FSDreamTeam forum
May 20, 2013, 09:59:26 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: GSX Released!
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
  Print  
Author Topic: CArrier Landings  (Read 15154 times)
jimi08
Full Member
***
Posts: 153


WWW
« Reply #45 on: February 04, 2009, 09:01:44 PM »

Most of the "unique" viewpoints where make to be used for the particular shot then deleted shortly afterwards.  Althogh the views are great for movie making, they tend to be bothersome for regular flying due to the number of viewpoints that have to be cycled through to get the wanted view.  The SDK has a pretty detailed description on how to make these views.
Logged


Justin "Jimi" Hendrix
FSX Blue Angels
www.fsxblueangels.com
burner12
Full Member
***
Posts: 154


« Reply #46 on: February 05, 2009, 12:23:05 AM »

 Angry I've searched everywhere and i have the deluxe edition but i haven't found where the SDK  is? can you lead me to it?
Logged
Razgriz
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 698


« Reply #47 on: February 05, 2009, 12:29:53 AM »

Insert disk 1, explore, and find the SDK folder.
Logged
burner12
Full Member
***
Posts: 154


« Reply #48 on: February 05, 2009, 02:30:04 PM »

Insert disk 1, explore, and find the SDK folder.
I did install the program, but how do I use it. All I see are files and folders for it, I don't see any .exe file to start it? I even installed the service pack sdk for it.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2009, 06:10:22 PM by burner12 » Logged
burner12
Full Member
***
Posts: 154


« Reply #49 on: February 09, 2009, 03:18:46 PM »


You Have to think about the mission at hand, and the weight of the aircraft.

-If you are headed out for a normal flight, you're going to have a lot of gas and stores (you're heavy). You're also going to be pulling the gear and flaps up after launch so you don't need to worry about max speeds. So going into burner is acceptable and preferred in this case.

-If you're going to be staying in the pattern, you're not going to have much gas, and there's no need for weapons (you're light). You're also going to be leaving the gear and flaps down, and are going to try to keep it below 200 kts. If you go into burner in this situation you might exceed max speeds pretty quick. Not to mention that you're wasting what little gas you have onboard.

Hope that helps.

You know here is one questino that hasn't been answerred. We 've all said that if you're light you don't need burner nad if your heavy you do. But why do I see some video of Hornets lighting the burners down the catapult and not at the start? I can understand why they'd light them after they're away from the ship in order to get the extra boost of power but why down the catapult?
Logged
SpazSinbad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 940


FLY NAVY!


WWW
« Reply #50 on: February 09, 2009, 08:54:48 PM »

burner12, I don't believe anyone has exactly said "... if you're light you don't need burner nad if your heavy you do." Your statement oversimplifies the burner situation as it has been described in this thread, and I believe your summary is not accurate. The Hornet pilot can use the burner at his/her discretion. While they may try to use it as described very well by 'microbrwst'. However for example the pilot can - in error - go to burner during a bolter, or NOT. It all depends.

You would have to give the URL for a Hornet launch showing the burner being lit sometime after catapulting. To my knowledge I have seen only catapults with the burner already lit before launch - not during.

APPROACH (USN Flying Safety Magazine) has stories about whether to use the burner or not during launch. These suggest that using the burner for catapulting is a good idea. It would appear that 'depending on the situation before launch' use of the burner is optional while the situation is flexible. It would seem there is no right or wrong but the burner gives more safety margin during catapult for example even if it is not required by other flying regulations.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2009, 08:56:19 PM by SpazSinbad » Logged

SpazSinbad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 940


FLY NAVY!


WWW
« Reply #51 on: February 09, 2009, 09:17:19 PM »

