chiki
Topic Author
Posts: 245
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 4:32 pm

Brake Chutes

Fri May 12, 2017 4:43 pm

Not sure if this has been discussed before
1. Why do military planes need brake chutes whilst heavier civilian airlines don't
2.It seems its most Russian planes and not many Western planes
3. Can these chutes not deploy accidentally mid-flight

Your thoughts
 
User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 545
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: Brake Chutes

Fri May 12, 2017 5:17 pm

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-fighter-je ... -they-land

I'm guessing it saves on brake wear too.
And runway length probably plays a factor too.
 
angad84
Posts: 1931
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:04 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Fri May 12, 2017 5:27 pm

1. To help them stop quick/quicker. Many military runways are far smaller than commercial strips, and when you add in the fact that military aircraft are expected to operate 24/7/365, in whatever weather the universe can cook up, you want to be able to come to a halt in the given area. Also, most military airfields (well, western ones anyway) have cables at either end of the runway and hooks on their fighters, so if an overrun is inevitable, the aircraft gets stopped before becoming an expensive landscaping arrangement.

2. In countries with lots of rain/ice/snow, the wheels will lose traction before the brakes are even close to maximum stopping power, so brake chutes are not optional, since they do the bulk of the decelaration. See: Russia and many northern countries.

3. Yes, and intentionally too. I've seen Jaguars pop the chute a few feet above the runway to dump speed (and therefore lift). As far as uncommanded chute deployment is concerned, it certainly *can* happen. You can manually jettison the chute from the cockpit, but often there will not be enough time to do so before an unintended chute deployment causes a crash. As I understand it, it's very, VERY rare though.

Hope this helped.

Cheers
A
 
mmo
Posts: 1150
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:04 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Fri May 12, 2017 5:40 pm

In addition, most (I hesitate to say all) high performance fighter type aircraft don't have reverse thrust available. So, the drag chute is an additional help for breaking and reduces landing roll.
If we weren't all crazy we'd all go insane!
 
chiki
Topic Author
Posts: 245
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 4:32 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Fri May 12, 2017 6:09 pm

Thanks guys for the responses and link been very helpful. Really makes sense with the Russians, they make competent aircraft a
and was surprised why they just cant stop
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Posts: 4779
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Sat May 13, 2017 10:35 am

chiki wrote:
Not sure if this has been discussed before
1. Why do military planes need brake chutes whilst heavier civilian airlines don't
2.It seems its most Russian planes and not many Western planes
3. Can these chutes not deploy accidentally mid-flight

Your thoughts



Brake chutes can be and has been installed on western fighterplanes as an option for many decades. But not everyone needs this. It's primarely needed for countries that operate their aircraft on shorter runways and where there is often ice and snow. Brake chutes was/is used by some countries on the Starfighter, Saab Draken, F-5 Freedom fighter, The F-4 Phantom, F-117 Nighthawk, the F-16, F-35, Eurofighter, Mirage F1, Dassault Rafale, B-52, Avro Vulcan etc

An F-16 of the Royal Norwegian Air force deploying it's chute:

Image


The F-35A's that Norway is getting will eventually be fitted out bith a brake chute pod between the tailfinns. So far it's only Norway that has ordered this.

Image
 
RetiredWeasel
Posts: 512
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 8:16 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Sat May 13, 2017 4:38 pm

All the century series fighters and earlier fighters like the F-4 were designed to use "drag chutes" as we call them in the US military. Brake technology with composites was not as developed, brakes were not as robust (needed to save weight for munitions) and these fighters were landing at higher speeds than the previous generation. Later fighters (ala F-15) landed at slower speeds and some had lighter landing weights (f-16) so the drag chutes were not needed and the brakes benefited from the improved technology..

All the drag chutes had a max airspeed failure point. For the F-4 it was round 200 knots. If it was deployed above that speed, then the cord would either fail or the chute would become a "streamer". They were designed that way.

All these fighters could land without the chutes, but you could anticipate having hot brakes on landing even on a 10,000 ft runway.
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Posts: 4779
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Sat May 13, 2017 7:08 pm

RetiredWeasel wrote:
All the century series fighters and earlier fighters like the F-4 were designed to use "drag chutes" as we call them in the US military. Brake technology with composites was not as developed, brakes were not as robust (needed to save weight for munitions) and these fighters were landing at higher speeds than the previous generation. Later fighters (ala F-15) landed at slower speeds and some had lighter landing weights (f-16) so the drag chutes were not needed and the brakes benefited from the improved technology..

All the drag chutes had a max airspeed failure point. For the F-4 it was round 200 knots. If it was deployed above that speed, then the cord would either fail or the chute would become a "streamer". They were designed that way.

All these fighters could land without the chutes, but you could anticipate having hot brakes on landing even on a 10,000 ft runway.


Plenty of F-16's with drag chutes as mentioned above. So drag schutes are still needed. there is a reason why Norway has asked for that option on the F-35 at a considerable expence ...
 
