stearman.
>
> Ed Rasimus
No problem, Ed, I do that too.
But there must have been a PT 18. Anyone know what it was?
vince norris
Tex Houston
"vincent p. norris" <vp...@psu.edu> wrote in message
news:atgdkvod9h4kmdi3k...@4ax.com...
PT-18, as was the PT-17, was a Lloyd Stearman designed, Boeing aircraft.
Tex
vincent p. norris
>
>Tex
Can you tell us any more about it, Tex? Did it look more or less like
a PT-17, or was it an entirely new design?
vince norris
Tex Houston
The only difference between the PT-13, PT-17 and PT-18 was the engines.
Lycoming, Continental, and Jacobs (in order).
See http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/4515/stear.htm .
Tex (who helps put on the Stearman Fly-in every year in Saint Francis,
Kansas.)
John Keeney
PT-17 & PT-18 were both basicly the PT-13 with engine changes.
Unknown
Ed Rasimus <ras...@adelphia.net> wrote:
>mjma...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
>
>>>Ed Rasimus <ras...@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>
>>[snipped for brevity]
>>
>>>We'd wind up in a cranking, turning, one-circle fight and Dillon's
>>>crop-duster experience would have him pulling lead into me until he'd
>>>stall, then with deft application of top rudder he'd manage to keep
>>>the nose up for a second longer than I could. I'd drop out of the
>>>stall and he'd ease off to take a bit of lag spacing then pull back
>>>into his lead. Nibble, nibble, nibble and eventually he'd have a good
>>>extended gun solution.
>>
>>A former Navy F-4 pilot, fellow trike pilot and good friend emailed
>>me this story that is very similiar (e.g: application of "top rudder")
>>that you describe above Ed:
>>
>>Subject: Marseille ..' A Dead Man Walking ' .. But, Perhaps The ' Best
>>Dog Fight' Pilot
>>
>--remainder of a great story snipped for brevity--
>
>That's beautiful....just f***ing beautiful. It captures the essence
>perfectly. Skill, art, terror, dedication. Ahhh, if I could write like
>that....
"The Korat controller acknowledged my emergency fuel state, and
asked if we would like to be broken up for individual straight-in
approaches, the most economical way to get on the ground. I said, no
thank you, we were going to fly a four-ship down initial. The
controller quietly acknowledged my choice and probably began preparing
his defense for the court-martial that would ask him why he let two
emergency-fuel jets fly an overhead pattern."
(Some Guy Who Wrote A Book, pp. 242-243)
I don't know what you're talking about, Ed. Know what? The
grass ain't always greener elsewhere, man. I think you staked out a
pretty fair patch for yourself, on your own. I've got notes all over
it: the account of the MiG-17 attack on p. 190 is another notable
example.
I'm only a satisfied consumer, but I'm tellin' ya: you do OK.
Billy
mjma...@tampabay.rr.com
>>>A former Navy F-4 pilot, fellow trike pilot and good friend emailed
>>>me this story that is very similiar (e.g: application of "top rudder")
>>>that you describe above Ed:
>>>Subject: Marseille ..' A Dead Man Walking ' .. But, Perhaps The ' Best
>>>Dog Fight' Pilot
>>--remainder of a great story snipped for brevity--
>>That's beautiful....just f***ing beautiful. It captures the essence
>>perfectly. Skill, art, terror, dedication. Ahhh, if I could write like
>>that....
>"The Korat controller acknowledged my emergency fuel state, and
>asked if we would like to be broken up for individual straight-in
>approaches, the most economical way to get on the ground. I said, no
>thank you, we were going to fly a four-ship down initial. The
>controller quietly acknowledged my choice and probably began preparing
>his defense for the court-martial that would ask him why he let two
>emergency-fuel jets fly an overhead pattern."
>(Some Guy Who Wrote A Book, pp. 242-243)
>I don't know what you're talking about, Ed. Know what? The
>grass ain't always greener elsewhere, man. I think you staked out a
>pretty fair patch for yourself, on your own. I've got notes all over
>it: the account of the MiG-17 attack on p. 190 is another notable
>example.
>I'm only a satisfied consumer, but I'm tellin' ya: you do OK.
My sentiments exactly! Hell, Ed didn't even need to write a book
as a compilation of his most excellent RAM postings could top
the NY Times Best-Seller list!
-Mike Marron
dslon...@gmail.com
a425couple
> Technicality- I think he added "not vertical" after split s. Am guessing it was more of a max performance descending chandelle.
>
mention "Cloverleaf maneuver":
AIR COMBAT COMMAND (ACC) MULTI-COMMAND ...fas.org › man › dod-101 › sys
› docs
May 10, 1996 - (USAFR), Air National Guard (ANG), and Air Education and
Training Command ... AIR COMBAT MANEUVERS (ACM). ... Figure 9.8
Cloverleaf ...
Cloverleaf - Is it useful ? - SimHQ Forumssimhq.com › forum ›
ubbthreads.php › topics › cloverl...
Do you think has any value in a real air combat mission ? ... The MCH
only specifies one "leaf" of the maneuver but it's possible to continue
the ...
Apr 15, 2014 - 3 posts - 3 authors
aetcman 11-248 - Columbus Air Force Base - AF.milwww.columbus.af.mil ›
Portals › documents › aetcman11...PDF
Aug 17, 2016 - maintained in accordance with Air Force Manual (AFMAN)
33-363, Management of Records, ... It ensures aircraft systems are set
for combat. To instill ... The cloverleaf is composed of four identical
maneuvers, each of which.
Time-optimization of high performance combat maneuverscore.ac.uk ›
download › pdfPDF
ACM, air combat maneuvering, maneuver optimization, minimum time
maneuvers, ... The next UCAV-X maneuver was the “Cloverleaf,” a turning
maneuver.
by BR Carter - 2005 - Cited by 14 - Related articles
Aerospace Medicine Issues in Unique Aircraft Types ...oncohemakey.com ›
aerospace-medicine-issues-in-uniq...
Aug 29, 2016 - “Inside” aerobatic maneuvers involve keeping the aircraft
in a +Gz ... horizontal eight, the Cuban eight, the vertical eight, the
cloverleaf (involving four loops in ... Military aerobatic flight,
expressed as air combat maneuvering, ...
Nice description of P38 "cloverleaf" - Ubisoft Forumsforums.ubisoft.com
› showthread.php › 386822-Nice-d...
Mar 10, 2005 - Without much thought, I was entering his preferred combat
maneuver ... Viewed from above, the pattern the airplane flew through
the air looked
The P-38 (C.C. Jordan; MakinKid; CDB100620) - Yarchiveyarchive.net › mil
He often said that the P-40 and P-51 represented pre-war air combat
thinking, and ... up speed and cut back in again in what he called a
"cloverleaf" maneuver.