General Category > Unofficial F/A-18 Acceleration Pack board
Sludge Hornet Modifications
SpazSinbad:
Sludge, I take it that you take it that criticism for Trent was not personal. I tried to generalise using his video as an example. The video was saved in .MP4 format which is usually the highest quality, being small made details more difficult to see. I guess in a backhanded way I was hankering after a NEW HUD seethrough that would show better detail probably. Anyway that was not the point as I concentrated on the basics only - meatball, lineup and airspeed.
Possibly the different downwind methods may be due to different NATOPS advice either in text or in the carrier pattern or FCLP graphics for Hornet / Super Hornet (I have not checked this yet). This is why it is nice to have one aircraft type on forum but I can live with any minor differences. My thinking is that it makes sense to be trimmed at Opt AoA downwind - ready to land - because that is one less thing to worry about turning base & flying the ball, although minor retrimming is needed due to power down for slight descent. Some pilots fly with slight out of vertical trim condition claiming that it is better to be fighting either a nose up or nose down trim condition which in an A-4 means something perhaps. Don't know about other aircraft though nowadays with flybywire probably OK to be completely trimmed.
Flying at a set speed downwind (150?) may be dangerous if the aircraft is heavy. Early A-4s did not have an AoA indexer using a set speed (probably plus/minus a few knots) which got their delta wing during base turn into trouble losing some stalling into the ocean, especially when heavy. There was a 'DUH moment' when this was realised with the AoA indexer and Optimum AoA being used instead, not being sure at moment if this was entirely due to Early A-4 &/or the other USN aircraft at that time. Anyway Opt AoA proved to be the winner it is today.
The other day the 4.4GB PDF about A4Gs was uploaded in smaller segments with the front part at 1GB having all the info about 'how to deck land' (plus bits about NAS Nowra and stuff). I was thinking to make a 'how to carrier land' PDF out of the material but it is not / will not be specifically for that purpose here as such because it is only background info for those not familiar with NavAv, to help explain what they see the A4G doing in the PDF embedded videos. Probably too much info but it interests me anyway. Below is the FCLP advice for the Hornet from NATOPS with text describing 'how to' with more NATOPS to follow. Now with Hornet NATOPS carrier landing circuit diagram included below.
SpazSinbad:
Interestingly here is the advice from the VRS SuperBug Manual (freely available via download): (13.7Mb)
http://www.vrsimulations.com/documentation/VRS_SuperbugXV2.zip
"...Pattern Entry
"A normal break is performed by executing a level turn to downwind with the throttles reduced to IDLE and the speedbrake function enabled (if required to reduce airspeed).
[ ] Speedbrake EXTEND (if required)
[ ] Airspeed 250 KCAS
[ ] FLAP switch FULL
[ ] LANDING GEAR lever DOWN
Downwind leg -
The desired abeam distance is 1.1 to 1.4 nm. The g-level required to achieve the desired abeam distance will be a fallout of break airspeed.
Trim the aircraft hands-off and on-speed. Compare airspeed and AOA.
Onspeed AOA is approximately 136 KCAS at 44,000 lb gross weight (max trap). Subtract (add) 1½ KCAS for each 1,000 lb decrease (increase) in gross weight. Complete the landing checklist. When wings level on downwind, descend to pattern altitude (600 ft AGL for the low pattern). Ensure the ground track pointer is on the exact reciprocal of runway heading.
To assist in achieving the desired abeam distance of 1.1 to 1.4 nm, select the 10 nm scale on the HSI display. Select ship’s TCN and adjust the course line to the BRC. On downwind fly to place the wingtip of the HSI airplane symbol on the course line. Ensure the ground track pointer
is on the exact reciprocal of the BRC. Select ILS if desired and available.
[ ] Altitude 600 FT (RALT)
[ ] LDG checklist (CHK page) COMPLETE
[ ] Airspeed ON SPEED
[ ] ILS TUNED/ON (if desired)
[ ] TCN steering TUNED/ON (if desired)
[ ] ATC ENGAGE (if desired)
Approach auto throttle (ATC) may be engaged if desired. Approach autothrottle, available in PA mode, will attempt to capture and maintain proper landing AoA (8.1°) regardless of GW or attitude.
WARNING
Approach auto throttle is not designed to operate in aggressive maneuvering flight. Aggressive attitude changes cannot be countered quickly enough for predictable and consistent speed adjustments."
The manual then goes on to describe a 'velocity vector' approach without reference to the basic 'meatball, line up and airspeed' method. One may not agree with basic approach method but it does get you there better IMHO. However I cannot comment because I don't have/use the Bug of Much Superness. ;D
Even though is babble about using the VelocityVector there is good info about AoA in same PDF as shown here below.
Sludge:
Spaz...
Oh yeah, definately not personal. I just meant you jumped right into it with some gusto, which is what I was hoping. No worries about the video though, I was asking if it was that bad for you. I agree I dont care for that HUD (too overdone, thick lines) either and the cockpit is setup for the wrong default eyepoint, as if its done from a child sitting in the seat looking up. The HUD glass damn near touches the top bow of the canopy frame. Thats a common problem, as even the default and Sludge Hornets are too low in their eyepoints. If we can ever get a collimated HUD, this error will get fixed. And I'm still trying to get that accomplished.
And basically, I just wanted your take on flying most of the pattern on-AoA, since Ive heard both sides of the argument. I know it can be done both ways in FSX using the Sludge Hornet, but I fly the on-AoA method from establishing on the downwind to the wires. I think Ill keep doing that. Also, another good pull from VRS site, that basically confirms what you were saying about flying the pattern on-AoA. I think the VRS manual takes alot of it from a mid 2000s SuperBug NATOPS, so we can go with that. Also, good legacy NATOPS pulls.
Good debrief on the pattern and pass tho...
Later
Sludge
SpazSinbad:
Sludge, the graphic in my last was posted at same time you posted. It is probably easier on forum members if only one aircraft (Legacy Hornet as seen in either Default or Sludge guise) is referenced IMHO. I was looking for Super Hornet NATOPS info to refind the excellent SuperBuggie AoA info instead. More later.... Super Hornet FenA18Eef NATOPS carrier landing diagram below. 'On Speed' = Optimum Angle of Attack.
Next graphic with text with carrier landing advice is from Super Hornet NATOPS also. As always it refers to FCLP advice which will follow... Hmmm both Legacy & Super Hornet NATOPS have scant advice about FCLP (although it is always referenced for carrier landings) but have Field Landing advice (without landing aids such as FLOLS etc.) with the Field Landing graphic saying 'use FLOLS' if available. Anyway the Super Carrier Landing advice earlier is current more or less for both.
Sludge:
Spaz...
Yeah, maybe FCLPs are one of those subjects thats briefed in real world more than discussed in NATOPS? Who knows? Again, good pulls, and it seems the Bug and the Legacy have more similarity than not, with the exception of slower landing speeds in general for the Bug.
Later
Sludge
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version