B-52H performs Whifferdill turning during aerial refueling
Posted by Practical_Feedback75@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 115 comments
70⁰ of bank
Posted by Practical_Feedback75@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 115 comments
70⁰ of bank
Entelligente@reddit
Bank angle check
thatwombat@reddit
I thought the photo wasn’t rotated at first. Why on earth would you refill this way?
Mdbutnomd@reddit
It’s a confidence maneuver so pilots learn 1g flight is no different at any attitude. That being said, this isn’t done anymore.
SavageSantro@reddit
It’s not 1g with that bank tho lol
PlanesOfFame@reddit
You can fly completely upside down and pull 1g- Gs are relevant to the accelerational force of gravity, so as long as your plane is accelerating at a constant similar to that of gravity, it wont do more than 1. If the pilots in this video banked steeply, they would only feel more Gs if they pulled back on the stick to make a tighter turn. They could theoretically bank the wings as shown and let the nose drop down which would equate to less than 1g of force!
SavageSantro@reddit
While that’s true I can’t image it happening here, after like 10 seconds they would already be in a dive straight to the ground, not really enough time to do a refuelling photoshooting unless they snapped to 70 degrees for a short moment
froglicker44@reddit
Nah, they can circle like this at in a turn until they run out of fuel. It’s like a rolling coin circling a funnel, the higher the bank angle the tighter the turn required for equilibrium but it’s a pretty simple concept.
SavageSantro@reddit
Yes but we are talking about flying at 1g, which you literally cannot do while flying in a bank and maintaining altitude according to physics. (Unless you got enough rudder authority but thats beside the point)
Wavebuilder14UDC@reddit
Just so you know… these people are crazy. You cannot maintain altitude in a bank at 1g, if you pull back at all which you must to maintain altitude you will increase the g force. Idk how you are getting grilled on this, these people are incorrect.
nkawtgpilot@reddit
Because nobody said the tanker and B-52 were maintaining altitude. You don’t in a whifferdill, it’s a 1-g maneuver but you climb and descend to keep 1-g
Wavebuilder14UDC@reddit
We found the missing context
nkawtgpilot@reddit
I should have been more descriptive than that even so you can visualize it, you start by pulling the nose up slowly then when you get to whatever attitude (sorry been too long to remember the specifics) you gently start your roll until you get to almost 90 degrees and then as the nose comes back down through the horizon you start your gentle roll back the other way and then pull up gently and do it again, if that makes sense.
It’s a pretty gentle and easy maneuver to keep 1-G the whole time, but it sure looks impressive. And full disclosure, although I was a CFIC instructor, we’d stopped doing that before my time, but every AF pilot does whifferdills in fingertip formation as part of primary training in UPT
Wavebuilder14UDC@reddit
Kind of sounds like a variant of Lazy Eights
PlanesOfFame@reddit
Yes BUT
If you bank the wings your force is divided. If you bank the wings at a 45 degree angle, the 1g gravitational force is not pulling you evenly across your body, and when you pull the stick back you do not pull directly against the difference. The steeper the bank, the steeper the turn. Also of note is that these maneuvers are started with a nose high attitude which drops as we see in the picture down below the horizon. These planes are enormous and generate a huge amount of lift so they can maintain a trajectory for a while- its not like they drop out of the sky like rocks if their wings aren't level to the ground
Wavebuilder14UDC@reddit
Its not that you drop out of the sky, its that when you enter a bank of any degree you are losing vertical lift and trading it for horizontal lift which causes the turn. If you bank and do not pull back on the stick you will lose altitude. If the maneuver is done without maintaining altitude then you would experience 1g and the nose will continue to drop. You cannot bank at any angle and maintain altitude without increasing g force. It does not matter how much lift you generate its that in order to maintain altitude lift must equal the force of gravity, when you bank gravity becomes the stronger force as your lift is not being produced vertically anymore.
In flight training we demonstrate this with steep turns.
froglicker44@reddit
You’re right but who said these things are maintaining 1g through this maneuver?
slpater@reddit
You can absolutely bank an airplane and maintain 1g vertically through the airframe. you can do this in a Cessna pretty easily even. Dont know who taught you physics of airplanes but they lied to you.
