Carrier Landings

[Great Ozzie]

I'm sorry SUBS... I know a picture is worth a thousand words... but I need a little more info here as what I see is:

Rate of decent from just outside 3/4 mile to just inside that is from ~1200 to ~1500 fpm!  I mean even at the first pics airspeed of 154kts, rate of descent should be "roughly" GS*6, so that would be like what... 120*6 = -720fpm (Groundspeed on the Cat is 36kts, so ~mid-150s – 36kts = ~120kts). I mean even at your speed of 154kts with no wind/carrier dead in the water, would be roughly -925fpm!

(I wish I could be a little more accurate here on the numbers but, my Hp15C calc is down so can't do polar to rectangular conversions and vice versa. :-P  Oh yes I could probably find a website that can do this but :-PPP  GS*6 should be fairly close for a 3 degree glideslope... yes I reckon on carriers that 3.5 degrees is standard but I don't know what the actual one here is and I don't know how the carrier's movement effects the "true" glideslope... does it decrease it?... someone?  This is why I wanted to be a Navy Pilot btw!!!)

And your AOA man... for the love of Pete... is as high as 10.9 degrees at 145 kts to 9.8 just prior to you being over the fantail (now at 133kts?)  Talk about risking grinding your nozzles off!  I think the alarm will sound off at 14 degrees (not sure tho... lol... inaccurate info better than none at all!).  I think I understand why you think 126kts is too slow… it appears you are transitioning from high speeds to lower ones and attempting to arrest your rate of descent…. Just like I would see the Marine CH-53 pilots do in their landing flare.  Your resulting AOA gets very high.

And your Max G...  Please tell me you didn't pull 5.7g in the pattern.

Speedbrakes! In the pattern!! Oy vey!

When I attempt Landing with Full fuel (the Practice Mission altered to Fair Wx theme) I HAVE to fly ~155kts to get an “Onspeed” indication (mid-7s in degrees for AOA).  And with ~78%N2 I can maintain the 700fpm+ descent rate needed to stay on glideslope.  This is with full flaps btw.  And I did drive it to the deck this way w/o crashing.  I mean you can do this sure… but I think one is flirtin’ with disaster… especially when you go into flying rougher weather.  Man the sound of the cable release after arrest sure seems to agree with that!

And one more thing sir... I am having trouble reconciling the collapsed nose gear of the Caravan with "Success!"  True... any landing you walk away from is a "good one" but... hmmm.....  I am very hmmm…. Just what is going on there?

Rob O.

[SUBS17]

Rob you crack me up dude the main reason for the hairy landings is of course I'm using Fraps at the same time which lowers my FPS a fair bit. (And I'm always pushing the record button)When FighterOps is released I intend to get a new PC and hopefully then you'll see better movies. As for the 5.7g well ya know I do fly with an online Squadron and we do mainly combat so for someone who flys in an enviroment where there are alot of missiles involved circuits/landings are quick no-nonsense type approach.  Of course in Squadron/War missions I tend to fly with more precision you're welcome to come for a flight with us sometime with Open Falcon or F4AF and judge my flying for yourself than just by a couple of videos and screenshots. BTW the SU25T crashes was me trying to land without a hook, in both videos the carrier was moving one was using aicarrier in the Hauraki Gulf and the other was the stock Carrier practice mission. As for the Cessna Caravan landing that is a stock FSX mission where you're supposed to fly a celebrity but on the way you have engine problems. That landing was gliding onto a moving carrier so if ya think a Hornet with working engines is hard try it in a caravan without engines. And yes the wires did snap the nose wheel off. The alternative to that mission is to restart the engine after fixing the problem.

-load out full fuel tanks
- realism 100%

I also have to say the guys did a great job with this Hornet and the fuel dumping/carrierOps and other features rock I hope one day they can add more to it and make the carrier MP compatible.

[SUBS17]

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.

I think you'll find its not necessarily the wings being level thats the issue its the rate of descent, if you come down too hard on one wheel it'll roll. Also you can't in FS abuse the plane too much in the Carrier Practice mission otherwise you'll damage something which in one attempt caused a crash on takeoff. as for the fuel I can get away with full tanks for some reason the first couple of landings are a little hairy though but the last couple are very easy. On the other hand if you dump fuel you are limited to how many bolters you can do and if you get too low on gas you may have to go off and top up with the tanker before making another attempt. You're probably better off dumping gas as you've been doing until you do enough landings to get better with a bit more weight. Also notice how I'm sort of pulling the nose back a little to bleed off both speed and desent prior to touching the deck.

Just for a laugh, I know its OT being an EH101 video and all check this out.

I invented a new game how far can you throw a humvee.

