Carrier Landings

[SUBS17]

SUBS17

"Onspeed AOA is approximately 136kts KCAS at 44,000lbs gross weight (max trap).  Subtract 1 1/2 KCAS for each 1,000lb decrease in gross weight."  (NATOPS flight manual for F/A-18E/F) so 126kts sounds correct for about a gross weight of 38,000lbs.

As per the F/A-18A/B/C/D NATOPS pocket checklist (01NOV04) for the given landing configuration I posted above, 126kts is the correct speed.  Fwiw, the chart shows Approach Speeds (given above config.) which vary from 119kts @ 24,000lbs GW to 151kts @ 39,000lbs GW. (this includes a +2kt allowance as the wingtip AIM-9s are off   ).

From my FSX point of view:

I do not "like" approaching at this speed (126kts).  As I said before, I like to come out of my downwind turn at 135kts, then "fine tune" this speed based on the AOA indexer.  With the reduced fuel loads I have been using, this means in the ballpark of 130 kts.

You certainly won't crash at 126kts (as per your post on the 17th) and sink rate won't be too high (descent rate actually HAS to be lower if you're staying on glidepath).  AOA @ 126 kts (less than 2000 lbs. fuel) I noted to be about 8.8 degrees which reads "Slightly Slow" on the AOA Indexer and trapping at that speed will by no means put the tail in jeopardy of scrapping the flight deck.

Rob O.

As far as all the sources I've seen mentioned 136kts of course it doesn't mention the configuration which maybe including missiles. The reason why I mentioned 126kts as being the approach speed for the super hornet is because it was mentioned that its approach speed is 10kts slower than the A and C models. No as for 126kts in FSX I've found that the FBW ain't behaving like FBW I'm having to trim constantly which it shouldn't if the FBW were modeled correctly 126kts would probably be easier to use as it is I don't use it as I find the AoA to high for a safe landing.

[SUBS17]

Hey Randy,

Man go out of the pattern at say 3000' (Severe Clear Wx theme) with just a couple thousand lbs. of fuel then...

Practice flying a pattern at different configurations.  You can start with say, the landing configuration (gear/full flaps/tailhook down).  Climb, say, 1000' at 150kts while doing a Level 180 turn.  Turn again 180 degrees while decelerating to 130kts.  Then set up at 130 kts (or "Onspeed" in the AOA Indexer... your choice) a descent at 500 to 600fpm.  This is how I taught my "real" flight students... I mean in the civilian world.  And to me, the principles are very much the same (Real World compared to FSX).  I mean whenever I checked out in a new type or make/model, I didn’t want to stay in the pattern.  I wanted to go out for an hour or so doing the so called “four-fundamentals” (climbs, turns, descents and level flight) at the various airspeeds I would be using.  This way when I got back to the traffic pattern, I could focus on landing, not on how to fly this new plane. 

The big thing you need to note here is: your power setting in each phase of flight and how the controls feel to you (meaning amount of control movement, trim input etc...).  Do that above practice enough so that you can do this "in your sleep" (i.e. you don't have to think about it... you just do it).  You make the pitch/power change for the new performance you want (say going from level 130kt flight to Onspeed 500fpm descent): once accomplished (listening to the engine pitch) you continue scanning, and in a few moments when your scan brings you back to the power setting (for me the %N2 in the EFD) you might be like... “Let me tweak that One %”.  Or you look at the AOA Indexer... “My pitch needs a slight decrease to get that Onspeed indication...”

Now when you come back to the Carrier Practice mission, the pitch/power settings for the traffic pattern will be caged in your head.  Then when you are on final and the AOA Indexer looks more like the blinking lights from last season's Christmas tree, you can be like, "I know my power is about right to give me (e.g.) a 600'fpm descent; and my pitch too, because at this weight I should have roughly such and such kts."  Then you can use the bulk of your brain's CPU focusing on the meatball and flight deck alignment, making the tiny corrections you need to stay aligned with the Carrier and on Glidepath.