Wavebuilder14UDC@reddit
As soon as you try to maintain altitude you will increase the g force
Unofficial-Plays@reddit
So what bank angle would that be?
kkingsbe@reddit
The big caveat here is that this assumes you’re not maintaining altitude. If maintaining altitude in a turn, the bank angle directly correlates with wing loading. 60deg = 2g if I remember correctly
FrameRate24@reddit
Who says their maintaining altitude?
ResortMain780@reddit
The only way to maintain 1g at that attitude is a full barrel roll.
Charlie3PO@reddit
The basic premise of what you are saying is correct. But at the TAS these aircraft were likely flying at, it takes a while for the nose to drop even at zero G. At 1G and some bank, even if altitude cannot be maintained, it can take a while for the nose to fall through, especially if starting off in a nose high altitude.
For example, at 45 deg bank, 1G and 400kts TAS. The nose will drop at approx 0.8 deg/second
At 60 deg bank, 1G and 400kts TAS. The nose will drop at approx 1.4 deg/second
At 60 deg bank, 1.5G and 400kts TAS. The nose will drop at 0.7 deg/second
At 90 deg bank, 1G (not that this matters) and 400kts TAS. The nose will drop at 2.7deg/second
Idk how they actually flew these, but starting nose high, smoothly adding bank, adding even a little G, they aren't exactly going to lose control in a few seconds.
Fun_Assignment_269@reddit
Or pull 1G and let it descend...
ResortMain780@reddit
overspeed in 3, 2, 1, ..
Fun_Assignment_269@reddit
I assume it's not a sustained maneuver
Airbjorn@reddit
Because they wouldn’t be able to stay connected refueling, if each airplane was at a bank like that and both losing altitude… There would be no way to maintain the same separation in order to keep connected.
SavageSantro@reddit
Flying that B52 like a fighter
Airbjorn@reddit
They had to be almost 3 G’s if banking 70 degrees while holding altitude.
Fun_Assignment_269@reddit
I don't think they're holding altitude.
Airbjorn@reddit
No way they can stay connected refilling if they’re basically slipping down in altitude. It would have to be done at altitude in a turn.
legal_stylist@reddit
They did indeed lose altitude:
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/b-52-pilots-recall-doing-the-whifferdill-turn-during-aerial-refuelings-at-70-deg-bank-angle/
Fun_Assignment_269@reddit
What if, and hear me out here, the tanker is also descending?
Practical_Feedback75@reddit (OP)
Testing and showcasing operational limits of both aircraft
keenly_disinterested@reddit
Ex CFIC instructor boom operator here. The maneuver wasn't to demonstrate operational limitations. It was (as another CFIC instructor in the article notes) a "confidence" maneuver. Many receiver pilots came to CFIC with the belief it is somehow more difficult to remain in contact while turning. The Whiff demonstrated that's simply not true. As long as the receiver pilot gets all their visual cues from the tanker and not the horizon, the BUFF doesn't really care what your bank angle is. On one mission we achieved 88 or 89 degrees of bank (the tanker and BUFF pilots couldn't agree on the precise number) without a disconnect. It was quite a view looking down and aft from the boom pod.
The Whiff was one of a list of air refueling demonstrations performed by CFIC instructors for their instructor candidates. One of my favorites was meant to demonstrate how much drag the boom imposes on the tanker. The two aircraft made contact after which the receiver would take time to fine tune the throttles to match the tanker speed as closely as possible--these guys were good, so the match was usually perfect. Once the throttles were set on both aircraft I would disconnect and fly the boom up to trail position. The reduction in drag would allow the tanker to accelerate and move away from the receiver. At a distance of 50' I would fly the boom down to around 40 degrees down elevation. The increase in drag would slow the tanker allowing the receiver to catch up. If I timed it right I could raise the boom at just the right time to make contact, and the two aircraft would again be at the same speed. The throttles on both aircraft remained set (unmoved) for the entire demonstration. The point of this demo was to drive home the fact that if a BUFF pilot allows his aircraft to get high or low in the air refueling envelope they will have to make a power correction.
gentle_badger@reddit
Thanks for sharing! Spent a career doing 4 different jobs in the AF, and know that I barely scratched the surface of understanding the amazing specialized knowledge in each AFSC
Lost-Actuary-2395@reddit
"It's not possible" "But it's necessary!"
wil9212@reddit
We still do the effects of boom position demo. Whiff sadly went away, but fantastic confidence maneuver, nonetheless.
keenly_disinterested@reddit
Does CFIC still exist? I haven't asked anyone lately.
studpilot69@reddit
…well yeah, they still make new instructor pilots.
