Fighter or Passenger

[Stevie Boy]

With every manafacturer claiming how stable their ski is, and with ski,s using Aero design & materials, this thought crossed my mind, for a fighter aircraft to be Fast, Highly Manouverable (Turn on a Sixpence) it has to be inheriently unstable, for passenger aircraft to be stable, with design they lose the ability to be Fast and are not as Manouverable.

Would you want to ride a Fighter or a Passenger Ski

[Gloersen]

Relaxed Static Stability applied to skis; short of diminshing returns.

 

Positive Static Stability practiced by skier; short of failure to make athletic moves.

 

Fighter ski, focused pilot.

 

 

[6balls]

Too much difference between those two craft...the commercial jet aircraft is a slug in terms of maneuvering and we all know how a military jet maneuvers. I don't think any high end skis handle like commercial jets.

 

I like to think high end sports sedan ie) BMW M5, Caddy CTS-V and their other competitors. They produce sports car type numbers but in a bigger, heavier package. They retain some sedan characteristics like smoother ride, and transition a bit slower in the twisties. Contrast this w/a Vette or Porsche Boxster--similar performance numbers to the super-sedans, but more of an edge, quicker transitions, stiffer ride.

 

I'm a long term D3 skier, and don't feel they are performance slugs. After riding my bro's Razor, though, it felt like I jumped from a sports sedan to an all out sports car. Faster, more maneuverable, a little less forgiving, a little less comfortable ride--felt more frenetic like it wasn't happy sitting still. Bought a Razor, so will see which style works better for me this season.

[Ed_Johnson]

Agree with OB, I have flown both also, and say go with the Fighter. However, there are Fighters I consider easy to fly, like the F-15, and those that can eat you for lunch if your not paying attention or make a mistake. High performance skis are the same way and you have to choose one that fits your style. I always want a ski that is better than me. Eliminates the excuses. I also want one that is highly reactive to my inputs and fine tune it to extract the most performance.

I never believe this crap when they say, "I pulled it out of the box and ran my PB." I feel it takes several sets to set one up correctly, first with binding placement, followed by several fin and wing adjustments. Just like the Fighter, you have to feel like it's part of you. It is so sweet when you reach that point.

 

Ski Well, ED

[6balls]

I just want to say, as a guy who has lots of time in a variety of single engine GA aircraft...I am really envious of those of you w/military jet experience. Wow.

On the ski front, I hope you are right. I was 4 buoys from practice PB in one set on the Razor, matching my tourney avg. We'll see how it goes.

 

[Ed_Johnson]

OB'

 

I'm happy your flying and helping pay my Retirement Check from Delta..LOL....ED

[Roger]

I think one thing being overlooked here is that the inherently unstable fighter jets have flight control computers making thousands of corrections per second to keep the jet pointed where the pilot is telling it to go. If the computer fails, the pilot ejects as the aircraft is not flyable by human alone. What we probably need is the better jets from just before the changeover to computer controlled jets... Something fast and nimble, but not inherently unstable.

[Roger]

I have a friend in Miami who fly's A4s as the aggressor squadron near Phoenix (he is a skier too). He fly's against all sorts of current "computer" jets and loves his A4. He was a F14 jockey in the Navy (another non-computer capable fighter).

[Roger]

Email sent.