FSDreamTeam forum
General Category => Unofficial F/A-18 Acceleration Pack board => Topic started by: burner12 on April 04, 2009, 03:42:47 am
-
I know about the spin outs that the hornet has on runways. But whenever I try to land on a carrier espicially in those TOP GUN Day traps missions once I touch down and catch a wire the entire thing spins out of control on to its right side and either crashes or splashes through the deck. This is annoying th SH**T out of me. I just got a new computer running Vista. So far I have made a few carrier landings that were fine, so i don't think it is the computer. I installed that brake fix and that didn't do anything. Has anybody else had this problem and is there a way to fix it? >:( >:(
-
burner12, may I ask if you are landing 'lined up'? with the centreline of the angled deck? From your description of what happens after your arrest? you seem to be lined up right heading for the island once arrested? Is that the case (by this I mean it seems you may be lined up with the ship centreline?). Maybe these are silly questions to you but I'm trying to imagine what might be the problem. Also landing at a reasonable All Up Weight using the Optimum Angle of Attack is important IMHO.
What settings do you have for the flightsim "Easy" or "Difficult" or something else? Maybe I'm clueless because I have not done any "TOP GUN" Day traps missions. What are they?
-
http://www.topgunsim.com/tgssite/ (http://www.topgunsim.com/tgssite/)
-
jimi08, thanks - never really got into that 'TopGun' stuff. Perhaps burner12 needs to ask at that website?
-
burner12, may I ask if you are landing 'lined up'? with the centreline of the angled deck? From your description of what happens after your arrest? you seem to be lined up right heading for the island once arrested? Is that the case (by this I mean it seems you may be lined up with the ship centreline?). Maybe these are silly questions to you but I'm trying to imagine what might be the problem. Also landing at a reasonable All Up Weight using the Optimum Angle of Attack is important IMHO.
What settings do you have for the flightsim "Easy" or "Difficult" or something else? Maybe I'm clueless because I have not done any "TOP GUN" Day traps missions. What are they?
Yes I'm mainly lined up w/ the centeline.Also the crash tolerence is set to realism. And I'm mainly landing in 150-155knots sometimes 147 and I still spin out?
I went back and tested it again to see what the problem is and it's that when i hit the deck i snap the left or right side of a wire and that brings me to the center causing a spin out. But when I DIRECTLY on centerline i dont spin out. I guess this is a stupid question but going around is ok right? I sometimes @ 160knots want to force her on the deck but going around willl help in not crash right? And it seems i have to always be lined up with the centerline to not spin out, does anybody agree?
-
burner12, at the moment due to a computer crash & re-install OS I don't have FSX installed to quickly check those airspeed figures for you. You must be lined up on the centreline of the angled deck. You seem to be doing that OK.
I would guess that NOT using the AoA indexer for the Optimum Angle of Attack approach (which will give you an airspeed to fly but please use the AoA indexer) may be an issue - especially if the All Up Weight of the aircraft is high - or over the Max. AUW for landing. If you use the 'doughnut' (optimum) in the AoA indexer you will have a better approach because the IAS for your weight will be correct.
Try dialing down the realism to the middle position. As you get more practice then try increasing the realism. Heck if you are not familiar with flying the 'doughnut' then start out with easy and then increase realism as you become more proficient. To me the whole point of this excellent 'Hornet in the sim' is to fly as best one can a 'navy approach'. That is why I have complained :-) elsewhere that one has to fly practice approaches on a runway with the hook down to get the AoA indexer to work properly. It is unusable with the hook up. Getting some practice on a runway flying the AoA indexer will be good value. After all USN pilots do this before ever setting out for the deck. Probably they have to do about 100 FCLP (supervised by an LSO ashore) before they ever see the deck.
You have mentioned 'forcing' the aircraft onto the deck at a high airspeed perhaps. This would be a classic 'spotting the deck' move. [Probably in this circumstance you have really 'crashed nose down' onto the deck.] If you can fly the meatball and AoA Optimum then you will have a better chance if on the angle centreline to do an excellent (at least survivable) landing. That is what every carrier pilot aspires to achieve.
Don't be discouraged if it is difficult - it is. Practice flying 'dirty' using the indexer at a few thousand feet to get used to that. Trim is important also. The aircraft should keep OAoA when dirty at your trim setting. This trim will change slightly when you are on glideslope because less power is being used for descent. Don't fly with the trim though. Trim and then use the controls.
Fly using the carrier pilot mantra - say it out loud if necessary - "Meatball, Lineup & Optimum (AoA). You may have heard it said as "Meatball, Lineup, Airspeed" where it is always understood in the jet era that 'airspeed' refers to Optimum Angle of Attack. Just repeat that mantra over and over until touchdown. Do not look at anything else. Just those things and you will be able to fly better approaches. HTH. ;D Happier Landings.
-
Thanks for the info. I have been using the AoA indexer and it works fine for me. It's just maybe I'm not trimmed properly or I just always come in like I said before a shade to the right or left and that spins me because i didn't hit the wire centered. But I know that going around is ok Navy pilots do it many times just to get on deck.
So thanks for the encouragement. I hope the problem of the spin outs is just my landings maybe landing too fast and I just need more practice. its been a while since I have done carrier landings so I'm just brushing up right now. But i hope i can resolve this problem.
-
I am having the same thing,seems like I "think" I have a perfect pass,glideslope,centerline,AOA,ect. and the plane tips over when Im almost to a stop.
I have many hours in Janes f-18 and superhornet(years ago :) ) I cant seem to land this one on the deck with out having issues.
I love that San Francisco carrier mission with a ILS! Without ILS I dont have a chance.
@burner12,What is that brake fix you mentioned?
Mud
-
I've finally found out it is mainly just not staying on centerline I'm now polishing up my rusty spots since its been a while.
Mud Dog here is the website: http://www.fsxblueangels.com/downloads.html
Download the brake fix and it'll fix the spin outs on landing strips don't know about carriers didn't really work for me on carriers. But also as a suggestion download the airbrake/spoiler fix. Fixes the nose pitch up when you extend the air brake. Helps ALOT! If you want to be a Blue Angel download the smoke fix looks alot better, and anything else you want to download. Happy landings! ;)
-
burner12, Sorry - missed your question about waving off. "Own Waveoffs" are OK - especially when you are learning. Better to Wave OFF than to crash. Glad to hear that you are getting some good results with better centreline lineup. Navy Flying with the AoA indexer is different, compared to an ordinary Air Force runway landing with a flare at the end. Conversely do not 'dive at the deck'. Your Hornet is not built for that punishment. :-)
Putting the nose down over the ramp will also raise your hook point increasing the chance of a bolter (missing all the wires with the hook). Pity it is not possible to fly carrier approaches without the hook being down. That takes off some of the pressure. New pilots usually do several touch and goes before ever arresting on deck.
Try landing at a lower AUW to help decrease airspeed at OAoA. Please do not use the brakes or have the park brake on when you are carrier landing. This is dangerous. For example the Skyhawk never had a 'park brake' (although the RNZAF fitted a park brake for their shore only operations with their A4K).
-
burner12, may I ask if you are landing 'lined up'? with the centreline of the angled deck? From your description of what happens after your arrest? you seem to be lined up right heading for the island once arrested? Is that the case (by this I mean it seems you may be lined up with the ship centreline?). Maybe these are silly questions to you but I'm trying to imagine what might be the problem. Also landing at a reasonable All Up Weight using the Optimum Angle of Attack is important IMHO.
What settings do you have for the flightsim "Easy" or "Difficult" or something else? Maybe I'm clueless because I have not done any "TOP GUN" Day traps missions. What are they?
Yes I'm mainly lined up w/ the centeline.Also the crash tolerence is set to realism. And I'm mainly landing in 150-155knots sometimes 147 and I still spin out?
I went back and tested it again to see what the problem is and it's that when i hit the deck i snap the left or right side of a wire and that brings me to the center causing a spin out. But when I DIRECTLY on centerline i dont spin out. I guess this is a stupid question but going around is ok right? I sometimes @ 160knots want to force her on the deck but going around willl help in not crash right? And it seems i have to always be lined up with the centerline to not spin out, does anybody agree?
Your problem looks as though you are too heavy which means a higher approach speed try dumping your fuel to below 5500lbs and your approach speed should be no higher than 140kts. 160knots is an insane approach speed the Hornets trap 135-140kts and superhornets at 125kts. Other thing is your AoA needs to be 8 or less the fuel dump switch is located on the left panel incase you need to find it and in order to pass 5 consecutive traps you need 5 good landings if you land heavy it can damage your bird and cause a crash on take off so don't forget to keep it on centre as well otherwise it rolls. If you use Saitek pro rudder pedals then make sure you configure them properly otherwise it causes the brakes to activate as well.
-
I guess that is the problem because Ive been practicing and it is now again spinning out even when I'm on center line. So in order to dump the fuel what screen should I look at once i've started the dump? Maybe it's just i'm terrible @ carrier landings. i hope not.
I tried dumping fuel and brought it down to 4000 and it didn't spin out as much. But then I tried just landing @ 345-400 knots and it still spun out. I guess I'm just a terrible carrier pilot. Keeping her on centerline is a challenge.
If you don't mind me asking what are your procedures for landing onboard a carrier do you always dump fuel and what basic speed and altitude do you use?
You said I might be heavy do you think that is what's causing the spin outs? Or is it just my flying?
-
burner12, I agree with sub17 to get your AUW down by dumping fuel to what he recommends.
When you start your approach lined up on the angle centreline; (when) the ship is moving away from you at a 10 degree or so angle to the right of your approach path. This means that if you do nothing you will become more and more left of the correct lineup path and more 'lined up' consquently (indirectly) with the axial (straight down the ship deck) centreline. One addition to the MLA mantra is that when you are turning base is that you MUST 'cross the wake' of the carrier to begin to be close to being lined up down the centreline of the angle deck. Project the angle deck centreline aft of the carrier you will see how it is further and further to the right of the ship's wake.
All things being equal if you start on the angle centreline you will have to make constant slight adjustments to the right to 'catch up to' and remain on the angle centreline. These slight Angle of Bank (AOB) to the right changes are unavoidable. It is never recommended to start to the right of the centreline to then drift left to be on angle centreline near touchdown. OR to start left (on the ship's wake for example to the drift to the right etc.) For one thing the actual aircraft would not be aligned fore and aft with the angle centreline; causing this problematic touchdown/arrest.
Reality means if you start on centreline you will weave slightly from one side of the centreline to the other by a small margin (hopefully) to be as close as possible on centreline with your aircraft pointed down that centreline. OR if you are an ace you will start on centreline and make constant slight adjustments to the right to stay on centreline. One way to help make minimal adjustments is to aim at a point about midway down the deck angle centreline to use that as your aim point for centreline alignment (rather than any other point on that centreline). Somewhere I have made a diagram - I'll find it and post it here. [Remember I'm not asking you to deck spot - you use only that centreline point as your centreline reference, otherwise it is back to the MLA mantra. You must use the mirror to judge approach angle - nothing else. Stay on centreline and at correct Optimum Angle of Attack - it is hard work.]