[SUBS17]

I am with you on this.  I wonder how many people fly full realistic with crash detection vs not in those videos.  My landing always do a nose dive and roll right in to the deck regardless of how perfect the approach was.  I did notice if I use the ailerons to correct the roll after I hit the deck, in some cases it helped keep the plane from fully rolling over.  It also makes a diference if I land with a lower gross weight as expected.  I still think the carrier landing is screwed up...I want to confirm this with a real f-18 pilot in which I may ping here real shortly.

Well, I wasn't a Hornet guy but I did my time in Tomcats (yep, that's me on the LSO platform). I've gotta say that the carrier ops are pretty accurate. As I said before, it just sounds like some of you aren't flying a good approach. People are coming in low, hot, and heavy. Every video that I've seen shows people WAY low. Fly the ball and you won't go wrong.

Have you ever checked out any of the older Tomcat sims like Fleet defender and Topgun Fire at will? It was sad to see the last Tomcats on a carier on video a while back I think its about time someone made a Tomcat sim. Think I'd take a Tomcat sim over a Hornet sim anytime.

[Great Ozzie]

Ok SUBS thanks for reminding me about that deviation in the Catalina Day Spa mission...

Yes, I agree, is no simple thing to land engine out anywhere especially on a moving runway.

When I did that mission, I didn't even consider landing on the carrier (for more than one reason). I did a quick and dirty mental checklist for that problem and got a quick restart (this is something you practice for IRL and I've actually had a similar event occur once in a Saratoga).

I am surprised the arrestor wires would cause a collapse of the nose gear (although thanks for the tip, as I did avoid them when I landed on the carrier tonite).  And the multiple warnings to stay away were cool!  Absolutely no way I would attempt this IRL if presented with this dilemma... what with the current state we are in along with past incidents like the USS Cole.  I can just hear the guys in the CIC saying, "wow a chance to test the CIWS."   Very cool to try this in FSX.

I actually ran across a set of arresting wires at Terre Haute (HUF) in a Piper Warrior (I won't say who it belonged to!) when I was a knuckle-headed student pilot.  Dang what a racket!  Live and learn (if you live).  :-S

I know what you mean about Fraps... I have read that if you can record to a separate drive, that will lessen the FPS hit.  And yes I got to get the full version if I am going to do any more recording... 30 sec runs always seem to stop at the wrong time.

Btw, am too shy right now to fly online but maybe sometime. :-P

Rob O.

[micro]

Have you ever checked out any of the older Tomcat sims like Fleet defender and Topgun Fire at will? It was sad to see the last Tomcats on a carier on video a while back I think its about time someone made a Tomcat sim. Think I'd take a Tomcat sim over a Hornet sim anytime.

No, I was never really into sims until recently. I mostly used FSX as a procedural trainier for checkrides and evals at my current job. Then one day I saw Acceleration and bought it for the Reno races. I assumed that the carrier ops would be fairly unrealistic. When I tried it out, I was shocked. Not sure if I mentioned this before, but the carrier in Acceleration is identical to the one that was in the F-14D sim at Miramar (ie, look, lighting, putting your nose wheel in the box to get hooked up to the cat, etc).

It is sad to see the cat go, but it was a sledge hammer being used as a fly swatter. It was designed around the Phoenix to shoot Soviet bombers a hundred miles out. And while it adapted to other roles VERY well, the original intent was never used and not one Phoenix was ever fired in combat.

I would love to see a Tomcat sim of the same league as acceleration. Let's start a petition .

[SUBS17]

Petiton already started although I have to point out yes the Aim54 has been used successfully in combat. But it wasn't the US Navy who earned those stats.
http://www.fighterops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7010
The reason why its a locked thread is the same request keeps popping up from time to time F-14s very popular. I have to agree on the realism BTW with the carrierops its far better than previous sims. The only one better was Super Hornet which had animated ground crew.

[micro]

I have to point out yes the Aim54 has been used successfully in combat.

Elaborate, please.

[SUBS17]

The Iranians used them quite a few times in the Iran/Iraq war and even shot down fighters with them I think the closest range one was fired was 6Nm.
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_211.shtml

I've heard a few stories about it quite a big fight between Iran and Iraq theres a few books about it as well.

[micro]

My misunderstanding. I was refering to why the US got rid of the Tomcat.

[SUBS17]

I think the reason for that was mainly political and the Superbug does not carry the same performance as the cat. Although it does have alot of impressive features I think they would have been better off getting a newer version of the Tomcat with maybe stealth and all the other gadets they have now added to it.

[SUBS17]

Check out this landing, with one engine.

&feature=related
And then theres always the C130
http://nzff.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=5796

[SUBS17]

Another mission success Yeah I know its OT a little.



Bit of refuelling prior to another circuit.