An APPROACH story (did not record issue date)
http://safetycenter.navy.mil/media/approach/default.htm
‘Cobra Off the Cat’ By Lt. Mark Crowe [Use afterburner on the catapult]
The carrier and air-wing team neared the end of a two-and-a-half-week at-sea period off the east coast of Virginia. The weather was beautiful, and I was scheduled to lead a division of Hornets on a routine air-to-air mission with a Case I launch and recovery.
Following the brief, I walked through maintenance and read the book. I noticed the jet had produced a few random flight-control Xs on a catapult shot but nothing that affected controllability or would not reset. Also, both flight-control computers had been replaced before my flight, so everything looked kosher.
Preflight, start, and pretakeoff checks were normal, right up until launch. I saluted the catapult officer and sped down the cat stroke. My head went forward a little from the deceleration (as it always does), and my chin immediatelywas pinned to my chest. The jet inexplicably had pitched nose-up, and I instantaneously felt the force of roughly three Gs; the AOA tone quickly followed.
With my peripheral vision, I saw the vapor trails coming across the leading-edge extensions. About a second and a half later, I got my hand back on the stick, my eyes on the HUD, and began pushing over to level off at 600 feet.
My first thought was to descend to 500 feet and continue with the Case I departure, then return overhead to troubleshoot. I clearly was working on stem power. The Air Boss, on the other hand, after asking if I had a problem, recommended I climb to 2,000 feet to troubleshoot.
My flight-control display showed I had Xs in two channels of both stabilator servos and a single X in my left leading-edge-flap servo. After talking with the Hornet rep, we decided I should climb above 10,000 feet to investigate. Once at altitude, I got a good reset of the flight-control system and a good check of the aircraft in the landing configuration. From then on, it was an uneventful flight to Oceana for a short-field arrestment.
Playing those few seconds over again, a couple of thoughts went through my mind. My first thought was I inadvertently had pulled back on the stick at the end of the cat stroke. (In the early days of the FA-18, with pilots sometimes grabbed the stick too soon after the cat stroke, often resulting in an ugly, pilot-induced oscillation.) Because I was aware of the issues of stick movement, my forward stick input after that catapult was not an instant one. With the jet in full afterburner, I knew I had plenty of excess power, so I gradually pushed the stick forward to level off. I was a bit disoriented, so my other thought was to maintain the altitude sanctuary of the structured CV environment and not to climb through pattern or break altitudes without having a good feel for where other aircraft were.
The event didn’t feel like that big a deal, so I was prepared to recover aboard the ship. Fortunately, enough people had seen the cat shot to know that landing on the ship and trying another shot would not be a good idea, so I got to go home a day early.
What had happened? After pulling the maintenance data from the aircraft, the troubleshooters discovered the flight controls went to MECH ON for about three and a half seconds after the catapult stroke. The PLAT tape showed the aircraft reached a 45- degree-pitch attitude within a second of coming off the catapult. The maintenance data also revealed the aircraft decelerated to 150 knots, and AOA increased to above 27 degrees during that pitch-up. On-speed at my takeoff was about 173 knots and 8.1 degrees AOA. I didn’t think my launch looked nearly as dramatic as it felt. It was not until I reviewed the PLAT tape two days later that I realized how close the aircraft had been to departing controlled flight at 100 feet.
After two weeks of scrubbing the aircraft for causes, the problem was traced to a loose wire in the back of the emergency-battery contactor. This problem was something no one could have predicted or seen.
I pulled away a few big lessons from this incident. Use afterburner on the catapult; it had been my habit pattern before this incident, and I will continue to do so. Not only is using afterburner the first step in our settle-off-the-catapult procedure, but, in this case, it also gave me enough airspeed and time to fly away from an extreme aircraft attitude.
Even though it was day VFR, the first place I looked after I could pick up my head was the HUD. This action helped to replace the situational awareness the cat shot had sucked away. Had this situation occurred at night, a look to the HUD would have been even more critical, especially without the benefit of all the peripheral-vision cues present during the day.
I did not consider the eject option. The aircraft was under control within three seconds after the catapult shot, so I never considered pulling the handle. If I had had a nose-down pitch or an uncontrollable yaw or roll, I quickly would have been at the edge of the safe-ejection envelope.
For me, this incident just reinforced the fact that anything can happen, especially during something as dynamic as a catapult shot.
Lt. Crowe flies with VFA-87
« Last Edit: February 09, 2009, 09:19:43 PM by SpazSinbad » Logged

SpazSinbad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 940


FLY NAVY!


WWW
« Reply #52 on: February 19, 2009, 05:48:52 PM »

http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/photos/090215-N-8517C-676.jpg "Even Marines Can Look Good at the Back of the Boat. So long as there’s cool VAPES!"  http://tailhookdaily.typepad.com/


* MarineF18vaporFORUM.jpg (100.33 KB, 1033x645 - viewed 143 times.)
Logged

SpazSinbad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 940


FLY NAVY!


WWW
« Reply #53 on: February 28, 2009, 04:48:26 PM »

Microsoft ESP (what is that? - no time to check) Hornet Carrier Landing demo video (64Mb):

http://www.topgunsim.com/tgssite/video/Carrier_Ops_640x360_2MB.wmv

MORE ON ESP here: (a new era in virtual simulation)
http://www.microsoft.com/esp/
&
http://www.flightsimx.co.uk/announcements/microsoft-esp-showcases-the-future-of-immersive-simulation-experiences/

"Microsoft ESP simulation solutions at I/ITSEC 2008 include the following:

■The Northrop Grumman simulator demonstrating virtual landing of an F-18 Hornet on the CVN-21 “carrier of the future” incorporating Microsoft ESP, Virtual Earth and Microsoft Surface with Northrop Grumman’s Command and Control Mission Rehearsal (C2MR)
■A Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle simulator showcasing Microsoft ESP version 2.0’s forthcoming ground-vehicle operations capability
■A helicopter flight simulator revealing Microsoft ESP’s version 2.0 multi-channel display capabilities across three large screens
■The F-16 cockpit trainer from Flight-Dynamix demonstrating the integration of Microsoft ESP version 1.0 into an existing custom hardware simulation solution
■A demonstration produced by the School of Engineering Sciences at the University of Southampton, United Kingdom, made using Microsoft ESP and Windows HPC Server 2008, showing a helicopter landing on a moving ship. A white paper, “Real-Time Computational Fluid Dynamics for Flight Simulation,” describing the process used by the scientists has been published by the I/ITSEC conference."
« Last Edit: February 28, 2009, 05:27:07 PM by SpazSinbad » Logged

Orion
Beta tester
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 596


« Reply #54 on: February 28, 2009, 06:26:14 PM »

ESP was canceled along with FSX and TS2- same simulator core by the ACES team, so no ACES, no simulator Sad.
Logged
SpazSinbad
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 940


FLY NAVY!


WWW
« Reply #55 on: February 28, 2009, 06:54:36 PM »

Orion, thanks - did not catch that during my search for ESP. Now I'll have to find out what TS2 was meant to be.  Grin
Logged

SUBS17
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 750



« Reply #56 on: February 28, 2009, 10:17:12 PM »

Microsoft ESP (what is that? - no time to check) Hornet Carrier Landing demo video (64Mb):

http://www.topgunsim.com/tgssite/video/Carrier_Ops_640x360_2MB.wmv


Thats just a FSX acceleration hornet doing a landing on the carrier the reason why I can tell is no ILS and no AoA bracket on the Hud. Wasn't lack of sales for ESP part of the reason why MS stopped FS series and I think they were in the middle of developing ESP2 when MS made that desicion.
Logged

Orion
Beta tester
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 596


« Reply #57 on: February 28, 2009, 11:25:23 PM »

Orion, thanks - did not catch that during my search for ESP. Now I'll have to find out what TS2 was meant to be.  Grin
http://tsinsider.com/

Microsoft Train Simulator 2 was supposed to be built on the same DX9 graphics engine that Microsoft had developed for FSX and ESP, but will a new fully functional DX10 engine.  They had ALOT more vector data for power lines, streams roards, etc...  They had fully functioning road crossings with the gates, bells and everything!  There were even a few hikers nearby.  I was lucky enough to try Train Simulator 2 in the summer 2008 demo at Anaheim.  Let's just say it was awesome and leave it at that Tongue.  One thing about the demo at Anaheim was they were showcasing TS2 version of a FSX mission, where they could have placed the people as AI objects, along with the animals in nearby farms, etc...  ARGHH!!  I just can't remember the system specs of the demo computers.  I remember it was an Intel CPU, Nvidia GeForce 8800 or 8600 and 2 or 4 GB of RAM.  They were still using the FSX settings and I believe they were all set to like medium high.  I asked if I could change some of the settings and I almost and it slowed down to like 7 FPS.  Good ol' FSX engine Tongue.
Logged
Bruce Hamilton
Beta tester
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1535



« Reply #58 on: March 01, 2009, 01:06:51 AM »

... no ACES, no simulator Sad.

Not according to the powers that be over at MS... they claim to remain committed to the FS franchise.
Logged

Intel Core i7-2600 Sandy Bridge 3.40GHz Asus P8Z68-V Pro/Gen3 G.Skill Ripjaws 16GB Western Digital 1TB  GeForce 8800GTX
mangold
Newbie
*
Posts: 12


« Reply #59 on: March 02, 2009, 07:31:43 PM »



Thats just a FSX acceleration hornet doing a landing on the carrier the reason why I can tell is no ILS and no AoA bracket on the Hud. ........[/quote]
missing ILS and AoA bracket on the hood ?
Perhaps you know already, aerosoft f-16 for FSX has more than that 
http://www.aerosoft.com/cgi-local/re/iboshop.cgi?showd,,10285
Even a HUD AirToAir mode with target designation box, target aspect angle indication, range to target rectile during the last 12000 feet, target closure speed indication, target altitude and more.
The radar MFD looks and feels similar to the f-18 one. However there is an AN/APG-68 extension making HOTAS control possible.
You know what I mean?

Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!