Reality of deck landing with 'meatball, lineup, airspeed' (MLA) accurately is that one aims to be on the these exact parameters at every stage; and if not then make immediate appropriate corrections to get back to the exact parameters. Don't wait. If you see a PLAT camera approach you will see these corrections (depending on actual approach of course). No carrier pilot can start a perfect approach and do nothing with the controls to stay perfectly on the correct 'MLA'. Different pilots will have slightly different techniques of power adjustment - line up adjustment and nose adjustment to keep their aircraft as close as possible to the MLA parameters. Having an OK ('no comment' [perfect] from the LSO) pass is often rare; depending on the ship, sea state and aircraft with pilot experience. Carrier flying requires constant practice, with a proportionately large amount of practice ashore at night in the FCLP pattern, before going out to do it on the carrier.
Flying FLCP at night forces the pilot to concentrate on MLA, with any other distractions hidden by a blackout of runway lights and other lights, so that he sees only the dim outlight of the carrier deck on the runway with the mirror. It is the best way to simulate carrier flying ashore. Initially FCLP is done in daytime to get the pilot adjusted but quickly it moves to night time.
Night carrier flying is always a challenge - commented on many a time in TV documentaries or films (usually nowadays about the USN). Still looking for graphic, in meantime I forgot to add that any corrections to MLA must have some anticipation built in so that when you are getting back to accurate MLA you have or are making a correction opposite so that you are on the correct MLA. For example if you are left of angle centreline you would make an appropriate correction to the right and before actually getting to the centreline you would make an appropriate correction to the left to stop the previous larger correction to the right. OK? :-) Then just to keep typing here that second correction will need a much smaller third correction to the right and then left etc. on down the glideslope. That is why another rule of carrier flying is to make corrections back to the MLA timely. Don't wait. Get back to MLA ASAP. Making corrections too gradual so that you think you plan to drift back to centreline by touchdown or have a higher rate of descent from a high start to arrive on glideslope at touchdown are all incorrect techniques. These techniques may be OK for a runway landing but carrier flying requires spot on approaches as accurate as humanly possible.
Here is a part of the parameters that an USN LSO takes notice of from his LSO manual about the HORNET: Note the parameters for deck landing and mishap tendency (bad lineup). Also another section says that NOT having a HUD is an emergency. I'm not familiar with HUD carrier flying so perhaps one needs to pay that more attention (or I need to do that anyway). :-) My problem never having flown a HUD equipped aircraft. I'm having trouble finding the diagram illustrating the line up problem due to angle deck moving with carrier forward motion. I'll find it later meantime here is another diagram from LSO NATOPS showing amongst other things a 'lined up left' viewpoint.
-
Thanks for the advice PazSinbad. You know I was flying that Top Gun day trap mission and kept flying the plane into the deck on the left but then at the end I aligned slightly to the right or kept making adjustments to the right to stay on centerline or as mucha s possible and when I landed I was off centerline (just slightly) but it didn't spin out because I landed to the right of centerline and not left. maybe that has been the problem all along I haven't made those correction for the ship in motion.
-
burner12, I'm still looking for the diagram trying to illustrate ship movement and the movement of the angled centreline. It is something not considered until it is seen and then thought about initially. To me it seems your success of not only being on angled centreline BUT that you are also have the centreline of your aircraft lined up with the centreline of the angled centreline. This is important for the rollout when arresting. Keep practising. It is fun isn't it? :-)
Try to get on the centreline from the beginning and stay there. Don't try to drift left or right to get on centreline at the end. Ensure that you go to the right of the carrier wake to be on the angle centreline as soon as you can.
Apologies for over emphasising the AoA Indexer at the expense of the HUD. Just my ignorance about how a Hornet is really used. I can recall many positive comments being made about the HUD and its usefulness - and I guess HUD usefulness in carrier approaches now. I recall one pilot saying he would land ONLY using the HUD. Others in transition from AoA Indexer to HUD said similar things. I only 'know what I know' which often is not all that much.
Because the search takes time there are other images that may help. For example this one shows a 'camera' viewpoint which likely is not the 'pilot eye' viewpoint of what it looks like close to the ramp. Remember do not deck spot in the sim either. If we imagine we are seeing the 'pilot eye' view then to my eye the ball is slightly high with lineup right. Look down the angle deck centreline - all of it - to see that even though the aircraft is slightly right it is also likely to be lined up parallel with the centreline. This is important.
-
Here is a line up correction illustration from a Goshawk 'gouge'. Imagine a Hornet lined up properly at lower part of diagram to the right of the carrier wake with ship going straight up the diagram but angled deck is not doing that. In the upper picture imagine if the 'hornet' did nothing it would be to the left of centreline because the ship is taking all of the angled deck away from the aircraft which is NOT flying straight up the picture. HTH.
-
Another 'in close' carrier approach pic. This time the 'camera view' makes it look like the camera is lined up with the right hand edge of the landing area with ball slightly high (remember this is not the 'pilot eye' view).
Then there are two pics showing a Prowler initally badly lined up left with second pic being lined up OK. Maybe the two photos were not taken on the same approach. Looking at the first badly lined up left pic (depending on aircraft) it is likely the LSO would wave off this one. Perhaps the zoom lens of the camera makes the aircraft look closer to the carrier than it is in reality. So there may well be plenty of room to correct the line up in time.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
You Spaz I should have thoguht of this earlier. Whenever I line up to the right the ship is moving to the right so it either puts me slightly off center or on center because I'm correcting for the movement while it's moving. So to start a final line up slightly on the right side of the approach pattern so the ship will make you line up with the center line, and don't line up with the centerline because that will cause you to go left. After trying thaat I'm getting better results. Am I correct about this?
-
burner12: Your technique as I'm understanding it 'MAY' work in FSX but it will not work in real world. Perhaps it is better to try to line up accurately right from the beginning. (Yes, you understand about crossing the wake to achieve this.) However YOU are flying the aircraft. The CARRIER is not flying you.
Don't think of the carrier doing anything when you are actually doing your approaches. Everything you are doing is relative to MLA. Nothing else matters. The carrier could be stopped or steaming out of wind or have the wind coming in the exact opposite direction. Does not matter (as long as conditions are safe and usually the wind is down the angle for sure). You are flying the mirror relative to the angled deck of the carrier. If you concentrate on this aspect then you will not notice what the carrier is doing because it is irrelevant. Concentrate on flying the exact parameters without regard for other things (like letting the ship drift to where you want it to be as you arrest). Yes your technique as described would be another way to THINK about the problem; so that you FLY the aircraft according to the universal LSO/pilot recommendations I have tried to outline.
Of course there is much more to it than I can hope to post by typing here; and more to it than I can know, not having flown a Hornet. But the basics of carrier approaches in the jet era have been the same (with minor variations in technique) for actually flying any particular aircraft. These basic techniques work. Although they will seem odd when you have been used to landing only on a runway. This is the fun and challenge of carrier flying. It needs to be done as precisely as you can manage - all the way. One reason why the recent pics have been added is to get you to see the subtle differences that a pilot is looking for during his approach, to get back to the correct parameters. With practice you will get much better for sure. Practice is what it takes, and here is where the LSO becomes important in carrier flying because he (with experience) knows what the pilot is doing to then help him correct his technique errors; and of course to criticise every approach if that is what is needed. No one should have a problem with an LSO telling them what is not going right on their approaches.
Another thought about these line up or carrier approach issues is this: When the aircraft is further away from the mirror the aircraft corrections needed are much more gross (to achieve getting back on line up, OAoA & meatball in the middle). The cone of what is correct becomes smaller the closer the aircraft gets to the carrier/mirror. So what control corrections were needed with the same view way out - when a lot closer - will require more subtle control inputs to achieve the same result. Another reason to be on the correct parameters as soon as possible.
From memory a 'late lineup' correction was always problematic because in the short time available the pilot has to add a bit of power (because the wings are not level so lift is lost) while the nose usually drops at the same time. You get my drift? (Please don't drift into the ramp.) All the control changes being made require other control changes. Do what is required - trying to keep in mind to be more subtle if you are near the carrier.
Conversely being TOO SMOOTH (by drifting to the correct parameter) is a big no no. Yes you can be smooth and accurate. Try to achieve both. I probably will never achieve it but trying all the time to achieve the best approach.
Now there is a night/dusk time lapse pic showing how the approach glideslope corrections way out become more subtle in close.
-
Spaz thanks for all your help. ;)
So what you are saying is that in FSX you don't need to line up to the right a little to counteract the movement of the carrier.
Because when I lined up on centerline I always spin out. Is it you HAVE TO BE JUST DIRECTLY on CENTERLINE to trap smoothly or is it my flying ability or some option i have turned on and don't know about? ???
Spaz I was wondering could you record your approaches and send them to me so i can seee how you do it. If not can you give me detailed instructions on alt. airspd and line up on glideslope?
-
burner12, I'm happy to have an input and would welcome other input also. My experience was over 35 years ago in A4G Skyhawks but since then I think my memory for carrier flying has been good; while being enhanced now by thinking about these issues we discuss (generally). The internet is a marvellous place to find out stuff. There are lots of LSO publications available for free download, as has been indicated in other posts. However I understand that to 'understand them' may require some background information. Certainly I need that for 'how to fly the Hornet'. But I'll stress the carrier approach basics are the same.
Recently I'm only doing FCLP (with hook down because I need the AoA indexer working for me). I have not even thought about using the HUD so far. And I still need to install FSX. Frankly IMHO to learn carrier flying - using a less complicated aircraft - would be ideal. The freeware Goshawk T-45C is excellent. I have set up (in earlier iteration of FSX) a 30 knot westerly wind down RW 26 at NAS Nowra at dusk to simulate FCLP (but have some daylight scenery for video viewers to look at). The strong wind simulates the strong wind over the deck of a carrier; and also simulates the real conditions at Nowra in the late winter early spring.
Having a strong WOD to practice in at an airfield means that the approach ground speed will be slower and there will be an "apparent" (depending on where you turn base) longer approach to get things right. At moment the Goshawk will fly at about 10KIAS too slow (according to the specs) but 'how' it flies is excellent. Also it has a good AoA indexer to use - same as Hornet. I cannot even remember if it has a HUD because I don't use it. :-) It does have the 'HUD only view' which looks odd because of zoomed scenery but I don't fly using that - just demonstrate the view of it for viewers. These videos are at FileFront at: (a video may show the AoA indexer not working correctly - this was the test)
http://hosted.filefront.com/SpazSinbad/
OR: http://hosted.filefront.com/SpazSinbad/2116553
If you go to that page there are many videos of circuits both High Quality; or the same video in Low Quality for easier download. These are not meant for any teaching as 'how to deck land or FCLP' - they are just tests for various aspects of the sim and FRAPS etc. However sometimes I do manage to concentrate long enough on the AoA indexer to get it to show the doughnut.
When I have more time I'll attempt to make Hornet Videos but don't hold your breath. There are good videos out there. The one explaining 'how to carrier land the Hornet' made by the SimBlueAngels is excellent. I don't have the resources or skill to top that terrific effort. It is really good. Go watch that. :-) Download it so you can watch it over and over.
An earlier post on another thread on this forum had a NATOPS diagram illustrating the main points of a carrier circuit. However that is a lot to do in one sortie. I would recommend that not only do you do FCLP (without a mirror - unless you can arrange that) but that you also set up a sortie that has you starting on a long final to the carrier with sufficient fuel so that you start under the same conditions [dirty - ready to land with flaps & hook down, S/B out - on speed (doughnut)] and from that start 'well set up' you can practise over and over. You will see how variations affect the landing etc.