RetiredWeasel
Posts: 512
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 8:16 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Sat May 13, 2017 7:17 pm

Mortyman wrote:
RetiredWeasel wrote:
All the century series fighters and earlier fighters like the F-4 were designed to use "drag chutes" as we call them in the US military. Brake technology with composites was not as developed, brakes were not as robust (needed to save weight for munitions) and these fighters were landing at higher speeds than the previous generation. Later fighters (ala F-15) landed at slower speeds and some had lighter landing weights (f-16) so the drag chutes were not needed and the brakes benefited from the improved technology..

All the drag chutes had a max airspeed failure point. For the F-4 it was round 200 knots. If it was deployed above that speed, then the cord would either fail or the chute would become a "streamer". They were designed that way.

All these fighters could land without the chutes, but you could anticipate having hot brakes on landing even on a 10,000 ft runway.


Plenty of F-16's with drag chutes as mentioned above. So drag schutes are still needed. there is a reason why Norway has asked for that option on the F-35 at a considerable expence ...


Yes, I was referring mainly to the USAF versions which don't use that option and avoid snow and icy runways and prefer long ones.
 
User avatar
spudh
Posts: 342
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:00 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Sun May 14, 2017 12:04 am

mmo wrote:
In addition, most (I hesitate to say all) high performance fighter type aircraft don't have reverse thrust available. So, the drag chute is an additional help for breaking and reduces landing roll.

I'm pretty sure the Saab Viggen had thrust reversers. But then it was a bit special in a lot of ways
 
angad84
Posts: 1931
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:04 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Sun May 14, 2017 4:10 pm

spudh wrote:
mmo wrote:
In addition, most (I hesitate to say all) high performance fighter type aircraft don't have reverse thrust available. So, the drag chute is an additional help for breaking and reduces landing roll.

I'm pretty sure the Saab Viggen had thrust reversers. But then it was a bit special in a lot of ways

The Viggen did and the Tornado still does. Both rather special in my opinion, and not just becuase of the thrust reversers.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 9316
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Brake Chutes

Fri May 19, 2017 2:03 pm

Civilian aircraft using a drag chute :

Image
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
chiki
Topic Author
Posts: 245
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 4:32 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Tue May 23, 2017 4:58 pm

Aesma wrote:
Civilian aircraft using a drag chute :

Image


quire cool would have loved to fly one of these and felt the difference in deceleration
 
cmb56
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Wed May 24, 2017 10:20 pm

Most military combat aircraft do not have thrust reverse. I am not aware of any US fighter types that have TRs. The Tornado does, one reason it always has a dirty back end. The drag chute takes the place of TRs and helps slow down on short runways.
 
cmb56
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Wed May 24, 2017 10:20 pm

Most military combat aircraft do not have thrust reverse. I am not aware of any US fighter types that have TRs. The Tornado does, one reason it always has a dirty back end. The drag chute takes the place of TRs and helps slow down on short runways.
 
WKTaylor
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 9:36 pm

Re: Brake Chutes

Tue May 30, 2017 6:58 pm

I addition to prior statements about brake design and efficiencies, the USAF has generally stayed away from drag-chutes in-favor of tail-hooks for all its current generation fighters. The F-4 and A-7 proved the viability of stopping using these devices. Soooo... the USAF as fielded approach and departure end 'cable-barriers': Cables suspended across runways which are engaged by the dragging tail hooks [deliberately dropped by the crew in an emergency]. The ends of the cables are typically attached to 'boat anchor chain' on each side of the runway that is aligned in the direction of travel. As the jet moves forward it picks-up/drags ever increasing lengths of chain. This typically stops most heavy fighter-sized jets in ~100-yds or less with no damage. The problem with this method is that the barrier has to be reset after every engagement.... usually no-big deal with one-off landing or takeoff incidents. The combination of much more capable brakes and the tail hook and barriers has grossly simplified/improved USAF airfield operations.

However foreign versions of USAF fighters still rely on drag-chutes to decrease stopping distances under emergency conditions [takeoff or landing] since 'cable barriers' don't exist and modifying the airfield is too expensive, impractical or out-of-character with the nature of operations at these countries. When USAF deploys to these bases [or any 'bare-bones base'], portable barriers are usually installed for safety. When they AREN'T installed, field over-runs/run-offs have occurred with a lot of damage to the fighter.

NOTE.
Obviously the 'ancient' B-52 also has a drag-chute for this purpose and still routinely deploys it to reduce braking stress/energy... and obviously is too-heavy to use the same 'cable-barrier' system as lighter fighters are able to use in emergencies. A 2016 B-52 mishap on Guam, expresses 'why' the braking and drag-chute issues are critical. The fully-loaded MA [max TOW] BUFF hit birds that cause #5-6-7 engines to roll-back... at VR. MP determined that the jet would be unable to reach bail-out altitude before asymmetric loss of control, so he elected to keep it on the runway. The combination of spoilers, flaps and max braking reduced air speed to 'max-deploy airspeed' for the drag-chute which 'streamered' due to failure of several riser cords which asymmetrically over-loaded the canopy gores. The failed riser cords where found to be materially deficient [understrength]. The combination of over-heated brakes [on fire] and departing the pavement [into loose soil] sealed the fate of the jet. It burned-up ~100-to-150-yards past the edge of the hard surface. Thankfully the whole crew evacuated the jet safely thru pre-jettisoned escape hatches.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: SamYeager2016, WIederling and 8 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos