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

When do I turn for final in the pattern?

<< < (2/3) > >>

Razgriz:

--- Quote from: SpazSinbad on February 10, 2010, 08:27:27 pm ---Sludge, Thanks - great diagram. Did you intend to show a LOW RED BALL?!   ;D  WaveOff WaveOff WaveOff!

I'll understand how people need precision but they should adjust to fly visual approaches once they get past the 90 degree point during base turn IMHO. Over reliance on these great instruments in FSX will not lead to a good outcome as Sludge is suggesting (due to discrepancies) BUT for getting to the correct START for a carrier approach it is a good start.

Generally (not pointing to any individual on this forum) from my reading of other forums my impression is that people expect FSX carrier landings to be easy. Carrier landings require practice. Why not practice ashore doing FCLP with visual runway landings (or if you can manage to set up a runway mirror as some people seem to have done - PROJECT anyone?) then take that practice out to the FSX carrier for a better result perhaps. I'll imagine that people go to the carrier without any practice and that they become very frustrated by lack of success. Yes it is difficult but rewarding. No? Plenty of advice on this forum on the threads (often misnamed but carrier landing advice is there nevertheless).

News to me about using BRC reciprocal as downwind heading - fair enough as long as a consistent pattern is flown and then adjusted as necessary, as Sludge is suggesting. Then Practice Practice Practice.

Sludge is correct (if video is the same or similar as the TACAN video). There is no need to work out any airspeeds. Use the AoA indications for correct approach parameters (under the maximum AUW). And yes there are limitations because this is a simulator on a PC on a small screen so be patient with this aspect of it all. Happy Landings.

--- End quote ---

I have made a version of Lemoore NAS with the E-28 arresting cables, the mini FCLP runway, and the meatball with a correct 3.5 glide slope.  I'd love to distribute it for help of all you guys but the E-28 Cable and FCLP runway are made by Jim Dhaenens and he asked me not to distribute them publicly.

He did note in our e-mail exchange that his KNLC for FSX has the same markings that I have put in my Lemoore thanks to Jim.  I was unable to find his, though.  If anyone can find it, be sure to put up the download link.

Sludge:
Spaz...

No problem.  Yeah, in NATOPS and everything else written 'bout US NavAv, correct downwind is the recip. of the BRC (ship's course, not the Angled Deck).  Even the Blue Angels "OK, 3" video says this.  It even mentions the difference of FLCP's and the carrier landings, in that regard.  This wiki link has a perfect desciption, scroll down and read under "landing pattern entry".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_United_States_Navy_carrier_air_operations
Also, your point about being more visual and landing with the tried and true, "Ball, Indexer, Lineup" is taken well.  As I have the setup (saitek x52 w/separate stick and throttle) and am at the point where I understand how to fly the pattern and how to practice correctly.  The problem Ive seen is that most of the simmers (in the multiplayer sessions Ive done) are using a joystick with the throttle on the stick and havent been taught or dont grasp the concept of landing w/throttle controlling rate of descent.  Nor do they know to use the stick to keep the nose at 5 deg nose up on final and line corrections.  Hence, most virtual aviators arent comfortable yet even with basic carrier landing principles.  I'm trying to teach and change that tho, as youll read in the next paragraph.

Raz...

I know what youre saying bout practicing.  Ive been teaching some of the fellas on the multiplayer using KSFO's Rwy19L.  I let them do a side-seat ride-along as I show them how to setup the "Sludge Hornet" for FCLP's around an airport.  If you get on the multi. at all, let me know, would take you out for a test drive anytime.  Since we are "sharing" a plane, they get to see first hand how I fly the pattern at 600ft, the "abeam" call, turning 30 AoB while maintaining about 140-150 w/full flaps.  Making the "3/4 mile ball" call, then once on the final rollout and lineup, how to keep the "waterline" (wings level) at the five degrees up pitch ladder and how to control the velocity vector rate of descent using the throttle.  I havent even gotten to the PAPI's yet, cause I want to keep things basic til most of the fellas understand the landing concepts first.  However, you already seem very familiar w/FCLPs and carrier landings, so Im probly retreading some common knowledge ground for you.  If you wanna fly, PM and we can set that up.