Back to your line up question. It has been awhile since I did a Hornet sim carrier landing. I have not done any of those TopGun approaches, if you talk about those. DO NOT WORRY about what the carrier is doing. It is irrelevant if you carry out my advice and that is: MLA - fly on the centreline as best you can at all times. Fly the doughnut (or whatever you see in the HUD) for Optimum Angle of Attack and of course fly the meatball as accurately as you can.
Now this is the problem to my mind about FSX or any carrier sim on a desktop. The view from the aircraft at a reasonable approach distance after line up is not clear. So a bit of 'deck spotting' will get you in the right position to then fly the meatball when you can see it. Nothing can be done about that except having a mirror in a separate window on your screen. For myself I have not got around to figuring out how to do that - it would be helpful - if you follow what I'm saying. That way you will have a clear view of the mirror even at a distance and you can, at the beginning of the approach, spend more time getting lined up and stay on speed (Optimum Angle of Attack remember). It is way to difficult to fly airspeed when it will always change as the aircraft weight changes to attain the OAoA. This angle of attack will get you aboard correctly, provided you are on centreline, and 'on the ball'.
If you are starting to the right of the wake so that you are on the angled centreline - and staying there - then you should have no trouble. All I can think of is that you have some rudder or rudder trim enabled to skew the aircraft to the right, or whatever, as you go down the centreline? The hornet must be trimmed properly in all axes. Try again to fly at a lower realism setting. Be successful with that and then start turning up the realism. No one expects anyone to hack deck landing straight away. OK. It is different - much different to anything else. And practise practise practise.
:-)
-
Having done it a couple times, I can tell you that it is purely speed related. Come in too fast = Spin out.
-
microbrewst, do you use the HUD or AoA indexer? How would you use the HUD please? Thanks.
More pics including an 'at ramp' pic here: http://www.check-6.com/gallery/carriers_007.php
In the RF-8G 'at ramp' pic below USS Saratoga we can see the ball almost perfect with the datum lights either side not symmetrical, a feature of that mirror I guess? Spot on the centreline for lineup.
HUD Symbology is for the Super Hornet out of their NATOPS.
Now viewing this 8.5Mb .WMV video at URL below I can see the AoA indexer symbol according to NATOPS diagram (right hand side) above. Could never figure this out before. Sigh.
http://files.filefront.com/HUDhornetDLhiQlargewmv/;13541768;/fileinfo.html
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Spaz would you agree with micro in that it's speed related? I start at about 155-162 then slow her down to 149. Also I don't know if the carriers in acceleration were designed to be flown from the right to line up on centerline. IMO they were designed so that you always flew centerline.
-
burner12, I think I need input from others more knowledgeable and experienced with the Hornet in FSX Accelerator. I admit to not a lot of experience myself; but hope to remedy that soon enough.
I think there are some fundamental misunderstandings. First you must fly the appropriate Angle of Attack for your All Up Weight. If you do this your airspeed (if your aircraft is under the maximum AUW) is what the Optimum Angle of Attack says it is - then well and good. However to me the airspeed is irrelevant. What is relevant is the Optimum Angle of Attack - for your AUW - at that time. This OAoA will never vary. What will vary up and down with your AUW up and down will be the IAS correspondingly. However please do not fly using airspeed. I cannot stress that enough. Carrier pilots do not fly using the airspeed indicator. They fly using the OAoA indications.
At first I thought (as was the case in much older Navy aircraft) that it would be OK to use only the AoA indexer (not the HUD). But that was my ignorance about how the Hornet is flown in the USN today. Today I saw on one of the online LSO manuals that NOT having a HUD is considered an 'emergency'. :-) So there I have been trying to land a Hornet in a self-generated emergency (because I had no idea how to use the HUD properly). However now understanding that video of the HUD (from info today) it makes more sense to me perhaps to use the HUD. But again however I am very comfortable using the AoA indexer because that is all I know. OK? :-)
Using just airspeed is a NoNo unless that is the only way you can fly the Hornet for the moment. Please learn how to use the HUD. The diagram above on the right side shows where the AoA indexer is on the HUD. Keep that indicator centred (at least that is how I understand it - please someone correct me if I'm wrong here) to fly OAoA or otherwise use the AoA indexer (the red/green coloured chevrons and orange doughnut on the left side of the HUD).
IF you have the wrong airspeed for your AUW then you may be flying either TOO FAST or TOO SLOW compared to what the real airspeed should be at the Optimum Angle of Attack. Without you telling us what your 'all up weight' is at that time, then we cannot say what the Optimum angle of attack airspeed should be. I'm hoping you understand that point. However you should ignore the airspeed and fly the Optimum Angle of attack. Life is much easier then. Yes it will seem odd but everything about carrier landing is odd at the beginning. Don't be disappointed that you find it more difficult than you imagined. It is difficult and it is made more difficult by the many limitations in FSX particularly with a small screen with not a good view until you are in close. It is tough to do good carrier landings with a small screen simulator. No question.
Another point about flying airspeed (rather than angle of attack at optimum) is that if you are TOO FAST your nose is too low, the hook is higher than it should be in relation to the aircraft at otherwise the OAoA and you risk breaking the arrestor gear by being too fast for that AUW. OR you will just break the landing gear for the same reason. Using OAoA is like the saving thing about carrier approaches. It is different only in that no one refers to the correct airspeed, only to the Optimum Angle of Attack.
Conversely if you are TOO SLOW for your all up weight at that time your nose will be too high with the hook point being much lower than it should be. This is when you can catch the ramp with the hook or worse. Another danger is that you are closer to the stalling speed and if underpowered you are going to sink into a water landing. It happens. If you get all messed up then Wave Off and try again.
Please don't misunderstand what I'm saying about the angle centreline. Please line up on the angled centreline as soon as you can. Project that angled centreline from the stern of the carrier out to where you are - let us say a mile. At that distance you will be in a spot that is well to the right of the wake turbulence in the water generated by the carrier. This is in effect where the axial centreline of the carrier is. Do not line up on this incorrect centreline. Do not start your approach to the ship from over the wake. You are in the wrong position with a lot of work to get to the right to be on the angle centreline. OK?
So the rule of thumb is too 'cross the wake' during your base turn to be anywhere near the angled centreline. Do not start anywhere else. Start your approach on the angled centreline, on speed (which is always the Optimum Angle of Attack - NOT the indicated airspeed) and on glide path with the meatball centred if you can see it. Because of the limitations of the sim it is not easy to see the mirror so I guess everyone including me is deck spotting at the beginning but as soon as you can see the mirror use that as your reference.
Please practice ashore. Please practice from a constant good beginning from a start at 1-2 miles dirty so that you get experience doing the same approach start over and over. Please do a good start. Save that good start as a flight that you can go back to to practice over and over if you don't want to practice ashore. Practice practice practice. Did I say 'practice'? :-)
I might make mention that a carrier approach - to stay on glideslope (with the two other things always being good such as OAoA and angled centreline) you need to use the power lever a lot. Use it in small amounts from a good trimmed level flight dirty at OAoA. Anticipate as best you can to change more power to less power as you get back on glideslope. It is possible to add nose corrections to maintain the OAoA as you change the power. For every correction there will be another correction in the opposite direction that hopefully becomes smaller and smaller as you approach the carrier with the glideslope window for a good arrest also getting smaller and smaller. Do not make big corrections near the ship. Try to be on centreline at least with your aircraft fore and aft parallel to the angled deck fore and aft line.
Keep asking questions as required. I'll call it a night now.
-
Please don't misunderstand what I'm saying about the angle centreline. Please line up on the angled centreline as soon as you can. Project that angled centreline from the stern of the carrier out to where you are - let us say a mile. At that distance you will be in a spot that is well to the right of the wake turbulence in the water generated by the carrier. This is in effect where the axial centreline of the carrier is. Do not line up on this incorrect centreline. Do not start your approach to the ship from over the wake. You are in the wrong position with a lot of work to get to the right to be on the angle centreline. OK?
So the rule of thumb is too 'cross the wake' during your base turn to be anywhere near the angled centreline. Do not start anywhere else. Start your approach on the angled centreline, on speed (which is always the Optimum Angle of Attack - NOT the indicated airspeed) and on glide path with the meatball centred if you can see it. Because of the limitations of the sim it is not easy to see the mirror so I guess everyone including me is deck spotting at the beginning but as soon as you can see the mirror use that as your reference.
Keep asking questions as required. I'll call it a night now.
Maybe I misunderstood you but you said to start about 1 mile out so when you line up on center you are already a little to the right of center but it will correct. Then you said to cross the wake. Wouldn't that mean you're starting less then a mile away? Sorry to keep pestering you. Let me know if you want to end the conversation.
-
Spaz would you agree with micro in that it's speed related? I start at about 155-162 then slow her down to 149. Also I don't know if the carriers in acceleration were designed to be flown from the right to line up on centerline. IMO they were designed so that you always flew centerline.
Still too fast try 135kts and also use the Carrier tutorial mission as the custom missions sometimes are less forgiving than carrier tutorial or practice mission.
-
burner12, seems to me that subs17 is giving you good practical advice for your sim flying. Would not it be possible to save (at the start of a good setup practice approach) that start point to then start always for yourself over and over at that same start point to get good practice at carrier approaches without all the hoohaa inbetween? :-) Repetition starting with the same parameters is good because then you will notice variations and consequences after many repetitions.
Again I cannot comment on the 135 knots to use because to me that IAS depends on your AUW at the time to have Optimum Angle of Attack. Sorry to bang on about this aspect. However I acknowledge if you practise your carrier approaches at the same AUW and know what the correct IAS is for the correct OAoA then by all means if that is how you want to do it - use that correct IAS for that AUW. However try to make the transition to using either the AoA Indexer or the HUD AoA indexer when you can. Also I would recommend changing the glass on the HUD to clear (see other thread on this forum about this aspect).
________________
burner12, it is difficult to type sufficient words about a complicated process. At some point I have to assume that you are understanding what I'm typing here. So thanks for asking your question about the 'start point'.
Mostly I'm generalising and you have taken some phrases to be 'gospel'. I gather you are familiar with all the advice and content and content at other URLs mentioned on this forum. Please ensure that you download and view the FSXblueAngels video about 'how to do carrier landings'. It is an excellent introduction to all of it. If you are not able to download to view repeatedly this video for good understanding of it then let me know. Thanks.
There are several points on a carrier approach that are given names. 'Start' 'Middle' 'In Close' 'At (the) Ramp'. 'Start' is referring to when you are wings level at about 1.5 miles for example on glidepath on speed on the centreline. That is the ideal start point although EXACTLY what the ideal start might be for the Hornet I do not claim to know. This is a suggestion from me.
Go to the start point by whatever means you wish so that you are there dirty - trimmed and ready to land.
You could get there by doing a circuit & base turn. Or fly there from any direction but that can be difficult because it is difficult to see the carrier from any distance at low level in the FSX sim. Also in real life - that is why jets do 'break entries' to downwind/base for a carrier landing during the daytime. Night time it is different.
Other threads have the NATOPS Hornet Carrier Circuit diagram. Please save this diagram to your computer so that you can study it, or print it out to have it near your monitor to keep you guided about what you are trying to achieve.
To get back to your last comment "start about 1 mile out so when you line up on center you are already a little to the right of center but it will correct". I do not mean to confuse you but hope to explain with words what is complicated to carry out. Bear with me. If you start at one mile or 1.5 mile ready to land then you will need to be at that ideal 'start point' which is situated on the extended angle centreline. There is no other start point.
Do not allow the carrier to do your flying for you. You are always flying relative to the carrier. Nothing else matters. Do not allow any drift to develop either for your aircraft or anticipating where you and the carrier will be when you are drifting. It seems to me that this 'drifting' or 'crabbing' is causing some of your landing crashes. You need to fly your aircraft at all times to maximise its position relative to those three parameters: OAoA - centreline - glideslope. Get back to the ideal at every opportunity. Drifting back is a bad technique that will cause you grief.
My comment about 'crossing the wake' was in reference to doing an ordinary circuit with a base turn as indicated on the NATOPS carrier cct diagram. When doing the base turn you must fly the aircraft so that during the turn it crosses the carrier wake. If you do not do this while attempting to lineup you will naturally be well left of the angled centreline. Then it will be difficult to get back to the angled centreline (by crossing the wake - there is no other way!) in time for you to settle down with the correct parameters. Perhaps you need to decide how you are going to practice carrier landings. As recommended by me set up a mission or flight that has you starting with a good start at or near the ideal 'start point' mentioned above. Then all you need to do is fly down that 'funnel' to a good landing without any drift. :-)
I don't regard your questions as pestering burner12. I can always try to improve my efforts to explain. It is a two way process. If you do not understand then ask again. I have learnt a lot already in the last two days that I had no idea about some aspects of Hornet carrier flying (indicated earlier in this thread). To me that is a good thing.
I'll recommend again that you practise carrier flying away from the carrier (at a few thousand feet) and then practice on a regular runway; and then go out to the carrier. There is a lot to do in a short amount of time at the carrier. Giving yourself an opportunity to practise in easier environments is worthwhile practise. After all this is what is done in real world flying. No one does their first solo to go immediately out to land on a carrier. ;)
-
WMV Video shows a Hornet Carrier Landing from a day circuit just before base turn. The pilot is looking left with a slight left wing waggle when he is looking most likely. The LSO tells him about the Wind Over the Deck down the angled deck (WOD). Pilot asks about whether procedure today is 'Hornet Full Flap' (sometimes I gather for different conditions the Hornet will use half flap). During the base turn there is an alarm 'whoop' (don't know why) however just after that sound you will see in the lower left hand corner the white wake. See how the Hornet 'crosses the wake' to then line up on the angled deck.
Looks like a short approach. Watch the mirror - see how the Hornet stays lined up. From this HUD view the approach angle may look steeper than it is but it does look steep. Notice how the ball is lined up all the way down to touchdown. Then at the last you hear engine go to full power during arrest.
This first example is larger than the second one (which are both the same otherwise). Reason for first 'better quality' is an effort to help see the HUD details but really there is not much difference between the two versions. So download the small one to get an idea anyway of what a Hornet Day Carrier Circuit looks like 'through the HUD'.
(43Mb) http://files.filefront.com/HornetDLcanastaHiQwmv/;13550223;/fileinfo.html (HIGHER QUALITY)
[use the "Download Now!" button rather than view/download the .FLV video version via black screen]
OR
(22Mb) http://files.filefront.com/HornetDLcanastawmv/;13550226;/fileinfo.html (SAME lower quality)
&
HORNET ESP (FSX) Carrier Landing demo .WMV video (14Mb):
http://files.filefront.com/HORNET+ESP+DL+hiqwmv/;13550694;/fileinfo.html
-
To elaborate on my previous post:
Most of the time when people experience this problem they are coming in too fast. This is either due to poor technique, or more commonly, being over-weight. If you are landing with full fuel tanks you are way too heavy, thus the jet requires more speed for optimal AOA (8.1 degrees). Lighten the fuel load to half tanks and aim for 130kts, that should reduce the chance of spin out.
Here's a video made specifically for FSX Acceleration carrier landings.
-On Vimeo: http://www.vimeo.com/2950519
-Download: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=7UQJCCZA
-
I would like to thank all of you who have given me instructions on how to land on a carrier. but apparently the problem wasn't my flying after all. We just got a new computer with a dual graphics card and apparently one of them was defective. So I bet that was the problem. We just installed 2 new ones and even when I land left of the wirse where before it skidded me out now it traps me PERFECTLY! :D :D So thanks to all wo have helped. Don't you just hate it when technology fails. >:(
-
OK then, how about a video of a trap please. ::) I've used FRAPS in the past and don't know of any other game video capture program; but likely there are others out there. I don't use FRAPS to capture the flying in real time because the real flying frame rate is affected adversely. My method is to playback the relevant portion while FRAPS captures the playback. FRAPS makes a very large but excellently detailed .AVI video. Then I use Microsoft Movie Maker 2 to edit/crunch this video into a usable size .WMV example. There are options to make the best quality for general use (tape at 3Mb/s) or lesser quality for file upload/download.
-
I don't know how to make a video using FSX. I have tried to record the flight by using the buttons it says to start and stop recording but I can't find that file, I don't think it recorded it. If you can give me instructions on how to record a flight I'll be happy to do so,by the way SpazSinBad thanks so much for your help! ;)
-
Perhaps I used the wrong terminology for FSX about 'playback'. I don't mean "RECORD" the flight - sorry for confusion. I mean to use the 'Instant Replay' function. I still don't have FSX installed to give more detailed instructions. I guess I can look on FSX help website. The replay will be available at the end of the flight. There is a maximum number of seconds available, with a maximum for any flight. I guess you would want to replay the last 60 seconds of a landing? It may default to that. I forget. I'm not used to having to remember all this stuff to then type out instructions about it. Use the ALT key to look at the menus.
When changing views in 'Instant Replay' use the "Locked Spot" external view otherwise external view will be jerky. I think F11 key will give you that function.
__________________________________
Q: How do you get Instant replay on FSX?
A: "When in flight press "p" to pause the game then press the "alt" key to bring up the menu bar on top and choose 'Options'. 'Instant Replay' should be there."
Useful FSX help website perhaps: http://www.flightsimulatorguide.com/fsxfaq.html
-
Will it save the replay?
-
No. You can only repeat the 'instant replay' in that session of FSX and select that when starting the 'instant replay' only - as I understand it. There are add-ons that will 'record' stuff but I don't really know about them. I make the best flight. Select 'instant replay'. Use FRAPS to record the "IR" etc.
-
While back found an FSX Hornet 'INCORRECT line up landing' and have just found it again today but cannot recall the website. Anyway remember this is not my video and it is NOT a correctly lined up approach. The Hornet is flying along the WAKE which means it is NOT lined up on the angled centreline. For whatever reason it manages to survive this absurd approach. Luck I guess:
http://files.filefront.com/IncorrectHornetFSXapproacdwmv/;13581742;/fileinfo.html (11Mb .WMV)
-
Heres a couple of my traps, 1st ones with a full load of fuel. ;D
&feature=channel
Yes another example of not using the Cat. ;D
-
Subs17, Great. Thanks for the demo using the HUD as it is seen. Many advantages in that for sure. I cannot make out what your airspeed is though. Can you gives us an idea what it was for most of that first video please? Thanks. Nice line up and good on glideslope. Was that your heavy breathing? ;D
-
I sacrifice the frontal wheel to have very stable landing in carrier
(http://g.imagehost.org/0685/contact_points.jpg) (http://g.imagehost.org/download/0685/contact_points)
(http://g.imagehost.org/0067/Realism_fsx.jpg) (http://g.imagehost.org/download/0067/Realism_fsx)
-
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, 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?
I went like this ;D
-
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.
-
Watch in HD
That's exactly how I'd land on a carrier, and it works perfectly fine for me.
-
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.
-
Please keep in mind that this series of photos are from an RF-8 nose camera (to USS Midway) so the perspective shown is not the same that a pilot would see in the same aircraft. The mirror is set up for the pilot eye perspective. Every pilot will sit in different aircraft more or less at the same eye height. So the mirror angle is changed for different aircraft. However to help setup a 'deckspotting approach' to then use the meatball when it can be seen in the simulator; this series of photos is helpful I hope. On the web there are many videos of real carrier approaches by different aircraft - keep in mind that most likely the camera is not seeing what the pilot is seeing - so if the camera sees a low ball then that means the camera is below the pilot eye line. The pilot is likely seeing a centre ball.
-
Subs17, Great. Thanks for the demo using the HUD as it is seen. Many advantages in that for sure. I cannot make out what your airspeed is though. Can you gives us an idea what it was for most of that first video please? Thanks. Nice line up and good on glideslope. What that your heavy breathing? ;D
No not heavy breathing just full fuel tanks, can't remember the airspeed I think it was about 140kts after a flare it dropped to 118kts. ;D
-
look this new contact points :o
-
"No not heavy breathing just full fuel tanks, can't remember the airspeed I think it was about 140kts after a flare it dropped to 118kts." subs17 are you 'pulling our legs' (making a joke)? I have forgotten now what the max AUW is for Hornet carrier landings but I don't think it allows a full fuel load. [On page 1 of this thread is a diagram with some Hornet statistics with 8,500lbs max fuel weight which I gather means no other stores at all.] Personally I would only use a few thousand pounds of fuel to help with engine response and have a lower airspeed due to lower AUW at the Optimum Angle of Attack.... but I have said that before. ;D
Being a carrier aircraft there is no need to flare. A flare even on a runway might mean the Hornet does an 'out of tolerance rate of descent landing' due to a stall (loss of lift). Approaching using the AoA indexer at Optimum, using a reasonable glideslope or the mirror with meatball centred will not break the Hornet (all other things being OK). Reducing fuel weight is important. Landing any aircraft with a full fuel load is unrealistic and not good in the sim either.
Landing with full fuel and a high IAS because of not using the AoA indexer at Optimum will break stuff also. ;D Please no flaring. Tah.
-
Hanimichal, you make fun videos - very entertaining. On that first approach/circuit the LSO would not be pleased. ;D However you demonstrate a lot of skill to get the wheels down and everything sorted to make a landing. In real world the 'break' is just past the bow to allow a minimum time downwind dirty to get everything sorted before the base turn. Otherwise there is too much to do - the LSO knows this so would wave you off if you are not setup dirty at the 'start'. Don't worry - I can see you are having fun.
Despite what you are demonstrating with new contact points the result does not look good from the outside (with nosewheel disappearing). With some practice you will land with usual contact points OK. I'm certain of that from what I have seen. Keep in mind all the points in this thread and others about carrier landing though. Deck Landings require the best precision you can input. Setup early, trimmed with low fuel. If you can set up the carrier to move with wind down the angled deck that will help reduce forces during carrier arrests. Even with a static carrier if you can have the strongest wind down the angle, that will help. I'm not sure if this can be arranged for a static carrier in FSX.
During some of the Goshawk videos at NAS Nowra the wind is the strongest at 36 knots straight down the runway AND without any turbulence. This really helps to have a slow groundspeed and more engine RPM if set up well at beginning. Also having a clear HUD in the Hornet will help a lot I think.
-
For FCLP on a runway with T-vasis (use the ordinary glidepath as indicated in the graphic) you can get a good idea about flying the Optimum Angle of Attack and flying the glideslope. If anyone can arrange to have a carrier deck (without arrestor wires) for a runway so that the mirror can be seen next to the runway that would be ideal but I don't know how to do that yet.
Practising FCLP - a lot - is mandatory for any carrier pilot so don't scoff at doing it yourself. It would also be good to have a carrier setup without wires so that 'touch and goes' could be practised without having to arrest and cat to interrupt the practice. I guess that could be done in other ways though.
-
USN FCLP video from the late 1970s probably. The full video shows Skyhawks, Crusaders and Phantoms FCLPing. The clip shows pilot view at dusk (probably for the sake of the film) with the mirror and landing area marked by lights. Note the touchdown zone - it has ALL THE RUBBER! (3Mb .WMV video 'FCLPmirrorDusk.wmv') & a longer version uploaded now.
http://files.filefront.com/FCLPmirrorDuskwmv/;13705740;/fileinfo.html (3Mb .WMV)
&
http://files.filefront.com/USN+MADDLsHiQmmwmv/;13706486;/fileinfo.html (8Mb .WMV)
-
hey SpazSinbad
thanks very much for details, because I dont know anything in real world aircraft
In my configuration every noob like me can say: goodbye forever spin out of control in the carriers
-------------
[contact_points]
;Gear
;Wingtips
;Bottom
;Top
static_pitch = -3.100
static_cg_height = 6.600
gear_system_type=1 //Hydraulic
emergency_extension_type=2 //None=0,Pump=1,Gravity=2
max_number_of_points=11
point.0= 1, -8.000, 0.000, -6.000, 9999, 0, 1.135, 80.000, 0.200, 3.500, 0.610, 3.000, 3.000, 0
point.1= 1, -35.500, -9.900, -7.400, 9999, 1, 0.635, 0.000, 0.400, 2.500, 0.546, 3.900, 3.900, 2
point.2= 1, -35.500, 9.900, -7.400, 9999, 2, 0.635, 0.000, 0.400, 2.500, 0.546, 3.500, 3.500, 3
point.3= 2, -37.830, -20.000, 0.000, 9999, 0, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 5
point.4= 2, -37.830, 20.000, 0.000, 9999, 0, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 6
point.5= 2, -5.000, 0.000, -1.500, 9999, 0, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 4
point.6= 2, -50.000, -4.000, -2.000, 9999, 0, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 9
point.7= 2, -50.000, 4.000, -2.000, 9999, 0, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 9
point.8= 2, -15.000, 0.000, 5.000, 9999, 0, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 4
point.9= 2, -48.000, -6.600, 9.000, 9999, 0, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 9
point.10= 2, -48.000, 6.600, 9.000, 9999, 0, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 9
--------------------
-
Hanimichal, Nothing wrong with starting out. I need to do that in FSX but as you can see I'm not setup for carriers so far - doing other things. However I do not see the point if you are starting out to use the most difficult flight settings, when you can just as easily wind them back to middle or easy. Then with practice introduce more difficult settings. No need to mess with contact points because (as we can see) things are not so good anyway. Sure you have to learn how to carrier land - which is much different to landing on a runway. That is the point. Don't expect to land on a carrier the same way you might land on a runway.
Remember not every approach can have a good landing - not even in the real world. Pilots can Wave Off or they are told to Wave Off. If things are not going very well then start again. No need to crash on deck. What is the point of that if you can see it coming? Wave Off and try again. Practice Practice Practice. Did I say Practice? Every carrier pilot needs practice before during and after they learn how to carrier land. No one ever gets an approach 100% correct. They may get close but they always strive for the best every time. If it is not working out then they wave off.
FCLP ashore is worthwhile practice with the T-vasi with the hook down so that you see a proper steady AoA indexer. Practice. The whole point of Navy flying is to carrier land. If you cannot do that then you are not a Carrier pilot. So practice - but I said that. Real world requires constant practice ashore and afloat. No ifs or buts. Practice practice practice. It is fun because it is difficult and it is always difficult to do it 100% correct. You can see precisely via the AoA indexer and line up and meatball how bad or good your approach is every millisecond. Always get back to the ideal. Don't accept anything less.
-
Spaz,
After reading some of your posts, I can't help but notice your comments about the AoA indexer. You mentioned that due to it blinking with the tail hook in the up position, that it isn't of any good use. If you are on a stabilized approach, your AoA should not be changing THAT rapidly between the 1 second intervals that the indexer blinks. I know your remedy to the problem is to make the approaches with the hook down, but you might want to try the following if you decide to go back to making approaches with the hook up.
1. Since your AOA indexer is directly related to your angle of attack, use it as a secondary input. By this, I mean once you are established on the approach with the amber donut (blinking or not) confirm that your AoA on the HUD is right around 8(+/- 1 degree), which is what gives you the amber donut.
2. Take a look at your airspeed. As long as you maintain your weight/airspeed combination you will remain "on-speed" for that approach.
3. Once you are "on the ball" make sure you keep your velocity vector around 3.5 to 4 degrees below the horizon line in your HUD
4. Maintain your optimum "on-speed" while keeping the velocity vector at 3.5 to 4 degrees below the horizon until touchdown.
Tips: As you make your approach, keep an eye on the ball, if you notice you are getting a little low on the approach, add a little power to bring the velocity vector closer the the horizon line in your HUD, once you are pretty close to being back on the ball, reduce power, to lower the velocity vector back around 3.5 to 4 degrees below the horizon line. If you are a little above the glideslope, do the opposite by reducing power a little to bring the velocity vector down to around the 5 degree line below the horizon. Once you are close to getting back on the glideslope, increase power to maintain. Once you are back on, double check that you are still at the speed that gave you the amber donut (or check that the AoA is still indicating about 8 degrees on your HUD). Hope this helps.
-Jimi
-
"No not heavy breathing just full fuel tanks, can't remember the airspeed I think it was about 140kts after a flare it dropped to 118kts." subs17 are you 'pulling our legs' (making a joke)? I have forgotten now what the max AUW is for Hornet carrier landings but I don't think it allows a full fuel load. [On page 1 of this thread is a diagram with some Hornet statistics with 8,500lbs max fuel weight which I gather means no other stores at all.] Personally I would only use a few thousand pounds of fuel to help with engine response and have a lower airspeed due to lower AUW at the Optimum Angle of Attack.... but I have said that before. ;D
Being a carrier aircraft there is no need to flare. A flare even on a runway might mean the Hornet does an 'out of tolerance rate of descent landing' due to a stall (loss of lift). Approaching using the AoA indexer at Optimum, using a reasonable glideslope or the mirror with meatball centred will not break the Hornet (all other things being OK). Reducing fuel weight is important. Landing any aircraft with a full fuel load is unrealistic and not good in the sim either.
Landing with full fuel and a high IAS because of not using the AoA indexer at Optimum will break stuff also. ;D Please no flaring. Tah.
I was proving a point that it could be done in FSX of course the AoA is well modeled in the FSX acceleration hornet but also as the video shows take offs don't require the CAT either. ;D
-
Jimi08, Thanks for HUD advice. I would not know how to use it so any hints are welcome. To me that is entirely a different way to carrier land - rather than use the AoA indexer. I'm very comfortable using the indexer (even though I may have to drop the hook 'unnecessarily'). I'll need to practice a lot ashore using the HUD exclusively to get the 'hang of it' as you have described.
As you have described maybe it it timely to remind users how to 'carrier land'? It is different compared to the more usual method to land on a runway. I was initially trained with the Oz Air Force (RAAF) then went back to the RAN after that basic flight training. My RAAF instructors compared the 'carrier landing' approach to a conventional 'short landing' technique. This required full flap, steady airspeed some 5-10 knots above aircraft stall speed with power on and a steeper than usual approach angle (however a flare was required at the end).
A conventional landing requires (in my book anyway) reducing power, airspeed with a constant approach angle and with a flare at the end. The carrier approach requires constant AoA at Optimum, with constant approach angle and excellent line up.
However a Navy pilot uses power to keep the rate of descent at optimum to be on the meatball centred glideslope. While the nose is moved up or down slightly as the power is increased or decreased to maintain the OAoA (airspeed). This is the reverse of the conventional technique (as I was taught by the RAAF). This different way of using power and nose position takes some getting used to - hence the practice required (away from the carrier - doing FCLP). That is how I'll practice the new HUD technique. No point in doing too much at the carrier that is new. The carrier environment requires total mastery of the technique.
Many other posts here and on the web (mentioned in URLs on this site) have a ton of information and detail on how to carrier land. If anyone tries to use a conventional landing technique with a flare to carrier land - then good luck to them. ;D
-
Subs17, people will do as they please I realise. My advice is usually very general because there is no way I can know how people are using FSX even though they post videos. I still cannot see what they are doing to produce the result in the video. For example dialling up the sim difficulty to the max then crippling it by changing the hardpoints is counterproductive. May as well dial down the difficulty and leave the hardpoints alone.
To me the only reason to use FSX is to use Navy aircraft with good AoA indexers. I realise that most users use FSX differently and have a lot of fun. My posts have been to point out that carrier landing requires different techniques and some 'how to advice'. I reckon the sim is there to enjoy so I hope people can do that and not be frustrated by the difficulty of carrier landing. With practice (mostly ashore and then later at the carrier) it will be a lot of fun. That is how I see things. I think it is totally unnecessary to change stuff to overcome poor carrier landing technique.
Now I have to go practice the new HUD technique (a lot). ;D :D
-
Yeah I use full realism and haven't edited anything yet, the pros for FSX accelerations carrier ops are that it is not scripted like previous sims and the player has full freedom on the deck to taxi up to the cat and launch. A big let down is the MP in particular the AI carriers not being MP compatible. I actually like the fact that you do have to lower your weight by dumping fuel to land previous sims never modeled this and its a step in the right direction just a pity that there is no combat yet.(eventhough my videos show some bad examples) The only sim thats more detailed as far as carrierOps is concerned is the VRS Superhornet which requires the calculation of the aircrafts end speed and take off trim setting for the cat launch by using tables. Now all we need is a sim that combines the best of both for the ultimate carrier based sim. 8)
-
Subs17, what freeware carrier would you recommend to go do some carrier flying from? Does your carrier move and is there a strong wind down the angle deck? Thanks. I used to do carrier stuff in all the other versions of Fsim but soon gave up. FSX certainly looks a lot better - as you are saying.
Have you used the freeware Goshawk? Latest version 1.8 is out and it is good for practice using AoA (not sure if the HUD is as usable as the Hornet HUD). Why? Because I use only the indexer. ;D
http://indiafoxtecho.blogspot.com/2009/05/t-45c-goshawk-version-180-released.html
Soon there will be a KAHU Skyhawk available with a nice see through HUD and an excellent AoA indexer alongside. Latest video showing working slats and proper spoiler function here: (44Mb .WMV)
http://files.filefront.com/KahuDroopSlatsSpoilersOKtTwmv/;13711907;/fileinfo.html
-
I just use AI carriers as you can set the carrier alone or as part of a fleet and you can get it to move which is very cool. Wind can be set through the weather in FSX but I never bother with it. You can also set the weather to real weather data in the settings custom weather menu if you're after the same effect as whats going on outside. ;D Yes I have the Goshawk it has one of the best 3d models and pits that I have seen for free ware. You can get the AICARRIERs from AVsim. As for the Kahu it sounds good they were the most advanced version of the A4 pity they are in storage at the moment always nice seeing them flying around will its 3d model include the pop out emergency generator? ;D
-
subs17, thanks - I'll look at the AI carriers then. I think you will have better landings if you make a strong wind down the angled deck on your carrier. The wind will reduce your groundspeed giving you more time in the groove and it will reduce any adverse forces during that landing that may give you a 'crash'. Try it. If your carrier landings work better with a strong wind (directly down the angled deck) then please let us know. Thanks.