Let me sum up (phew!) with the ol'

Pitch + Power = Performance

Airspeed (Pitch) + % N2 = Level/Climbing/Descending for a given Configuration (Gear, Flaps, Weight... etc)

(And NO NO NO we are not going to discuss pitching to FPM and Power for Airspeed!  This is enough :-P)

Seriously, you will be amazed how much easier it is when you know what power settings to use for a given phase of Flight.  You will see!

Rob O.

Nope this ain't how I do it i don't worry about any of the above, for me its fly from the seat of your pants and watch the meatball. At the approach point paddles contact line up on the carrier apply lead to compensate the angle apply power and speed 140kts. As for N2 etc only really applys in a sim if you've got a really good throttle.

[Great Ozzie]

Well SUBS,

You can't possibly be flying "by the seat of your pants" (it's a romantic notion tho) because you would need to simulate the forces acting on your body that cause your butt to slide around in the seat from not using enough or too much rudder.  And in today's "modern" civilian trainers, that sliding is nearly negligible in standard rate turns... so much so that the student normally requires prompting to keep the ball centered.

If your allusion "by the seat of your pants" means you just go up there and stick some power setting in and drive it to the deck (and by some small miracle you manage to slam it on the flight deck an "walk away")... then sure I understand that.  But I don't possibly see how you are flying a stabilized pattern/approach to landing and trapping on every approach.  Maybe you are one of the lucky ones and can do that w/o thinking or knowing why you do what you do... you just do it (but I think that is Top Gun fantasy).

I prefer (on the Clear Wx theme) to keep airspeed within +/- 3 kts and altitude +/- 50ft of my "self-assigned" altitude (those are the tolerances I set for myself).  I work at that, and when I get better I'll tighten those up too.

Like you said... it's a flight sim and one can fly however.  My post to Randy was to give a "real world" practice method that can be used in FSX to aid in learning to fly precisely, hence making these traps "a walk in the park". ;-)

>N2 only applies in a sim with a really good throttle.   

C’mon.  I use an Xbox 360 controller and it works just fine!  I easily get 1% increments and usually a half % if I am careful with the settings I use.  I’d use my Cougar HOTAS, but alas, no XP Pro x64 drivers that I am aware of (maybe I try it if Thrustmaster releases drivers for x64 Vista… is possible they might work in x64 XP).

Besides… you have to set power according to something! (whether fan or compressor speed)  If you are just ball parking it based on speed… I can only see this leading to a lot of throttle jockeying on approach and imprecise flying.

Btw thanks for that about the FPAS... I blew off that page (as I never tried using it in flight) and did those calcs in my head.  Not anymore :-D


Rob O.

[SUBS17]

Well I think first things first its always good to show people what not to do:
Landing should look something like this:


This does not class as a landing either

And high speed high decent rate can equal


A mess

[SUBS17]

Its also not good getting your feet wet either:

[micro]

Microbrewst, I do have one question for you sir (at least it is a hope)... you are a trusty Shellback, aren't you? 

Rob O.

Unfortunately, I never got to deploy. I made it through CQ and then suffered an injury which cut my carreer short. Now I've moved on to the grown-up task of corporate flying, and all of my tactical flying is done from my laptop! Hence the delay in my response. My company was able to find the last reamining hotel in the country without internet service for my 4 day trip. 

[Great Ozzie]

Thanks for the reply  and again thanks for your info (re: trapping).

Man am sorry to hear that about the career being cut short... but... wow 2 envious jobs: the million dollar gold wings and a corporate slot. :-)

I am so glad about this FSX and Accel as it seems is the next best thing to being there or dreaming about it.

I was at Kaneohe MCAS '81 to '84 and did 3 Westpac’s (2 with 1/3 and one with 2/3) is why I had to tease you about the Shellback thingy.  Yeah... call me a jarhead... you'll still rate a hand salute!