DifficultyAwareCloud@reddit
Cool…but ultimately useless. I’m glad we got rid of it.
KDiggity8@reddit
Thank you! That is so much incredible info!
It reminds me of glider training, when we'd have the tow do tight turns, just to practice handling on tow (along with recovery from slack lines, simulated rope breaks, and boxing the wake).
FlyByPC@reddit
Thank you. My first thought on seeing this was "please tell me why this isn't a stupid idea."
Practical_Feedback75@reddit (OP)
Right from the source! I appreciate the explanation and anecdote
girl_incognito@reddit
Both photos are B-52G's, by the way.
Plastic-Serve5205@reddit
Came to say this. I was a G model Crew Chief.
Practical_Feedback75@reddit (OP)
Yes you are correct, sorry about the typo in the title
LordVixen@reddit
Why do that? Seems dangerous.
GrayRoberts@reddit
Gotta make sure the gas gets to the wingtips.
maddoxnysi@reddit
So the fill one side and then just go normal and it gets distributed evenly after?
LordVixen@reddit
I think he’s pulling your leg
gefahr@reddit
Well I never
NedTaggart@reddit
You totally should.somtime. its lots of fun
maddoxnysi@reddit
Full nank
brighter_hell@reddit
A barrel roll would help too
RogueScholarDerp@reddit
It is an automated mechanism. The enable switch is right next to the board stretcher.
Advanced_Gear404@reddit
Pulling 2G's while refueling means the fuel comes out 2x faster.
/s
Mulligey@reddit
I know your making a joke, but technically, it’s a 1g maneuver. 2g is the 135’s g limit
Gwthrowaway80@reddit
That looks like about a 60 degree bank. At 60 degrees of bank, assuming the aircraft is not also losing altitude, you would indeed be pulling 2 g.
Cpkeyes@reddit
Why not?
Mdbutnomd@reddit
Confidence maneuver for pilots learning to AR, likely instructors. It’s not done anymore to my knowledge.
nj_5oh@reddit
Correct it is not performed anymore, and hasn't been for a long time.
Johnny-Cash-Facts@reddit
This was commonly done during training of new boom operators.
Practical_Feedback75@reddit (OP)
It was done to show and test the operational limitations of both aircraft
Brilliant_Control730@reddit
I have the same picture as a poster. It was taken during my instructor gunner days.
Adventurous_Pizza973@reddit
Gotta get the last few gallons out somehow
Anymouse8@reddit
Tanking off of the 135 in Afghanistan/Iraq/Syria at night, some of my most dreaded words were “Tanker’s coming right.” At which point the tanker pilot would inevitably slam the jet into an unnecessarily aggressive 40+ degree turn at a roll rate that would make the most aggressive F-16 pilot blush. SMH. 🤦♂️
KC-10 dudes and dudettes were much more chill.
WardoftheWood@reddit
Are you serious?🧐 this would be proof the world was not flat because of it were the plane would fall to the ground. Dang!
AbeFromanEast@reddit
The not often seen full-bank refueling
maddoxnysi@reddit
Almost, full i think 90 degree, nevertheless its crazy to manage that with such huge plane i mean this is not a jet
Gaspuch62@reddit
It's jet x8.
maddoxnysi@reddit
I meant jet fighter compared to this huge b52 lol
Wedge_Donovan@reddit
x12 if you count the KC-135
racoon-pit@reddit
Don't forget about their APUs
Gaspuch62@reddit
So, we're at 12 jet engines. I just read that the KC-135 has two APUs, the B-52 hasn't had an APU, but I found an article from 2022 saying that an upgrade package that might add them. So at least two more turbines, but those aren't usually running in flight. Could also count Ram Air Turbines on the aircraft and external fuel pods.
Gaspuch62@reddit
True. That's a lot of jet.