I'll ask about the emergency generator for the KAHU Skyhawk. At moment I don't know but likely it could be modelled if it is not modelled already. The HUD is terrific - easy to see and it is see through. The Brazilian Navy plan to upgrade their Skyhawk fleet of twelve to a comparable KAHU standard while the Argentine Air Force already have a good upgraded set of Skyhawks (not sure of the details of these two because I'm not a speaker/reader of their respective languages to get a comprehension of the details).
-
subs17: Here is the modeller's answer to your question: "Um, I could model it but probably wouldn't actually do anything.... not sure if any point :)"
My question to subs17 would be also: apart from having a funny air turbine dropping out of the fuselage what else would it do (except perhaps model the lack of electronics in the real situation etc.) in the Skyhawk that is worthwhile?
-
I think its for when it has a flame out, if the engine was modeled realistically with turbine stalls etc then that would probably be part of the procedure I guess to use it. Not sure if its automatic or if they throw a switch for it t pop out BTW the radar is off the F-16 forgotten which block though and the HUD is Ferranti from what I recall last time I read about it.
-
subs17, I'm a former A4G pilot a very long time ago now (some 35 years) so I know how the RAT (Ram Air Turbine) emergency generator is used. I won't have access to the KAHU version of NATOPS (pilot flight manual) for various reasons - one being the aircraft is still so highly classified that it cannot be sold to a third party even to this day. As you say the KAHUs remain 'wrapped in plastic' (think "Twin Peaks") outside in the weather in New Zealand - unsold. However there are several variations (in quality only) of the A4E/F/G/K (the KAHU was an A4K before being modified) NATOPS at FileFront. The best quality PDF (135Mb) of my actual NATOPS manual (with A4G extra pages) is at: http://files.filefront.com/A4Gnatops692ppBestQualitypdf/;11720369;/fileinfo.html
Look on this page for other variations including the PCL (Pocket Check List): http://hosted.filefront.com/SpazSinbad/page2
Anyway after all that you can find the relevant RAT pages explaining that it is manually activated but it knocks out a lot of electrics in operation. Of course it is necessary when there is no engine for an engine restart. However it is tested but deployed just before landing because it is such a hassle to use (for a test). Really just having the RAT deployed serves no purpose for Fsim use. Anyway I'm not the modeller so I can only offer my opinions about how the KAHU will turn out in FSX.
Even in use for test deploying the RAT (with the large yellow black striped handle under & slightly outboard of the HOOK handle on the right side of cockpit) things could go wrong if the pilot mistakenly pulled the 'CANOPY JETTISON HANDLE' (aft both handles mentioned) which was more difficult to reach. This happened to an ex-A4G when in service with the RNZAF. Pilot landed OK without canopy and aircraft repaired. [See Graphic attached.]
The FSX KAHU HUD as seen in the videos at FileFront is excellent and modelled as close as possible (with all the button functions on the keypad underneath) to the real thing. Yes the radar is an F-16 model. You can GOOGLE for info about it online. From Wikipedia here is a synopsis: "Westinghouse AN/APG-66 radar optimized for maritime tracking, HOTAS controls and a 'glass' cockpit (2 large CRT screens), MIL-STD 1553B databus; Litton LN-93 inertial navigation system, Ferranti 4510 wide-angle HUD, the Vinten airborne video recording system, the General Instruments ALR-66 radar warning receiver, and a Tracor ALR-39 chaff/flare dispenser." & here is info about the radar: http://www.scramble.nl/wiki/index.php?title=Northrop_Grumman_(Westinghouse)_AN/APG-66
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Thanks for the info SpazSinbad I think that will come in handy for JT when its released I hope their A4s have the RAT modeled as you would definately have to use it in combat.
(http://www.thunder-works.com/media/losestados8.jpg)
Regarding paint schemes I've seen Kahu A4s flying with Aggressor blue, Standard Lizard, Desert and aggressor grey colour schemes and also an aniversary Gold paint scheme most of them were painted dark green though. For F-16 radar I'd reccomend the MLU tapes 1 and 2 as that covers the radar modes for APG 66 V2.
http://www.skyhawk.org/5e/g154911/html/154912c.htm
(Gold A4, BTW one of the pilots took a female reporter for a ride in this bird and wound up marrying her)
MLU tape 1
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/ebooks/F-16%20MLU1.pdf
tape 2
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/ebooks/F-16%20MLU2.pdf
(wow new version of Tape 2 ;D)
If you want to see how the APG 66 V2 handles with these modes then get Open Falcon as it models the Radar modes quite realistically and it also features the DTC and Datalink which works in MP.
-
subs17, WOW! Thanks for the links to the two F16 radar PDFs. I'll have to ask my KAHU contacts now where the KAHU differs - but I could not tell by myself. On the web there are the usual low quality HUD tapes from the KAHU but that is about it. Interesting snippet about GOLD TA4K pilot marrying his passenger. That GOLD clip is in the RNZAF section of the online PDFs. However for the moment none are on this webpage: http://www.a4ghistory.com/
Latest A4G Royal Australian Navy Fleet Air Arm Skyhawks with the other RAN Jets (before and during) is at: http://www.a4ghistory.com/A4G_RAN_JETS_ONLY_May09.pdf (1.86GB)
MAKE SURE YOU RIGHT CLICK TO 'SAVE AS' rather than allow Adobe Reader to download the PDF by left clicking on the URL. Otherwise of course use a Download Manager. At the same web page there is a long .WMV video clip about A4G ops on HMAS Melbourne: http://www.a4ghistory.com/A4G_GreyWinterMortonSilent24m50s.wmv
Sometime soon the 4.4GB PDF will be available at the first URL (with the other files above). This one will have RNZAF Skyhawk info as well as USN etc. It is essential to use Adobe Reader 9.1 or better (update soon) and best to be using WinXP SP2 or higher. MAC users are going to be disappointed - if they get to read about this PDF somehow.
I'm not sure why you think the RAT is so useful to be modelling in Fsim. Jet Thunder (JT) has been around for a long time - I doubt we will see it released - but it would be nice. Why would they model other A4s? IF the RAT is deployed the A4 is in big trouble (depending on situation). Even for a test the RAT was deployed minutes from the airfield to minimise complications after deployment. Yes because the Skyhawk has no battery the RAT was essential when the engine stopped to get it going again or when electrics failed for specific reasons. But it was not a cure all device.
A 1GB PDF that is about the A4G ONLY is at FileFront: http://files.filefront.com/1GB+A4G+ONLY+15apr09pdf/;13602748;/fileinfo.html
The PDFs mentioned here have info about 'how to deck land' for the Skyhawk which applies to the Hornet also.
-
Yeah the reason why I mentioned the RAT is its good to model the aircraft fully in a jet combat sim like JT that way when you do run into such a problem you can use it. For FSX you would use it for movies or if it were modeled like the VRS Superhornet then you could also set the damage and then use the procedures to recover the aircraft. For civy sims its not so important but if you were in a war like my Squadron is at the moment then getting back to base and saving the airframe is important to winning the war. eg my first war mission all my Slammers missed their target and a 5th Element aircraft drew me into range of an SA6 while I was in the merge. Consequently I was visually acquired by an SA6 in my F22 and got hit so my wingman got the kill and I limped home in my 22 landing at the base in what I can only describe as a very delicate sideways approach(and without rudder or NWS) ;D. My 22 got repaired and is back in the air again but the other guys lost some aircraft which they can no longer use and there is only so many each side has.
Another piece of advice if your friends who are making this Kahu really want to see it in a combat sim that is possible and there are no limits to how detailed its modeled if you used the DCS engine. SDKs are available for DCS and it should support 99% of an A4s avionics and 100% of its weapons in a 6dof clickable cockpit.
Eagle Dynamics DCS 3rd Party Support Packages
In an effort to better support 3rd party development of Digital Combat Simulator (DCS), Eagle Dynamics will create a set of plug-ins that will allow 3rd party developers far greater capability to modify and add to DCS. Current plug-in support includes:
Physical Cockpit Interface Package (PCIP). This package provides support to cockpit builders and allows them to more efficiently, and with great depth of capability, to port systems simulated in software to their physical cockpits. This includes support to various projection systems.
Terrain Builder. This plug-in to 3DSMax 7 allows developers to create new terrain maps (elevation, texturing, and object placement) that can be used within DCS. DCS will feature the ability to load multiple maps into the ME and simulation and allow 3rd party to create multiple map-sets as free or paid-for add-ons. This will be the first SDK and we plan to release it in April-May 2009.
3D Model Builder. This plug-in to 3DSMax 7 allows the creation of animated, 3D objects that can be used to populate DCS.
6 DOF Cockpit Builder. This plug-in allows object builders to create new 6 DOF cockpits that can be assigned to DCS user-created aircraft.
External Flight Model Linking. This software package allows the linking of 3rd party flight dynamic systems into DCS to control aircraft.
GUI Source Package. This package includes sources codes to allow the developer to create their own GUI screens, Mission Editor, Campaign Editor.
Also, in the coming weeks we will open a new, private forum for 3rd party developers. This forum will allow such developers to share ideas, talk with Eagle staff, and discuss their projects with their peers.
Further details will be made available after the release of DCS: Black Shark. Until then, note that all the above is subject to change.
__________________
Matt Wagner
Producer, TFC/Eagle Dynamics
http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=31052
Another thing is this would allow a more detailed FM than FSX could.
-
subs17, OK now I think I understand what you are saying about your combat sim requirements. Fair enough. However the A4 with the RAT deployed is in a lot of trouble unless CAVU weather conditions. For the KAHU I don't know what the end result would be but probably similar to standard Skyhawk with very few avionics working. What is JT? I had assumed that was "Jet Thunder" the long never appearing Falklands War simulator. Is it out now? I'll have to look. http://www.thunder-works.com/news.htm No news there but other games websites say something is happening?
The RAT for an FSX movie is all well and good but I'm not making the KAHU. I have asked about modelling the ejection system working and that got a laugh. :-) Way back I saw an Impala (Macchi Jet) canopy ejecting then two seats ejecting as they should, modelled in FS2000 I think. That was my reason for asking; but it is only useful for 'the movies'. However working slats / speedbrakes / spoilers etc. are fundamental to any A4 aircraft in a sim. I'll have to ask about the chute brake system also. Never used it myself (in A4G) so I had forgotten about that until now.
Thanks for the advice for the FSX KAHU modeller. I'll pass your information on (I don't know what it means) AFAIK the KAHU is for FSX only but I don't really know if it is intended for anything else. Good luck with your combat sims.
