General Category > Unofficial F/A-18 Acceleration Pack board
Carrier Landings
SUBS17:
--- Quote from: Great Ozzie on January 29, 2008, 05:01:13 am ---SUBS17
"Onspeed AOA is approximately 136kts KCAS at 44,000lbs gross weight (max trap). Subtract 1 1/2 KCAS for each 1,000lb decrease in gross weight." (NATOPS flight manual for F/A-18E/F) so 126kts sounds correct for about a gross weight of 38,000lbs.
As per the F/A-18A/B/C/D NATOPS pocket checklist (01NOV04) for the given landing configuration I posted above, 126kts is the correct speed. Fwiw, the chart shows Approach Speeds (given above config.) which vary from 119kts @ 24,000lbs GW to 151kts @ 39,000lbs GW. (this includes a +2kt allowance as the wingtip AIM-9s are off ;) ).
From my FSX point of view:
I do not "like" approaching at this speed (126kts). As I said before, I like to come out of my downwind turn at 135kts, then "fine tune" this speed based on the AOA indexer. With the reduced fuel loads I have been using, this means in the ballpark of 130 kts.
You certainly won't crash at 126kts (as per your post on the 17th) and sink rate won't be too high (descent rate actually HAS to be lower if you're staying on glidepath). AOA @ 126 kts (less than 2000 lbs. fuel) I noted to be about 8.8 degrees which reads "Slightly Slow" on the AOA Indexer and trapping at that speed will by no means put the tail in jeopardy of scrapping the flight deck.
Rob O.
--- End quote ---
As far as all the sources I've seen mentioned 136kts of course it doesn't mention the configuration which maybe including missiles. The reason why I mentioned 126kts as being the approach speed for the super hornet is because it was mentioned that its approach speed is 10kts slower than the A and C models. No as for 126kts in FSX I've found that the FBW ain't behaving like FBW I'm having to trim constantly which it shouldn't if the FBW were modeled correctly 126kts would probably be easier to use as it is I don't use it as I find the AoA to high for a safe landing.
SUBS17:
--- Quote from: Great Ozzie on January 29, 2008, 09:32:44 am ---Hey Randy,
Man go out of the pattern at say 3000' (Severe Clear Wx theme) with just a couple thousand lbs. of fuel then...
Practice flying a pattern at different configurations. You can start with say, the landing configuration (gear/full flaps/tailhook down). Climb, say, 1000' at 150kts while doing a Level 180 turn. Turn again 180 degrees while decelerating to 130kts. Then set up at 130 kts (or "Onspeed" in the AOA Indexer... your choice) a descent at 500 to 600fpm. This is how I taught my "real" flight students... I mean in the civilian world. And to me, the principles are very much the same (Real World compared to FSX). I mean whenever I checked out in a new type or make/model, I didn’t want to stay in the pattern. I wanted to go out for an hour or so doing the so called “four-fundamentals” (climbs, turns, descents and level flight) at the various airspeeds I would be using. This way when I got back to the traffic pattern, I could focus on landing, not on how to fly this new plane.
The big thing you need to note here is: your power setting in each phase of flight and how the controls feel to you (meaning amount of control movement, trim input etc...). Do that above practice enough so that you can do this "in your sleep" (i.e. you don't have to think about it... you just do it). You make the pitch/power change for the new performance you want (say going from level 130kt flight to Onspeed 500fpm descent): once accomplished (listening to the engine pitch) you continue scanning, and in a few moments when your scan brings you back to the power setting (for me the %N2 in the EFD) you might be like... “Let me tweak that One %”. Or you look at the AOA Indexer... “My pitch needs a slight decrease to get that Onspeed indication...”
Now when you come back to the Carrier Practice mission, the pitch/power settings for the traffic pattern will be caged in your head. Then when you are on final and the AOA Indexer looks more like the blinking lights from last season's Christmas tree, you can be like, "I know my power is about right to give me (e.g.) a 600'fpm descent; and my pitch too, because at this weight I should have roughly such and such kts." Then you can use the bulk of your brain's CPU focusing on the meatball and flight deck alignment, making the tiny corrections you need to stay aligned with the Carrier and on Glidepath.
Let me sum up (phew!) with the ol'
Pitch + Power = Performance
Airspeed (Pitch) + % N2 = Level/Climbing/Descending for a given Configuration (Gear, Flaps, Weight... etc)
(And NO NO NO we are not going to discuss pitching to FPM and Power for Airspeed! This is enough :-P)
Seriously, you will be amazed how much easier it is when you know what power settings to use for a given phase of Flight. You will see!
Rob O.
--- End quote ---
Nope this ain't how I do it i don't worry about any of the above, for me its fly from the seat of your pants and watch the meatball. At the approach point paddles contact line up on the carrier apply lead to compensate the angle apply power and speed 140kts. As for N2 etc only really applys in a sim if you've got a really good throttle.
Great Ozzie:
Well SUBS,
You can't possibly be flying "by the seat of your pants" (it's a romantic notion tho) because you would need to simulate the forces acting on your body that cause your butt to slide around in the seat from not using enough or too much rudder. And in today's "modern" civilian trainers, that sliding is nearly negligible in standard rate turns... so much so that the student normally requires prompting to keep the ball centered.
If your allusion "by the seat of your pants" means you just go up there and stick some power setting in and drive it to the deck (and by some small miracle you manage to slam it on the flight deck an "walk away")... then sure I understand that. But I don't possibly see how you are flying a stabilized pattern/approach to landing and trapping on every approach. Maybe you are one of the lucky ones and can do that w/o thinking or knowing why you do what you do... you just do it (but I think that is Top Gun fantasy).
I prefer (on the Clear Wx theme) to keep airspeed within +/- 3 kts and altitude +/- 50ft of my "self-assigned" altitude (those are the tolerances I set for myself). I work at that, and when I get better I'll tighten those up too.
Like you said... it's a flight sim and one can fly however. My post to Randy was to give a "real world" practice method that can be used in FSX to aid in learning to fly precisely, hence making these traps "a walk in the park". ;-)
>N2 only applies in a sim with a really good throttle. ???
C’mon. I use an Xbox 360 controller and it works just fine! I easily get 1% increments and usually a half % if I am careful with the settings I use. I’d use my Cougar HOTAS, but alas, no XP Pro x64 drivers that I am aware of (maybe I try it if Thrustmaster releases drivers for x64 Vista… is possible they might work in x64 XP).
Besides… you have to set power according to something! (whether fan or compressor speed) If you are just ball parking it based on speed… I can only see this leading to a lot of throttle jockeying on approach and imprecise flying.
Btw thanks for that about the FPAS... I blew off that page (as I never tried using it in flight) and did those calcs in my head. Not anymore :-D
Rob O.
SUBS17:
Well I think first things first its always good to show people what not to do:
Landing should look something like this:
This does not class as a landing either
And high speed high decent rate can equal
A mess ;D
SUBS17:
Its also not good getting your feet wet either:
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version