If you do a quick search on google, you will get that the maximum G force a fighter jet can withstand is 9G's (they also can withstand higher loa...

If you do a quick search on google, you will get that the maximum G force a fighter jet can withstand is 9G's (they also can withstand higher loads than that, although with structural damage), but is there any jet that was designed to hold out at 10G's or more?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I don't think so. The F-15 has a margin on the G tolerance that means it can probably handle more than 9G's and the F-22 is rated 'above' 9G's but without a number it's probably a similar safety tolerance.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >is there any jet that was designed to hold out at 10G's or more?
    For why purpose? The pilot will be unable to pilot the craft by then.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >The pilot will be unable to pilot the craft by then.
      what about drones

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Drones are indeed planned to have high g capability.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Maybe once we start getting actual fighter drones (you know, shit that might actually have some use for such G-tolerance), but since we don't really have any such yet...

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Why DON'T we have fighter jet drones yet? Not even a remote controlled F16?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Drones built from existing planes have been a thing for decades, mainly used as targets for weapons testing.

            >why did it take so long?
            Seriously, anon? It's only very recently that drone technology is worth a damn. Fighter jets take decades to design and troubleshoot.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Latency. Your average drone has the response time of a senior citizen which makes them awful for anything fighter-related.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              you are moronic
              your average digital drone has a latency around 100ms
              analogue signal fpv is around 25-30ms

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Missiles are like little drones, they can pull 50g

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          But they aren't reusable, so they don't tell us anything about the stress on the airframe.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            they get to where they're going, isn't that all that counts?
            just imagine a LRASM with an AIM240 strapped to it

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This, there's no point in making the plane capable of performing maneuvers that would kill or incapacitate the pilot.

      >The pilot will be unable to pilot the craft by then.
      what about drones

      Too new to have factored into the design, at least for any planes we know about, though you can bet your ass that whatever the latest shit is that we aren't aware of yet is designed with higher G's in mind.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The Centauri are willing to have the flight computer execute maneuvers that will black them out if it means they come back to consciousness in an optimal firing position.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      yes. 9g is the normal load but you usually have a safety factor of 1.5 times to account for say sudden turbolence while pulling 9gs.

      the onset rate of the g force and the duration of the force are important when determining if you can carry certain g forces. sudden pulls at 11gs are managable but you might get permanent spine damage

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I can't even find target drones that go above 9G's, huh

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That makes sense because up to now the only targets we were ever worried about hitting were enemy planes with pilots that can't exceed 9 G's anyway. Until thirdies manage drone fighters above 9 G's, we'll be long over training to shoot them down.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Jets can survive quite a bit more without failing usually. The limitation is an operational one and its for two main reasons. First, the pilot can't sustain more than 9Gs for long. And while it might not break the air frame today, hard maneuvers will stress it over time and reduce the life of the airframe. In wartime that will get relaxed. But in peacetime you expect your expensive jets to last many years.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    With dogfighting being long dead and modern stealth aircraft being missile trucks, is there a point to high-G maneuvering anymore? Sure it makes for a good airshow, but when is the last time in combat a pilot has had to pull anywhere near 9 Gs? Serious question I do not know.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    We could have pilots pull more Gs, but the problem is pilots are little b***hes about being tested on with things like submergal in hyper oxygenated liquid etc.
    I hate it when tiresome homosexuals get in the way of scientific progress.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >submergal in hyper oxygenated liquid
      based evangelion poster

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The Abyss

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          why isn't that stuff used by anyone?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It doesn't solve any useful problems. It's not the secret answer to high-G's unle

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Iirc, they've been experimenting with using it for major lung/breathing problems. You could do more damage though if it's pumped/forced as liquids aren't compressible.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It collapses your lungs after you exhale it and causes damage to alveoli while you use it.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    A pilot can only hold 9.5g for about 30 seconds at most so what would be the point of a 10+ g plane unless unmanned

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Also your getting very slow very quickly at 9+ g. You only would pull that hard in a last ditch defensive maneuver and if it doesn't force an overshoot you're dead. It's a very niche capability

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >you will get that the maximum G force a fighter jet can withstand is 9G's
    A fighter jet won't instantly fall apart if it exceeds 9Gs, but when it lands the maintenance crew has to inspect everything and might have to scrap the plane if certain components were damaged.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    A couple Japanese and Italian WWII fighters had 15G limits, but they weren't jets

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    all pilots should be forced to get a surgery that puts plugs into the main arteries in the head connected down to the ankles.
    more Gs faster blood flow. faster blood flow more Gs.
    infinite G tolerance.

    problem solved.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    iirc pylons are the failure points for large g maneuvers.

    Then again I am nojets so this may be bs.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I've seen plenty of F-16 demo vids where they regularly pull 9.5 Gs. Those max G numbers are kind of bullshit. My guess is you would have to regularly pull like 11+ Gs to break or bend anything. And humans can't really withstand such Gs safely for any real length of time, so it's a moot point. But for A.I. piloted or remoted piloted jets of the future, they may have to design a jet that can do like 15 Gs.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You have to inspect a whole load of shit to determine if anything was broken or bent, which takes time and money.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *