General Category > Unofficial F/A-18 Acceleration Pack board
F-18 carrier brake problems
SpazSinbad:
Hanimichal, thanks for a great video. I like the HUD in a separate view. I'll have to get to use that. Your approaches (as seen on Optimum AoA) should work OK - without sacrificing the nosewheel - as you are suggesting? How were you going before making the 'nosewheel sacrifice' modification?
Hanimichal:
--- Quote from: SpazSinbad on May 03, 2009, 04:58:15 am ---Hanimichal, thanks for a great video. I like the HUD in a separate view. I'll have to get to use that. Your approaches (as seen on Optimum AoA) should work OK - without sacrificing the nosewheel - as you are suggesting? How were you going before making the 'nosewheel sacrifice' modification?
--- End quote ---
I went like this ;D
SpazSinbad:
Hanimichal, Thanks for the great video. Watching full screen in high quality mode I could see several details but not all. For example most of your landings were slow (with slow chevron). This means (amongst other things) your nose is too high compared to the Optimum Angle of Attack landing attitude. This will mean that the nose will fall through a much bigger arc to the deck (causing nosewheel to break?).
Another thing: It is difficult to see accurate airspeed from the HUD to gauge your All Up Weight (AUW). What is it or what is the fuel onboard when landing? If you are above the maximum carrier landing AUW you will crash no matter what. Either the U/C will break (too much weight) or the too high airspeed will break stuff (arrestor gear). Being too slow in this condition makes the effect worse (see previous paragraph).
On one landing I saw a slow chevron with the ball coming down from a high with 'drop nose to land'. This is a classic carrier crash scenario. Overall they look like good approaches but with any parameter NOT correct you will have a problem landing. This is the nature of carrier landings. Everything has to be spot on. There is little margin for error especially if you have the realism settings set at HIGH etc.
You may think I am being 'too picky' for commenting on the landings but this is the way an LSO will look at them in the real world - the comments are meant to help you get back to the 'perfect pass'. Overall they look like very good carrier landings but the detail can get you every time. For example one pass is slightly left of centreline coming back to the right but with the aircraft lined up on the axial deck, another crashworthy scenario.
My recommendation would be to use the realism set in the middle and fly your good approaches well below the maximum AUW/fuel onboard and fly accurately without the last second 'drop nose to land'. Otherwise this is known as 'deck spotting'. By this I mean a pilot can fly the ball but at the last second stop looking at the ball to look at the deck. The aircraft will appear to be TOO HIGH so the pilot reduces power and drops nose to land - bad. However if you can see the ball well which you are doing obviously then keep that going all the way to touchdown. Deck spotting is fatal.
With Optimum angle of attack the airspeed for the AUW is giving the accurate airspeed and aircraft attitude for touchdown / arrest. Keeping accurate lineup without drift is important also. I'm sure you will be able to do good landings from what I have seen in the video. Great videos and thanks for posting them.
Remember to anticipate all control inputs. Making a large correction close to touchdown is not a good idea.
Razgriz:
Watch in HD
That's exactly how I'd land on a carrier, and it works perfectly fine for me.
SpazSinbad:
Razgriz, I guess I'll have to make some carrier landing videos soon. ;D At moment I'm working on making an A4G Skyhawk PDF to upload to a free download website. Because it is large the 'file resaving process' takes 10-15 minutes so I surf the web waiting for the endless resave to finish (can't work on anything much due to process also taking over computer but surfing OK in tandem).
Looking at your landings on a field is not the same as carrier landings. Why? There is no meatball to follow for glideslope with your eyeball not perhaps being accurate for what it might look like. For example with a small 'FCLP' runway (being short) there is an illusion about glideslope information to the pilot compared to looking at a conventional length runway. I think I posted info from online about this in another thread but I'll repost the URL here: http://aeromedical.org/Articles/a&l.html
Even though your HD video is good value it is not set up like the marvellous video(s) supplied by Hanimichal for the carrier landings. I'm impressed by that setup and will have to try to improve on it (soon). The carrier landings shown must be more precise than field landings - no question.
Without the hook down in the field landings the AoA indexer is more or less unusable. The long delay during the blinking AoA shown will kill anyone for a carrier landing (with hook up). I do my FCLP with hook down. I wish there was a way to stop the blinking AoA indexer for 'hook up' FCLP.
In effect the field landings shown are in no way like a carrier landing for reasons described. Going on the engine sounds can be misleading but just looking at the videos for the 'flared' landings on the runway it looks to me like you are doing such landings. However I acknowledge that looking at what is shown can be misleading so don't jump on me. That is the problem doing FCLP without a mirror.
When I do FCLP at NAS Nowra there is a VASI (I think that is what it is but may have misnamed it). I use it as a guide with all four red lights showing (for the particular approach to Runway 26 at NAS Nowra). So when one yellow light shows I know I am high. How do I know I'm low? Good question. The runways at Nowra are very bumpy (big ups and downs) so when you see my FCLP videos (just rough ones for the sake of making a video - not to show a perfect FCLP pass - why? because there is no mirror) at FileFront you will understand why they appear that way. There are a lot of test Goshawk videos there also. It is a great aircraft (freeware) to learn how to use the AoA indexer in a strong wind down the runway for FCLP.
There are also test videos for an A4K KAHU Skyhawk (with a terrific see through HUD) under development by some Kiwis. Use the "Download NOW" yellow text button to get the .WMV version rather than any lesser quality .FLV version (processed by FileFront).
http://hosted.filefront.com/SpazSinbad/2366980
&
http://hosted.filefront.com/SpazSinbad/2116553
There are lot of various test videos in these folders but none are for carrier landings. Why? Because the testing is for the aircraft concerned and not for carrier landings. One day I'll get around to setting up properly for making videos in that environment. Some of the landings are hilarious because the airfield at Nowra is on a tabletop so that an approach can be made 'under' the runway 26 up a gully (which causes an horrific downdraught in strong westerly winds). My A4G PDFs explain it all. :-)
http://files.filefront.com/1GB+A4G+ONLY+15apr09pdf/;13602748;/fileinfo.html (1GB PDF)
I might add that in FSX it is difficult to carrier land for various reasons to do with the artificial restrictions imposed by the simulator itself (with the size of any computer screen not being large enough for the task). Field landings are always going to be easier because long large runways are easier to see at a distance compared to a very small carrier deck. I'll post a series of pics soon from a USN real carrier approach so that the 'deck spotters' can see (from a distance) how to get setup so that when closer they can see the mirror but be well setup to land. That is the problem - getting a good start for a good landing using the mirror with all parameters, 'meatball' (approach angle to deck), lineup and airspeed (optimum angle of attack at lower than maximum carrier landing all up weight) being correct.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version