Sludge/Combat Hornet Integrator - Released

[SpazSinbad]

Thanks neutrino. I have not been able to use any updated Sludge Hornets for a few months so have not commented on what seems to be good updates but was leery about the 'auto flaps' regression. This graphic was made earlier and now I'm not sure if it applies to the engine in the FSX Hornet [F404-GE-402?] but it is NATOPS airspeed/weight info for the F/A-18A-D version. Sludge did not mention the weight for his idea about 145 knots and that detail is important for Optimum Angle of Attack airspeed. Anyway here is the graphic....

[GOONIE]

Thanks, Sludge. Finally was able to download and test out the charlie bird last night. Really like a lot of the new tweaks and how it handles around the boat. I have used the new CGs, and I really like them. Only wish I could get the catapault toe brake mod to work. What I mean is I have the same issue as others here, who do not have rudder pedals assigned to the brakes, and thus lose braking ability after launch. I assume there is no way to reverse the max brake trigger once it is used? Say launch bar down, etc triggers max brakes to result in a 150kt launch (as I see in the basic .xml) and then another trigger, say airspeed 160kts or launch bar up releases the max brake call/trigger.

Great work!

-Capt

[Sludge]

JR...

I haven't been able to respond in-depth to your email cause I get back from working out late (its HOT in the days, so I have to run at night), then Im up late night, doing what I can.  I think you are have a point and I may have jumped the gun about "all future Sludge Hornets will have AUTO FLAPS", but Ill continue testing 'cause I'm still not getting why ALL the VIDEOS show Hornets landing in the low 140s.  If they are all at max trap and the G/S is at 3.5, then thats probly part of the answer.

Yeah, had a big discussion with JJ the last few nights about everything from KCAS on the HUD, to landing speeds of Hornets, Tomcats, and everything in-between.  Now Im still tweaking/modding.  I did some preliminaries with the Sludge Alpha and the CS Delta (with stores) and so far, the best fit FOR ME, seems to be taking a touch of lift off the flaps in the FA18.AIR, setting the flaps to AUTO on the LEADING EDGE and MANUAL on the TRAILING EDGE flaps.  I may be mistaken, and Virtuali can correct this, but I thought the FSX Hornet's LEFs at AUTO are AoA-based, just like the real bird.

I see what youre saying about the landing speed charts, and how you are working from airspeed backwards to A/C Weight. FOR ME... I see all these vids and something is not the same.  Whether that something is FSX 4.0 glideslope/higher WoD keeping us consistent with the chart and real-world using 3.5/nominal WoD and higher ?  Just something doesnt sit right, and Im trying to figure it out.  Look at 0:20 and how the HUD AoA bracket is ON-SPEED at 141.  Some more tests with the DELTA Hornet will make or break this mental block for me.  IF I do a max a/c weight trap in a DELTA Hornet, and the speeds are still low 30s, I'll look for more answers.

Spaz...

I dont know the weights, so the best I can assume is that they are at max trap weight.  Otherwise, if they are less, say 31k, this issue gets even more confusing for me.  In those pictures, you can see from the newly-modded Carrier Trap Gauge "A/C Weight", that Im at 31k.  So in my latest tests, everything is at max trap weight (unrestricted) = 33k, according to Legacy NATOPS.  I can even go up to 34k (restricted; NATOPS), once I start to get a handle on this issue.

I know those previous pics were at 31k, but my latest test pics are at 33k.  Some decent results but have to test with the DELTA Hornet and MAX TRAP, then we will see how much closer we get to the landing vids.

CAPT...

Thanks buddy.  Damn good idea, I may try it.  Give me a few days and Ill start working on it.

Fellas...

Have you guys gone to the official Blue Angels site lately?  Its really well done.  You gotta have Silverlight installed, but the site is really well done now.

Later
Sludge

[SpazSinbad]

Sludge, I'll assume the correct engine is in that weight/Opt AoA table posted.

