General Category > Unofficial F/A-18 Acceleration Pack board

f-18 hud waterline

<< < (11/13) > >>

SUBS17:

--- Quote from: Doum76 on September 17, 2009, 11:36:32 pm ---


But do not take a lok at my Aerosoft F-16 second landing. it's a pain to master for me as well.


--- End quote ---

Nice landing but to land the F-16 you need to do 2 things 1st is to flare until the FPM is at the far end of the runway at 100ft and 2nd thing is once on the ground pull back on the stick to place the guncross on the 10degree pitch line to aero brake the aircraft until at least the nose drops about 100kts and then engage NWS about 70kts. You can rapidly deccelerate by combining airbrakes, aerobrake and wheel brakes but IRL if you just use wheel brakes and speed brake to stop you risk burning the brakes out. Not sure if this stuff is modelled in this addon or not. BTW I wonder if departure is modeled you could give that MPO switch a try(overide) 8)

Doum76:

--- Quote from: SpazSinbad on September 18, 2009, 01:17:00 am ---To me it is interesting that there is a lot of enthusiasm to fix the 'bugs' in the HORNET FSX and also to do better carrier landings. I think Doum76 does very well on both counts.  ;D


--- End quote ---
The Hornet ain't really bug, just need more reallistic touch ups, but that only few freaks like us care, i gotta admit i love the Hornet, that's what made me get into all this, graphicly stil impressive. But more reallistic addons sure is welcomes. BTW leads me to ask this questions, as for flight dynamic, how the Hornet is handled etc.. is it a bit close to how the Real Hornet reacts?

or the carrier landings, i did tried to get better, but as always my line ups for some reason are my major problem, either on carrier or land, and since the new HUD, i'm having a hard tieme doing carrier landings, trying to figure out what affects this.... For Lands, i'm getting better but it's kinda cheaping now with the E Bracket, Tapdole and Vertical Velocity Vector, makes all easier on land, as for carrier, still wil ned to get back to that, since i'm done with the file fooling around for now.  ;)

I'm pretty sure if i would had been a character in TopGun movie i wouldn't had been Goose, but GooseBumps, for all the shivers i would give people on carrier when landing.  ::)

Doum76:

--- Quote from: SUBS17 on September 16, 2009, 08:09:47 pm ---Nose Wheel steering Lo and Hi modes, with Lo it moves like a normal NWS for an aircraft in Hi mode it will turn well beyond the normal limits to allow the hornet to manouvre on the deck of the carrier.

--- End quote ---

Only things i'Ve found so far is inside the «...Microsoft Flight Simulator X/SimObjects/Airplanes/FA-18/Panel/FA18_HUD_VC/FA18_HUD_VC.xml»

There is a section with NWS, but hw we can set it up on and off no idea, how it affects the wheel no idea, all it says it's how it's been triggered.

If i understand right, NWS is triggered by: Wheel on ground, Gear down, center wheel rpm reaches 100 knots.
NWS HI:  onon ground, Gear down, GROUND VELOCITY (Knots) reaches 15

But might only be to make the text appear on the HUD and does nothing else.

Doum76:

--- Quote from: SUBS17 on September 18, 2009, 09:23:34 am ---
Nice landing but to land the F-16 you need to do 2 things 1st is to flare until the FPM is at the far end of the runway at 100ft and 2nd thing is once on the ground pull back on the stick to place the guncross on the 10degree pitch line to aero brake the aircraft until at least the nose drops about 100kts and then engage NWS about 70kts. You can rapidly deccelerate by combining airbrakes, aerobrake and wheel brakes but IRL if you just use wheel brakes and speed brake to stop you risk burning the brakes out. Not sure if this stuff is modelled in this addon or not. BTW I wonder if departure is modeled you could give that MPO switch a try(overide) 8)

--- End quote ---

For the NWS not sure if it's moddled, i'll have tor ead some aprt of themanual again, but i don't rememebr seing anything about it, on the other hand, keeping the nose up on landing to aero brake until reaching about 80 knots, that i remember reading it, but, was it on a forum or manual, i try to do it, but i let stick go too fast. But for the procedure about the FPM up to the end pf runway is sure of an help.

Only problem, i don't know if it's like that for real F-16 or the model (getting answers on their forum seems as tough as to get a picture taken with Humpty Dumpty) but getting the optimum  donut with AoA Bracket and ILS bars still visible  on a decent Rate of descent is pretty tough to achieve, the Bracket and ILS bars tend to go away bellow the HUD and when little thrust is add to make them appear back or have a decent rate of descend, the donuts change easily to show your too fast, the donut might lack accuracy, i  know the optimum angle is 13 deg, but can't remember the min that will get the donut to fadein a too fast chevron.

