Just Getting Into Carrier Ops - Where to Start

Tarps, the next thing is to see your aircraft.cfg to make sure there is not a problem there, often I find double entries for a section and correct them without thinking though I do'nt remember any in this case.

After a long hot boring day San Miguel is relaxing me to the extent that touching the key board is inviting disaster
 
Tarps maybe you are coming in a bit high in the Spad? I know trying to put the VRS F-18E on deck I have nosed that bird, and rolled it over on countless occassions by catching the wire high, and then it slamming down on the deck when it is pulled from the sky. When you are modifying the tail hook points are you moving them up, forward? PLEASE don't take this as an attack on your piloting. Personally I am terrible at carrier landings even to this day. So just trying to think from my own experience what could be going wrong.
 
Rich said:
After a long hot boring day San Miguel is relaxing me to the extent that touching the key board is inviting disaster
Click to expand...
I was stationed in the Philippines (NAS Cubi Point) for two years and made more port calls at Subic than I can count. San Miguel has gotten me "comfortably numb" on numerous occasions. :icon_lol:
 
Roadburner,
I have moved the Spad's tailhook aft and down, it didn't correct my landing problem.
I am by no means "Mr. Tailhook" when it comes to carrier flying. On some approaches I have come in high and then dived for the deck trying to salvage the landing, and on some others I have pulled off too much power and gone low and either hit the ramp or flopped onto the deck. I'm not surprised when I crack up on those approaches. It's when I fly a good approach at a decent speed and land right into the wires and the plane goes end over end that I get frustrated. Last night I decided to cheat a bit and moved the Spad's main gear contact points 6 feet forward. That solved the nose-over problem. Cheezy of me to do that, I know. :redf: I like to fly with correct parameters for the aircraft but there are so many variables involved it's hard to figure out what's causing the problem.
 
Tarps check email, moving maingear forward 6 ft is really desperate and moving hook location down is another bad move it effectively moves the hook catch point lower under the tail and has a tendency to slam the tail onto the deck.
 
Rich, yesterday and tonight I tried out your custom aircraft.cfg file for the Spad and the launch bar entries work perfectly but unfortunately I'm still getting nose-overs when I catch a wire. Only one successful (barely) out of numerous attempts. I've been bringing the plane in at around 75-85 kts (not too much above stall speed), if I had the hook up I could almost land with brakes only. Maybe I should have a higher speed at the ramp? Except for the Just Flight F4F/Martlet planes which I can land OK thanks to your revised tailhook line entries, I haven't had any luck with the other tail-dragger types I've tried. Besides the Spad that includes Paul Clawson's BT-1, F4B and F9C, and the Flying Stations Swordfish. All the planes seem to run out the wire their tails high in the air, and then nose over. In the real world I would think the wire tension on the hook would prevent that. When you have to do so much trial and error and adjusting, it ain't fun anymore.
 
Tarps, no idea what is happening what I gave you is what I am using with no problems you should not need to adjust anything.

Please post what you currently have in your tailhook settings so I can see where your catch point is.

I thought you were landing the Swordfish ok ? we have not had any other complaints about it nosing over I left a slight flick up of the tail when it caught a wire for realism.

List the aircraft you have nose over problems with I may already have fixed them but not payware please.
 
Rich,
Correction to my last post, yes I'm getting aboard OK with the Swordfish. Here are the three other planes I have had no luck with, these numbers are from the original .cfg's:

Paul Clawson's Boeing F4B
[TailHook]
tailhook_length=6
tailhook_position=-13.6, 0.0, -0.9
cable_force_adjust=1.0

Paul's Curtiss F9C
[TailHook]
tailhook_length=6
tailhook_position=-8.5, 0.0, -1.2
cable_force_adjust=1.0

Paul's Northrop BT-1
[TailHook]
tailhook_length=4.2
tailhook_position=-15.6, 0.0, -1.4
cable_force_adjust=1.0

Messed around with the BT-1 on Sunday night, finally got it landing OK but had to cheat (hehe) and move the main landing gear forward about 2 ft. Don't have the tailhook numbers I was using, as I just now deleted the .cfg and replaced it with Paul's original. For the Spad I am currently using your modified .cfg, made several good landings at 105-110 kts over the ramp but I'm still nosing over too much.
 
Paul Clawson's Boeing F4B


Paul's Curtiss F9C

No Hydraulic pressure in aircraft.cfg so hook does not work on either of them give each of them 500 PSI
 
TARPSBird said:
For the Spad I am currently using your modified .cfg, made several good landings at 105-110 kts over the ramp but I'm still nosing over too much.
Click to expand...

OK - I haven't tried the Spad for a while, and won't be at my sim PC for a day or so to verify ... but I distinctly remember touching down aboard the Leyte at well under 100 kt touchdown speeds. So I did some digging, and found this:


Excerpt straight from the 1957 NAVAER document:

http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/ad-4.pdf Note page 5. Stall speed on approach power is 68.2 kts.

so, assuming:

1) Tim modelled the A-1 flight model accurately - and I'm farily safe to assume that premise
2) You have a moving carrier, a bit of headwind, and loaded fairly lightly

Then according to the above data, if if you're coming in at over 100 kts, you're still coming in too fast. Even if you wanted a 10% over-stall margin, you should be touching down at 75-80 kts. If you're landing at 105 kts, that 30 kt overage is a full 40% higher than what I believe to be the recommended touchdown speed on this bird. No wonder you're having tipovers.

On a plane with as low a wing loading as an A-1 (lightly loaded), with a moving carrier and a bit of headwind, this should be an easy, no drama landing.

Go back to stock aircraft.cfg, set up the carrier and the plane correctly - and try again. Also, raise your seat good and high so you can see. Otherwise, the temptation is to lower the AoA (nose down) as a trade off for better visibility. That excess-nose down attitude will then mess up your speed, tailhook position, etc.

Bear in mind, you should have a clear sense from the cockpit of your plane's attitude on touchdown. On taildraggers (or at least the A-1), it's clear that the most common attitude was close to three point - slight nose up. That way, the plane is further away from the nose over point (versus a trike, where the touchdown attitude is flatter).

Observe:







So, Ensign Tarps, sort your carrier speed, weather, aircraft weight, SPEED, and attitude - and you should CARQUAL in no time! :ernae:
 
delta_lima,
Thanks for your comments. Nice landing pics, I like the color shot with the F3H Demons in the foreground. In my past attempts to get aboard in the Spad I have complied with most of what you mentioned in your post, except for adjusting the eyepoint upwards to get a better view of the deck without compromising correct AOA. That's a good suggestion. And yeah, I figured 100+ kts was coming in a bit too hot. I'll just have to practice, practice, practice. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top