I have been trying to write some advice about modding the aircraft but not sure if it is relevant or useful so it has been deleted. One thing though. I would assume that most USN aircraft get back with stores onboard to be at or near their max trap weight. That assumption may be incorrect but unused fuel and unexpended weapons are expensive so retaining as much as possible not only saves money but allows for the unexpected in case of fuel.

Not always will the aircraft be at max landing weight of course. There will always be a minimum amount of fuel though (plus whatever is hanging from the aircraft).

[neutrino]

Sludge, I'll assume the correct engine is in that weight/Opt AoA table posted.

I have been trying to write some advice about modding the aircraft but not sure if it is relevant or useful so it has been deleted. One thing though. I would assume that most USN aircraft get back with stores onboard to be at or near their max trap weight. That assumption may be incorrect but unused fuel and unexpended weapons are expensive so retaining as much as possible not only saves money but allows for the unexpected in case of fuel.

Not always will the aircraft be at max landing weight of course. There will always be a minimum amount of fuel though (plus whatever is hanging from the aircraft).

Sludge and Spaz, I think we are getting somewhere here. The answer must be whether these Hornets are landing at close to 33-34k lbs gross weight (70-80% internal fuel), in which case the speed will be in the low 140s and all seems correct. If on the other hand they are landing at 30k lbs, they must be landing at half flaps to achieve this high speed we see on the videos. With full flaps they will be below 135kts at such low weights. So as soon as I wrote my post the other day I sent a message to WR2, who is a former Hornet driver and asked him if he ever remembered landing at half flaps. However I still don't have a reply. I asked on one more place, so eventually we'll figure it out 

[SpazSinbad]

Thanks neutrino, it will be interesting to hear Hornet pilot reply. I'm wondering if the aircraft would carrier land with half flaps due to arresting gear limiting speed/weight - wear and tear on aircraft issue - but I'm only guessing. Perhaps 'half flap' is for runway landings for some reason? I'll look through NATOPS for any 'half flap' requirement issues for carrier landings. Perhaps there is a 'weight and balance' issue with different stores on different wings and asymmetric loadings requiring 'half flap' in some instances?

[neutrino]

OK guys, here is the answer I got from an active-duty F/A-18 pilot:

A 1/2 flap approach is normally reserved for single engine situations. Normal ops would be full flap. I would expect most approaches are done with less than 3000 lbs of gas. On speed should be around 133-135, plus stores weight.

[SpazSinbad]

Thanks neutrino, good to know (never had more than one engine to think about only having one in the RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk).  

[Sludge]

JR...

OK, now Im really confused.  So its full flaps and he is saying that most approaches are 3000k gas or less?  And on top of that, even if it was =/- 3k gas, you'd figure that optimum AoA is SLOWER? 

Seriously confused now.  There's just something that doesnt jive between what Ive seen on most videos, especially the first video I included when talking about this, and the NATOPS sheet and what pilots are telling us.  We are missing some "factor(s)" that are making real world Hornets get into the low 140s when on glideslope.  Did you talk to Y/T Whiskey? Or the Seven-G guy?

Later
Sludge

[neutrino]

The Seven-G guy Well, the part that they don't normally use half flaps is not confusing However, at 3000 lbs of gas (30% fuel) the Hornet weighs 28k lbs (no external load) and with full flaps the on speed is 126 kts. No problem, except I never saw such low speeds on a video. So either they land with much more gas, or they do use half flaps. Or they have about 4,000 lbs external load.

JR...

OK, now Im really confused.  So its full flaps and he is saying that most approaches are 3000k gas or less?  And on top of that, even if it was =/- 3k gas, you'd figure that optimum AoA is SLOWER?  

Seriously confused now.  There's just something that doesnt jive between what Ive seen on most videos, especially the first video I included when talking about this, and the NATOPS sheet and what pilots are telling us.  We are missing some "factor(s)" that are making real world Hornets get into the low 140s when on glideslope.  Did you talk to Y/T Whiskey? Or the Seven-G guy?