-
That 8mm skyhawk footage is absolute gold quite rare to see films of carrierOps like that. With regard the RAT I see it like I look at the F-16s tail hook, its a moving external part for the 3d model that is used in emergencys so for a complete 3d model thats what you would expect. If the modeller doesn't model it then no problem it'll still fly but with it the model is more complete. As for ejection sequence then if that were added it would be a bit like the VRS SH and then you would need the pit to feature the seat arming lever etc it all depends on how detailed the aircrafts going to be. IMO I'd pay for a fully detailed A4 regardless of which version if it were at the same level as the VRS SH but my friends probably wouldn't however if it were a payware addon for DCS with full combat capability then it would sell very well. I think at the moment there is only JT(Jet Thunder) and 7G are the only cold war jet combat sims in development. I like JTs Skyhawk pit which is 6DOF and allows the pilot to view the probe for refuelling. One other thing the Kahu must have the drogue chute modelled otherwise its not going to be done correctly as all Kahu A4s used the chute to land or they used field arresting kit.
-
subs17, I'll post the modellers answer to your question - or he may reply here?
UPDATE: KAHU Skyhawk modellers reply: QUOTE
"Hmmm I know NOTHING about DCS and am not 'at this time' interested. The
project has already consumed a great deal of time and the initial plan was
to model for FSX and I intend to stick to that. I am not however ruling out
developing it further for other sims, merely completing the task at hand."
-
That sounds cool how detailed will it be? Will we be able to do a full ramp start?
-
Quote from FSX KAHU modeller: "Hopefully yes :)
&
More A4G videos on Utube:
http://www.youtube.com/profile?gl=AU&hl=en-GB&user=bengello&view=videos
-
Tell your modeller I have a PSD for the RNZAF Roundel(left and right) and the Tiki for 75Sqn if you wish to use for the RNZAF skin it was off a RNZAF F-16 Skin I did a couple of years ago for Falcon so you guys are welcome to it.
-
subs17, thanks for the offer. Can you post the files somewhere or do you need to e-mail them? I use FileFront for most 'smaller than 1GB' file transfers. As you may imagine the Kiwis are not far away and because the A4G went to New Zealand for conversion to A4K and then KAHU I'm interested in Kiwi Skyhawks. There is an official set of drawings for the original SEA camo scheme at FileFront: http://files.filefront.com/A4K+markings+1970+80+RNZAFpdf/;12286100;/fileinfo.html (3.8Mb).
Soon I'll post a 1GB PDF about the RNZAF Skyhawks ONLY at FileFront. In the meantime there is a small KAHU info PDF (15Mb) at: http://files.filefront.com/KahuUpdateRNZAFonlypdf/;13637626;/fileinfo.html This is not comprehensive because my interest is in the A4G. Speaking of which the refreshed 4.4GB PDF is being uploaded to http://www.a4ghistory.com/ Upload should finish by tomorrow sometime.
At present there is only the 1.86GB PDF mentioned earlier (only with A4G & RAN FAA jets content) on this page. It will stay there with the 4.4GB PDF and then a new .WMV video with music will be uploaded. The old one had to be replaced - not enough room on the website.
-
subs17, I don't know where you get your information about the KAHU: "...all Kahu A4s used the chute to land or they used field arresting kit." The last phrase 'or they used field arresting kit' is not true. The KAHUs could land on ordinary runways (such as NAS Nowra at 6,000 foot length) without the chutes but of course they liked to use them when possible. However they did not have an USMC style portable field arrestor gear (USMC used a portable field catapult also particularly in South Vietnam). However most RNZAF airfields including NAS Nowra and most RAAF airfields in Australia have some 'short field arresting gear' (which includes the other end for an aborted takeoff arrest or a last ditch landing arrest). Mostly the short field gear would only be used for practice or demonstrations at 'flying display days' for example OR for a real emergency which happened from time to time.
The drogue chute for the A4K is being worked on. Here is a pic of the real deal:
-
SpazSinbad send me a pm with your email address and I'll email them to you. I can tell you on NZ airfields 99% of the time I saw the chutes used on landings. I also saw the portable arrester kit used when it was first being trialled in NZ as well as one incident where an A4 had a problem with its gear and so the pilot used up most of his fuel and then used the hook to land.
-
subs17, I agree that would be the way to operate with the chutes if they were available. I'll post some pics of their arrests and PM you also. An RNZAF correspondent has just informed me that the A-4Ks were the first Skyhawks with the brake chutes (with the container modified a few years later to match the A-4M model brake chute container) with the first Israeli brake chute aircraft following on from the A-4Ks.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
A4G-FAA_scrapbook_11may09 4.49GB PDF* download
http://www.a4ghistory.com/
This PDF or similar has been discussed earlier so I thought the FREE download notice might be useful?
Bear with me. This is a 'refresh' of a previous 4.4GB PDF made available at
the end of last year approx. Some new RAN A4G & other RAN aircraft content
has been added at the expense of irrelevant content, such as the USAF
Thunderbirds (no reflection on them). The PDF is about the RAN Fleet Air Arm
Aircraft and A4G Skyhawks in particular but included are examples of the
other users of the Skyhawk; with again emphasis on the USN and RNZAF A-4s.
Website text follows: [Please do NOT left mouse click on the URL below]
_________________________________________
A4G-FAA_scrapbook_11may09 4.49GB PDF* download:
*(Right click on the link below & 'Save Target As...')
This very large PDF has all the Royal Australian Navy Fleet Air Arm jet
aircraft, with emphasis on each individual A4G Skyhawk aircraft history.
Included are the other fixed wing (prop & jet) and helicopters in the RAN
FAA are highlighted. Also included are other users of Skyhawks, in the past
and today, with an emphasis on the RNZAF & USN A-4s. Necessarily this PDF is
large to be able to include the various aircraft described above.
Please use Adobe Reader 9 or higher on Windows XP SP2 or higher to get the
best viewing experience from this PDF. There are popup graphics or embedded
video clips in some pages that require the latest Adobe Flash Player &/or
Windows Media Player 10 or above. MAC users may be disappointed by being
unable to see these popups or videos.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not allow Adobe Reader to download this file (by just 'left button
mouse clicking' on the URL below) because the download will FAIL. Best to
use a File Download Manager OR the 'right click' 'Save Target As...' from
the Windows menu method.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.a4ghistory.com/A4G-FAA_scrapbook_11may09.pdf
-
subs17, I agree that would be the way to operate with the chutes if they were available. I'll post some pics of their arrests and PM you also. An RNZAF correspondent has just informed me that the A-4Ks were the first Skyhawks with the brake chutes (with the container modified a few years later to match the A-4M model brake chute container) with the first Israeli brake chute aircraft following on from the A-4Ks.
So for a realistic Kahu you would need to script the chute to be activated by the player and modify the FM to reflect the drag. You would also need to have a script to release the chute and to reinstall the chute. BTW the protable arrester kit was tested by a Kahu Skyhawk unlike the above photos with the fixed arrester gear.
-
subs17, OK thanks - I'll follow the portable arrestor gear for the RNZAF trail. All I know is what people tell me or write about the A4K. Do you happen to know where the portable arrestor gear was trialled and when? Because the aircraft were in service for such a long time people have different knowledge of it, according to different times (before / after KAHU for example). Thanks for the headsup. All the RNZAF Skyhawk info from the beginning to the end especially is in the 4.4GB PDF available online. There is more information about their time in Australia because that was most interesting to me. What I will do in a weeks time is make a small version of just this RNZAF info in the PDF available. If you like Skyhawks the 4.4GB should keep you entertained. ;D
-
The portable arrester gear was tested about the late 80s sometime around 88 or 89 and at the same time the aircraft were going through their upgrade. I recall reading a newspaper that had a photo of an A4 without the hump testing it in Woodbourne. I think the only A4 thats probably better than the Kahu is the Singapore version:
A-4SU = General Electric F404-100D / 10,800lbs.
I also like the Topgun version.
-
subs17, thanks for info. As more is collected I'll just add it here. Below is first response from a Kiwi forum:
"They were using the portable arrestor gear at Woodbourne in 1989 when i was there, probably about April-Julyish, not certain exactly but that's when I was at No. 4TTS. That was pre-Kahu however I'd guess as we also watched the first ever Kahu being handed over at Woodbourne in a special ceremony during the same period. As there was only one Kahu flying then (a T-bird) and I seem to recall several aircrfat using the arrestor, I'd say most if not all were pre-Kahu.
I have a feeling i saw that arrestor used at Wigram once too. It used to be on the back of a green truck from memory and could be deployed around the place."
-
Back then there was also just one pilot trainned as a test pilot and he was on a documentary about pilots doing a test pilot course in the UK. I'm quite sure that pilot would've been doing that course especially to test the Kahu.
-
subs17, that may well have been the case to have a dedicated RNZAF test pilot trained for initial KAHU testing. However most airforces/air arms have at least one current test pilot trained in a good US or UK TP school. I would imagine that the RNZAF has at least one test pilot all the time, similarly in the fixed wing era the RAN FAA had a test pilot for all the odd testing jobs required, along with the usual jobs a test pilot will carry out from time to time.
From another message about the 'Portable Arrestor Gear' we can see how the WB runway needed it:
"The PAG was predominantly used at Woodbourne whenever Skyhawk test flights were programmed.
The PAG is still stored at Woodbourne I think (as part of the Skyhawk sale package). From
memory when we bought it in the mid 80s it was second hand. It was bought primarily for use
at Woodbourne when a Skyhawk was doing its post servicing test flights, due to WB's shortish
runway. However it was also deployed away from Woodbourne occassionally (only within NZ tho)."
&
"Portable Arrestor Gear (PAG) at WB at the time - 1988-89...it was purchased as part of the KAHU work...idea being to always have it at the 'long' end of the runway for all KAHU flights- should there be a problem. First 'traps' were done pre-NZ6254 (KAHU T-Bird prototype)..."
-
Just for the heck of it - below is a photo of the RAT (Ram Air Turbine) Emergency Generator deployed on a 'pretend' A4G (made out of an A4B with nose lengthened artfully) at the FAAM (Fleet Air Arm Museum) at NAS Nowra, NSW, Australia. For a while the aircraft was suspended (before and after it was on undercarriage on floor). Now the aircraft has been repainted in a different scheme and it is on the floor. Not sure if the RAT remains deployed. The A4 did not have a battery so it needed electrical power source when engine failed in flight - not only to restart the engine but to overcome any other electrical problems such as a failure of the main generator (run from the engine). Lack of battery was to save weight. Later models of the Skyhawk I believe such as the A4M had a battery and also a self start capacity.
2nd photo shows new paint scheme - and yes RAT still deployed. ;D & Now a closeup of the 'pesky rat'.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
A KAHU walkaround is here: http://a4alley.t35.com/models/Walkarounds/A-4K-Walkaround.html
& RAT pic is here: http://a4alley.t35.com/A4-Alley/walkaround/RAT-out.jpg
I'm told that the RNZAF PAG (Portable Arrestor Gear) was very similar to this example of an RAF PAG:
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Hey SpazSinbad you should start a separate thread about the Kahu and keep us updated on its progress.
-
subs17, this thread went wobbly and it is about the FSX Hornet so I'll not start a KAHU thread. However I'll say that it is getting close to be ready for a full test. What needs to be changed after a full test I have no idea. It will have an opening canopy and aft hell hole. The 3D cockpit will see the fuel probe. The HUD will be all singing all dancing (but I don't know how to test that). The slats work as they should incrementally. The HUD display is magic as well as the AoA indexer. It will be excellent. ;D It should have a working brake parachute - have not seen that yet.