Btw, I saw your video you did in the vein of TOP GUN.  Man was impressive and very professional looking. Bravo!


Rob O.

[SUBS17]

Heres a video featuring a carrier landing from the HUD view.

Yeah my PC ain't the fastest these days so there is low FPS whenever I try to record movies aside that note the following in this trap I had a full load of fuel. I also today did some traps without the flaps which work mainly because of the FBW which automatically lowers the flaps. Funny thing about this is in the F-16 you don't need to lower the flaps for landings as the aircraft knows the moment the gear is down to go into landing configuration. Funny how the Hornet doesn't have this but then again its probably due to the FBW being quite new at the time of development. Now the seat of the pants thing, my method involves setting up the hook, flaps and gear, once thats done eyes should be watching the carrier, AoA bracket and the meat ball. Main things of interest are the speed and the altitude plus the FPM and i just simply line up and apply power when needed and maybe a touch of speed brake every so often. Crude I know I suppose if I had the F/A-18 NATOPs and Tac manual I'd probably try to use that as a guide I might look into getting those later on or just wait until the next Hornet sim is released (which will have a manual anyway). Next best thing to a video is pictures to help the noobs learn to land.(and learn some of my bad habbits)

[SUBS17]

Well SUBS,

You can't possibly be flying "by the seat of your pants" (it's a romantic notion tho) because you would need to simulate the forces acting on your body that cause your butt to slide around in the seat from not using enough or too much rudder.  And in today's "modern" civilian trainers, that sliding is nearly negligible in standard rate turns... so much so that the student normally requires prompting to keep the ball centered.

If your allusion "by the seat of your pants" means you just go up there and stick some power setting in and drive it to the deck (and by some small miracle you manage to slam it on the flight deck an "walk away")... then sure I understand that.  But I don't possibly see how you are flying a stabilized pattern/approach to landing and trapping on every approach.  Maybe you are one of the lucky ones and can do that w/o thinking or knowing why you do what you do... you just do it (but I think that is Top Gun fantasy).

Its from years of practice with every carrier sim from F/A-18 interceptor up to FSX acceleration, eyes on HUD and meatball and you can't go wrong.

[SUBS17]

How about this for an approach don't use the meatball at all.

&feature=user
I think I need to save up and start building a pit like this.

[crim3]

Remember what microbrew said. On final aproach you don't have to aim for a certain IAS, you have to AIM for a glide slope and an AoA with the meatball and the AoA indexer respectively. This way the speed will set itself properly depending on the weight. More heavy and the speed will be higher, lighter and the speed will be lower, but the glideslope and AoA has to be always the same.

[Intrepid]

To Rob O : thanks man  followed that advice to the letter and it worked,  it made a big difference dumping the fuel ,stopped me from tail draggin like a dog with an itch
To everybody out there... thanks ,I realy apreciate these forums and am glad most are so willing to help
Two thumbs guys

[SUBS17]

Heres another video of the carrier practice mission.

[deltaleader]

Heres another video of the carrier practice mission.

Interesting video SUBS17.  All I can say is that if I did that on my computer...it will have rolled over and crashed.  I am suprised to see so many of these landing successful when the wings are not always perfectly level or landing on the deck is at a slight angle.  The only way I can land the F-18 on my computer is fuel needs to be less than 5000 lbs and I have to have a perfectly level and straight landing with the deck so I dont tip over.  I seriously feel like my installation of this plane is over sensitive or something.  If I can get a video of my approach and landing, I will post it.

[Great Ozzie]

Thanks for saying that Randy.  Is great news to hear that.  Besides... I owed you for the VC tip. :-P

Yes is a great thing these forums... I am constantly picking up things here too and am grateful for the work others put into their posts.  Is a good thing I think to see what others do and then pick and choose (wow like a buffet-o-tips!) and end up keeping what makes you a "better" pilot.  The learning never stops!  Or the fun!

Rob O.