Later
Sludge

[SpazSinbad]

As mentioned earlier, my guess is that all aircraft return with maximum landing weight - or below - which includes maximum fuel and unexpended weapons (to save money and max fuel to maximise safe return etc.).

[nicka117]

Hey guys, I have a friend that I help with his golf game on occasion (I'm a golf instructor) and he has a lot of time in the hornet (also flew for the Blues). I sent him a link to this thread and asked if he had any thoughts. Here is what he had to say:

The response the guy got from the Hornet pilot is correct.  We land with full flaps behind the boat.  If you think about it, it makes sense and it makes it easier.  The slower you are behind the boat when you roll out in the groove, you have more time to make corrections to land on the boat.  We want a stable and slower aircraft to make it easier to land on the boat.  The approach speeds for aircraft like the F-5 and F-16 are a lot faster.  You should roll out wings level from your turn with about 15-17 seconds of time(if my memory serves me correct!).  Long in the groove, or more time than that, you are screwing up the pattern for the other pilots and we can't land aircraft as quickly.  You will get waived off by the LSO.
 
I have only done a couple 1/2 flap landings in my life, and I have thousands of F/A-18 landings.  The auto-flaps landing is scary, very fast and the aircraft is not as stable.  Plus, depending on the approach speed you can get close to the tire speed landing limitations on touchdown.
 
As far as approach speeds, I really didn't focus on that.  I focused on the AOA.  I did a quick cross check to make sure the airspeed and AOA correlated.  There have been faulty sensors in the past where that caused a problem, but very rare.  I don't know what aircraft(A-D) or what you have loaded on the aircraft, so hard to tell approach speeds.  The chart you have is correct.  You should be landing in the low 130's below max trap weight.  I flew the F/A-18C, so it weighed about 25,000 lbs empty.  Add fuel and stores, then you have the weight.  

[neutrino]

Hey Nick, that was a great response and I very, very helpful information! Thanks a lot for helping clear this issue out It's always great to talk to a real NAVY pilot

[Sludge]

Fellas...

Just got back from a weekend trip.  Read the last posts including the Hornet driver's inputs.  Now, what Im saying is that we are still NOT what REAL WORLD Y/T videos SHOW and what I can replicate in FSX.  IF anybody can replicate that or any other Hornet landing video put out, I will lay this to rest.

Here's my three newest pictures and why I'm still confused as to WHAT is missing between FSX and REAL WORLD, that gives them low 140s on approach and gives us mid-low 130s on approach with FULL MANUAL Flaps, and MAX TRAP WEIGHT (unrestricted), which should be 33k=139 (137 +2 [no AIM-9]) for the Alpha and 33k = 139 (137 +2 [external stores]).  Unrestricted bumps both up to 141.  I still cannot replicate that or other Y/T videos of Hornets landing.

Now to be clear, there are assumptions made.  I'm using MAX Trap Weight to assume the HIGHEST LANDING SPEED possible.  I'm also using adding +2 because the ALPHA has no 'Winders and the DELTA has external stores.  The ship is moving at 24 kts w/natural wind of 11kts, for a 35 kt WoD.  I'm using FULL, MANUAL FLAPS as I want to see what the numbers are without any mods/tweaks on my part.

As you can see from the provided pics, the ALPHA (MANUAL Flaps FULL) is 134 kts/ON-SPEED.  This is too slow as it should be 139 kts.  The second pic is the ALPHA (AUTO Flaps FULL) is slightly SLOW, and at 143 kts.  Too fast.  The third is the DELTA (MANUAL Flaps FULL) at 136 kts.  This is closer but still needs to be higher, around 139.

Later
Sludge

[Sludge]

OK...

Im getting really close with a MAX TRAP WEIGHT Delta Hornet (33.0k) and it ON-SPEED about 140 kts.  Gotta do some more testing tomorrow, but it should be ready to go with a few tweaks.

Also, another Delta Hornet at (32.3) and its TRAP STATS which are really close as well.

Later
Sludge