-
Now heres where an actual pilot is required, make sure that:
1/ the pit is 6dof
2/ the location of the refuelling probe is at the correct realistic position in the pit. eg the JT Skyhawk pit is 6dof and yes you do have to move your head to the right spot to see it.
-
subs17, I'm not making the KAHU model. It is up to the model maker how it is made. My comments are on the result.
For real world A4 the simple thought was to 'put the right boot into the basket' and it was as simple as that for air refuelling from an A4 buddy store. Most jets today would have seats adjustable, with the pilot having a preferred seat position. Mine would have been full up so that helmet almost 'buzzed' on the canopy. Some preferred seat at lowest postion (not me) I like to see as much as I can.
-
So could you see the fuel probe with your head lined up with the HUD or did you have to move it to the right and forward to see it? The reason I ask and greatly suggest that the people making this is to take it into account as with 6dof using trakir you have the freedom to take advantage of current technology to make it into a master piece.
Show the people doing it this:
Note 20secs from start how the pilot can see the probe.
Compare to this:
&feature=related
Thats the difference between a 6dof pit and a 3d pit.
And heres why, because of the trakir:
http://www.naturalpoint.com/trackir/
-
subs17, Have not seen the videos yet but will after this post. I'll pass on your information to the model maker and post a reply - if any. I don't have this TRAKIR and am unlikely to get it to test. Do you have TRAKIR?
For an A4 pilot the probe (bent or otherwise) should be in view at all times. One sees beyond the oval front frame and eventually both the frame and the probe become invisible for all intents and purposes. I guess for the HUD users this would happen also. The HUD seems to fill the front view now; but the pilot looks through and beyond all this clutter to focus on what is relevant at the time. So for air refuelling from a buddy tanker the pilot would fly slowly up to the refuelling basket to put the probe into the basket so that it will be locked there by, not so much concentrating on the probe tip; but by imagining 'putting the right boot into the basket'. This helps the new pilot especially go beyond stopping inches short of the basket. IF this happens then all kinds of funny business is likely to occur; which can become very amusing to onlookers. The new pilot will tend to start over controlling with the aircraft gyrating around the stable probe tip - just short of the basket. No one can do this intentionally but if they stop short this is what will happen. So they need to concentrate on two aspects to cruise slowly into the basket - then no worries.
-
Yes I have a Trakir I bought it because when I used to dogfight people in lockon the guys with trakir always used to beat me until I bought one. Essentially a Trakir is a infrared camera that reads the movement of infrared reflectors on either a baseball cap or the reflectors can be setup on a headset. With 6dof you can turn your pilots head left/right/up/down/sideways left/right/tilt head left/right and if you move your head into closer to the monitor then the screen zooms in or back to zoom out. In a dogfight you can keep track of the bandit the whole time without using keys or Hotas buttons to pan the view.
Heres a video of the latest trakir(5) in the latest FPS sim Arma2.(which features aircraft as well)
IF this happens then all kinds of funny business is likely to occur; which can become very amusing to onlookers.
Yeah we get situations like this refuelling in FalconAF where guys over do the throttle inputs the only sim I've seen so far that models basket refuelling the best is Lockon Flaming cliffs where the slack in the hose was modeled(not scripted) which was alot of fun to hook up to. Currently F4AF is the most realistic sim for refuelling as it has Tacan channels and the AI respond and behave realistically. They'll hookup to the probe top up then move to the left wing they also model not so good AI pilots who take longer to top up. VRS superhornet features basket refuelling as well but I haven't tried it yet as I do not have the full version of FSUIPC.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v452/SUBS17/ScreenShot_008.jpg)
I can only imagine how much fun it is to do it IRL as you've got the wind effects as well to contend with I've seen videos of Skyhawks refuelling and notice that with the Kahu in particular the pilot is looking close to the HUD.
I've read about worse things happening while refuelling:
Gold A4
Kiwi Red Aerobatic display team
&feature=related
&feature=related
&feature=related
&feature=related
&feature=related
Bombing with A4s
&feature=related
Why Airshows in New Zealand can never be as good as this now.
-
The refuelling looks impressive in the graphic and as you describe in those other sims which I don't have. I can understand how the TRACKIR is good for the dogfight capability. Having a good mental map of where opponents are and what they are likely to do helps a lot but of course keeping them in sight is ideal, preferably at 12 o'clock. ;D Not having seen the videos yet I cannot comment on them. The YIPS or "heebie geebies" as it was called long ago were worse with the straight probe A4. A newbie would go right to the edge of the basket and STOP! Then he would rotate his aircraft every which way but not move the tip of the probe from the edge of the basket. It is highly comical to watch from the outside and no fun inside the aircraft. During training a pilot has it drilled into him to NOT touch the other aircraft in formation for obvious reasons. It is a prime directive to have to overcome for air refuelling and not so easy. Behind a A4 buddy store the turbulence is not noticed except the turbulence at low level that will make hooking on more difficult. In clear air at altitude the receiver will be well below the turbulence generated by the tanker. I have not done air refuelling with any other refueller so I guess with large tankers there must be some turbulence to contend with. Dino Cattaneo has info on 'FreeTrack' here for anyone interested:
http://indiafoxtecho.blogspot.com/2009/01/freetrack-freeware-head-tracking.html
-
Yeah I've seen Kahu A4s refuel in barrel roll it looked quite impressive pity they lost one doing that manouver though.
-
subs17, the barrel roll formation with one plugged was called 'the swan'. I have my thoughts on the crash that are not relevant for this forum. However there are lots of good videos of the 'Kiwi Red' doing 'the swan' online. I guess one of your links above shows it. In the meantime here is a video of a would be 'Kiwi Red' coming to grips with ARF: http://files.filefront.com/RNZAFrefuelYIPSwmv/;13807798;/fileinfo.html (3Mb .WMV video)
-
Yeah I've always wanted to do that in mp hopefully either Jet Thunder, FighterOps or DCS will feature an A4 with that ability in MP. In VRS Superhornet there is a buddy refuel pod for the Superhornet but its invisible in MP with FS2004. I'm hoping the FSX version might work better since FSX supports slingloads so you can connect objects to aircraft. It was very sad about the A4 lost doing that barrel roll as it affected all the other A4s in service getting less used until they mothballed them.
-
Subs17, your comment about the A4Ks 'being less used' because of an accident is not true. Reason why RNZAF Strike Wing disbanded was political and yes the Skyhawks were getting old, needing upgrading again; but it gets too complicated to explain in detail for this forum. Standing out in the rain today they are not likely to be ever sold - after all this time being grounded. Old, more capable US aircraft (F-15s & F-16s) will become available soon to probably flood the civilian / warbird support market in the USA. I'm hoping the RNZAF A4Ks will go to museums etc. One example KAHU is owed to the FAAM museum at NAS Nowra (gentleman's agreement at the time of sale from Australia to New Zealand). My choice would be the survivor TA4G (turned into a KAHU). That one would be a great asset for display showing how the G became a KAHU.
-
Speaking of A4s.
http://www.vimeo.com/2192352
Nice to see VBA using them here.
-
Thanks, these guys make great videos, what is the sim being used here?
-
Its Lockon Flaming Cliffs I've been to VBA and some of the other Formation team try outs. They are alot of fun to fly with but it is quite demanding as it takes a fair bit of concentration.(also requires daily trainning to perform like that)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v452/SUBS17/ScreenShot_576.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v452/SUBS17/ScreenShot_577.jpg)
You'll probably find that those A4s would likely use an SU33 pit as most aircraft mods require either F-15C or SU33 pit aside the C130 which I think uses an A-10A pit thats the limitation with Lockon FC but with DCS full 6dof 3d pits and addon aircraft are possible due to the SDK.
-
Thanks for sim info (only have standard old LOMAC here) subs17, looks like you have fun.
-
Thats a few years ago I did that now days I fly with the Airwolves for Seawolves Virtual Navy and our primary sim is Falcon 4 Allied Forces although some guys still use Lockon. Just recently some of the guys have got DCS Black Shark so thats the next sim I'm learning until they release the A-10C. Last month we were in a war with another Virtual Navy the 5th Element which went well and was fought in the Air, at Sea and on the ground in the Panama theatre. Our next exercise is Red Flag which will be next month sometime.
-
Perhaps this 'cheapware' KAHU will become available soon? Anyway with a few issues to correct here is a mess about video of a test flight: (some items not shown or visible - next time the HUD will be demoed also)
"Short Description [KAHU for FSX version 1 test flight]
Version 1 test for KAHU A4K Skyhawk at NAS Nowra (where else?) in colours for No.2 Sqdn RNZAF. Brake Chute, spoilers all AOK. Work needed on engine responsiveness and HUD AoA indexer needs to match indexer. Lots of things to see in 7 quick minutes. 100Mb .WMV file is not highest video quality but one can get the drift from this long video that the quality of the work in the sim is just excellent. KUDOs to the team wot made it. I just flied it. For next video I'll have to remember to mess about with the EXCELLENT HUD!"
http://files.filefront.com/KahuV1testNowra7minswmv/;13832397;/fileinfo.html
-
From what I saw it looks good but there are issues with your video codec.
-
subs17 in the immortal words of one of Australia's NOT so famous ex-politicians: "Please explain". ;D
My explanation was posted in several places but not on this forum because I did not think it would be that important but here it is anyway. The best quality .AVI file was made with FRAPS but no one is going to download a multi GigaByte AVI video file nor am I going to upload one. So this high quality video was crunched down by MovieMaker2 to what is seen online at 100Mbs. I make no apologies for the quality because it is OK for what it is at 7 minutes running time in that file size limitation.
-
Your movie ran for 2mins and then crashed and the codec error came up.
-
subs17 it is good to be cryptic in some circumstances, however it is helpful if you provide more detail about what software you are using to view the video and did you download the entire file?
As a consolation I did another quick circuit with same version 1 KAHU (to better see the brake chute - which will be enlarged in next version). The FRAPS .AVI was remade at the highest quality MovieMaker2 will provide. Also I realise that at some point I can use Nero Vision (latest version) to make perhaps better quality videos (WMV or other formats) with some editing; but this is in the future when the final version of the KAHU is released.
http://files.filefront.com/KahuV1bestNeroNowraCCT2miswmv/;13841593;/fileinfo.html (68Mb .WMV)
-
Thats better it looks quite good.
-
KAHU at night (graphic from author of model):
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
lunedì 22 giugno 2009
Grumman F-14D 0.9 public release
http://indiafoxtecho.blogspot.com/2009/06/grumman-f-14d-09-public-release.html
"Ok, here we go. First public release of the Tomcat. As it is partially incomplete, the release number is 0.9.
For now, it will only be available for download here at the link below. Will work with FSX:Acceleration ONLY.
http://rapidshare.com/files/247525808/F14DXA09.zip (17.7Mb)
Please report any installation problem you may have asap. Have fun!"
-
83Mb .WMV video made from FRAPS .AVI of first flight/circuit at NAS Nowra with Dino's Excellent Tomcat! Nice to have a power on approach (even if it is a bit rough/low here). Tomcat configured dirty with hook down (for AoA indexer use) at takeoff to reduce workload.
http://files.filefront.com/TomcatV09testNowraCCThiQwmv/;13922546;/fileinfo.html