Later
Sludge

SpazSinbad:
Sludge, as always thanks for all the info. Agree about new pilots needing to understand basic carrier flying concepts - it is not easy to do if they are not willing to make an effort to inform themselves about this new way of making an approach (compared to standard Air Force/GA reducing power and airspeed for a flared landing).

I understand about BRC and flying that downwind - if that is the USN way of doing things. As long as the pilot is consistent I go for the SOP way - whatever that is. Probably the RAN A4G used the same but we spent very little time downwind (only a 5.5 degree angle deck also) at 300 feet with a level turn until seeing the ball - then fly the ball. You could make a lower pattern with level turn yourself as a way to do something different BUT the SOP way is always good for the practice in it. Being consistent means over time subtle differences are noticed to make better corrections and on and on it goes. However I always keep in mind the limitations of the flight simulator so new pilots should not be too hard on themselves. They will get better with practice though - and I said that already. :-)

Perhaps one thing is worth repeating. Just flying any old airspeed (instead of Optimum Angle of Attack) may work depending on other factors, however it should be remembered that the OAoA has the aircraft in the correct landing attitude for that 'no flare' carrier landing. If at OAoA then the hook is in the right place to catch a wire. Any other attitude (flying on some airspeed) introduces the 'crash' scenarios and missed wire scenarios etc. Need I say that the aircraft cannot be drifting either - I see a lot of videos online with the aircraft linedup on the BRC flying down the wake with the inevitable crash (usually edited out) at the end.

Sludge:
Spaz...

Yeah, your A4G flying was lots different.  Plus, most flight simmers still fly with the HIGHLY OVERPOWERED default Hornet that cannot deploy full flaps (45 deg).  This is a major flaw that hamstrings even good virtual pilots.  I think however, that most simmers dont put the same expectations on FSX carrier landings that some of us "hardcore" flyers have.  In my few sessions, I have learned where most average simmers are coming from, and at some point, you just gotta let people fly how they want.  Plus, if they dont have a good setup (any brand separate throttle/joystick/rudder hotas), then carrier landings are that much harder.  It would be like asking me to fly a good pattern and landing with a microsoft sidewinder joystick... AINT GONNA HAPPEN.

Later
Sludge

SpazSinbad:
Hah. Funny you should mention that. I'm still using my SideWinder joystick (may be PRO? version - I forget now). Anyway have tried a few other sticks and still prefer the Winder even though it is a bit wonky today with that STOOPID twist rudder thingo - I should disable that but work around it mostly - then forget. All the problems have become transparent after all these years but probably an older joystick from Thrustmaster would help (decades ago my new one lasted all of a few weeks so i gave up on it).

Don't be mistaken about the A4G. It used the same carrier landing principles. Nothing has changed for most Navy jets (except all have flying differences of course and either single or twin engined). Later I'm told the A4G circuit was raised (perhaps to 500 feet). Anyway if one practises ashore in a certain way and takes that to the carrier then it makes no difference what the parameters are for any aircraft type. As long as one is consistent to then learn about the small errors. Otherwise by changing around the parameters too much the variables are too large to learn anything from the small errors. Carrier flying is all about minimising even the small errors and you have to see them to do that. The A4G used the level base turn because older pilots from the Sea Venom era did that apparently. Think about it. Descending while turning looking for the mirror might be problematic. Keeping the turn level until seeing the mirror was very useful. Lower circuit altitude allowed low cloud base returns also. Also lower altitude helped keep the circuit tight with a short approach - rather than tending to longer.

YET use the Hornet SOP way of doing things. It is there after years of fine tuning if required and to provide the framework for the perfect carrier landing.

You may think I'm being picky when criticising other landing videos for example; but in real world you oughtta hear the LSO! :-)

The 'fixes' to Hornet 'problems' are essential as Sludge points out. However I don't agree about letting people fly how they like. Of course they can do that but then they can be easily ignored if they complain 'that things don't work'. The Hornet pilot has to make things work by flying using the proper carrier technique as has been explained now many times on this and other forums. And remember the pilot flies the Hornet - the Hornet does not fly the pilot.   ::)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page