Zakluor@reddit
Which is not a jet? The B-52 or the KC-135 doing the refueling?
maddoxnysi@reddit
Jet fighter, thats what i meant to say jee, i gave a hint about b52 being huge as a comparison to jet fighter
DagamarVanderk@reddit
Funny because both are most definitely jets
Activision19@reddit
I’ve found that a lot of non aviation people seem to think that jet=fighter jet.
ddadopt@reddit
Damn, dude, I gotta at least give you the fact that you're taking the well-deserved roasting and not deleting the ignorant comment.
maddoxnysi@reddit
What is ignorant in it?
Festivefire@reddit
Both aircraft here are jets.
maddoxnysi@reddit
Fighter jet, as a much smaller and manoeuvrable , mentioning a huge i though people get what i was saying guess not
FMC_Speed@reddit
it helps get the fuel to the edges of the fuel tank, and little shake and bank to fill her up full
BreadUntoast@reddit
SHAKE IT THEB YA BAKE IT!
ez2cyiwon@reddit
Anyone have video of this maneuver?
POGsarehatedbyGod@reddit
How in the f
Jayches@reddit
As a practical matter, how on earth do the fueler and b-52 maintain the narrow margin of separation distance of the fuel hose while flying this way? Seems difficult to maintain between two airplanes of vastly different flight characteristics, to say nothing of the altitude-losing spiral they would be in. Or is this a brief photo op lasting only long enough to take a crazy picture without colliding?
ThatHellacopterGuy@reddit
The same way pilots maintain position in any formation maneuver - manipulation of flight controls and power.
avar@reddit
Why does it seem so? A large pick-up truck and a sports car have vastly different handling and driving characteristics, but both can easily drive side-by-side within patting distance through a turn on the highway when controlled by skilled drivers. Same principle.
Jayches@reddit
Absence of traction grip and maintaining same altitude in 3D space come to mind. Certainly a lot simpler on a flat surface.
CarminSanDiego@reddit
Has this been proven to be a real picture? When the 135’s auto pilot is off, pilots can barely maintain straight level so I call bs
Also fighters sometimes have trouble hanging on with a little bit of PIO - can’t imagine something with slow flight controls like a b52 can do this for longer than a second
ThatHellacopterGuy@reddit
This was a CFIC maneuver for decades, back in the good/bad old days of SAC.
studpilot69@reddit
These pictures have been around much longer than the internet.
par-a-dox-i-cal@reddit
Damn, they must travel fast to maintain lift at such bank angle.
Warren_Puffitt@reddit
So the probe/flying boom rotates?
sjmuller@reddit
No, both planes are banked at the same angle in a turn. The B-52 is just following the angle of the tanker.
Sgt_JC66@reddit
Not an H model. That’s a G model.
Practical_Feedback75@reddit (OP)
Yes you are correct, the title is a typo
blooptybloopt@reddit
MichiganRedWing@reddit
Seems excessive.
start3ch@reddit
Cue Dr. Strangelove theme
ElFarts@reddit
Air Force takes it. Marines stick it in.
lockerno177@reddit
that is hands down the most stupid intentional manuever ive ever seen.
Late-Mathematician55@reddit
I'm thinking some training manoeuvres should be left to the simulator
HNL2BOS@reddit
sort of werid.....this exact image (plus the actual background of it) popped up on my google feed earlier this morning.
Imaginary-Spray3711@reddit
This photo is a manipulated image. There is no way this would happen.
Original-Let8340@reddit
It is not. But your confidence in being completely wrong about this is noticed.
Mbizzy222@reddit
https://theaviationgeekclub.com/b-52-pilots-recall-doing-the-whifferdill-turn-during-aerial-refuelings-at-70-deg-bank-angle/
80sBimmers@reddit
Navigator just poured himself coffee before this, probably.
zibudotai@reddit
Navigators need to know that coffee is good on the inside, not the outside.
McG713@reddit
Badass
The_Ashamed_Boys@reddit
Looks like an unnecessary risk to me.
post-explainer@reddit
Please provide a source by replying to the message that was sent to you. Failure to respond to that message will result in the automatic removal of this post. Please feel free to reach out to the mod team through modmail if you have any questions or concerns.
r/Aviation is trialing new measures to prevent karma farming. Please feel free to provide feedback through modmail. Thank you for participating in the community!