Another stupid questions, while looking at the replays, i'Ve realised that the little fin underneath the fuselage, between the nozle and the back landing gears (same fin there is on both outtake fuselage on the Tomcat) seems to be a lvl showing the right AoA, the nozle, the fine line and the back landing gears seems to get lvl line when optimum angle is obtain, what really is those little fin?

SpazSinbad:
Doum76, probably only a Hornet pilot can comment on the flying characteristics of the model in FSX. I would presume someone has given it the OK (OK for sim) where there have been many compromises. Worrying about how realistic the sim is is not worthwhile if there is nothing to compare it too. Certainly the Hornet does not fly like a 747. In older FlightSims often the homemade military jets were made to fly like the Lear Jet. OK for some but not realistic. FSX Hornet is not a Lear Jet.

As for line up on the carrier. Draw a diagram. Have a look at the several diagrams in this forum. The angle deck is approximately ten degrees different to the axial heading of the ship. I could give numbers for how much offset this will mean when you are 1.5 Nm from touchdown on the carrier but I know you can work it out also.

When you catapult you can note the catapult heading then turn down wind at 30 degree angle of bank to the reciprocal heading and then add ten degrees more to port to be downwind for the angle deck. Do you follow? OR you can go downwind on the reciprical catapult heading but when you turn base you should turn at a lesser angle of bank, at say 27 degrees? Why? Because if you go downwind on reciprocal heading to catapult (axial deck hdg) then steadily you will be ten degrees off to stbd flying away from the carrier, rather than directly parallel to the angle deck. All this does not matter a lot if you fly downwind close to the correct distance from the ship (whatever that is - once again look at the NATOPS carrier circuit diagrams in this forum).

Even though a former Hornet pilot says to turn on the instruments, he would not be doing that as though he is instrument flying (in cloud). He would be referring to the instruments more often than usual but doing visual flying; whilst keeping an excellent lookout and also looking at the carrier to get feedback about position to turn base at correct distance downwind etc. He will be looking at the ship during the turn but also doing the turn by the book so to speak - so that the aircraft is close to ideal position when rolling wings level 'at the start', lining up correctly, having crossed the wake by a sufficient amount. This is why you need to make your own diagram, to get clear in your mind how much offset that is. Draw a straight line down the angle deck to approx. 1.5NM and measure the distance at that point to a similar distance but straight down the axial deck. It is quite a significant lateral difference - no?

Anyway all this takes practice. There is no other way. No magical formula except 'meatball, line up and airspeed' - "glideslope, line up and Optimum Angle of Attack". Personally I like to keep it simple. As mentioned before I find the HUD distracting. To me it is only good for altitude and heading information. Otherwise the rest of the wobbly bits are ignored. When 'at the start' all is ignored except mentioned because the AoA is to the left of the HUD, while I can see the line up and the mirror in front. This is when the left metal support bracket for the HUD gets in the way, if you are lined up correctly. Anyway that support bracket can be made transparent perhaps?   ;D  This is where a Full Screen HUD with room for the AoA indexer to be in view would be very handy; but of course the metal bracket would still be there; but perhaps less intrusive, depending on whatever.

I'll repeat. Landing this aircraft on a runway is easy compared to landing on a carrier. OK? There are many sim limitations to how a carrier landing can be achieved. To me the worst drawback is that the mirror and other ship cues such as lineup, cannot be seen at a sufficient distance; so too much guesswork is required at the start. For similar reasons experienced carrier pilots start their wings level approach much closer to the ship. Why? Because things are clearer up close and the less time in the groove means less time to make mistakes. So I'm told.  ;D  Several real online HUD Hornet videos have a very short finals from base turn but this is not showing off - this is realistic. Of course the finals can be too short and if so the LSO will wave you off.

Practice practice practice. Practicing FCLP is good for getting some aspects such as lineup correct from a good base turn position. However ensure that the wind is straight down the runway for FCLP. That is another smaller factor for carrier circuits (wind is down angle deck) and remember that if the carrier is moving then the centreline is moving to the right away from you all the time. 'Nibble' to the right to keep correct lineup - this is unavoidable. Always be in the perfect position and if not then get back to it pronto. There is no drifting to be lined up at touch down or some other method. Be perfect as you can be - all the way.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page