• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.

    Post 16 Update

    Post 17 Warning

Deck-Land a Lightning - You're Mad!!

I'll give it a go!! It's not that tricky; approach reasonably flat at 150 knots, slow to 135-140 over the fanfail and she'll drop in nicely as long as you're dead straight with the centreline. The JF Lightning is quite stable at low speeds compared with some I could mention....!

DaveQ
 
You're especially mad doing it off a stationary carrier, without the benefit of its speed to help reduce your relative touchdown speed ... :icon_lol: Still, not as mad as this guy, who though landing aboard a moving carrier, opted to only lower his port flap - I guess he figured using both flaps was for wussies! :) Wonder what the Pilot Instructor thought of the whole affair, in the starboard seat ...

attachment.php


In real life, they must have figured they couldn't fabricate wings fast enough to keep up with all the main gear struts getting punched up through them ...:mixedsmi:

Funny, I recall a certain individual here, known famously for their derision for anything fictional (hello, this is a simulator! but I digress...) - anyway, they sought to ridicule our good Lazarus with a comment along the lines of "what's next, a Sea Lightning?" .... on whom's the joke now, huh?


All joking aside, I learned today for the first time that this "concept" was even (however briefly) considered ... I had no idea ...



Learn something new every day, as they say! :)

DL
 
delta_lima said:
All joking aside, I learned today for the first time that this "concept" was even (however briefly) considered ... I had no idea ...



Learn something new every day, as they say! :)

DL
Click to expand...

It was more than 'considered'. A full design was drafted. I've posted some of the views in another thread.
If you think that's mad, you should see what was envisaged if a new radar was fitted.....

Dave
 
DaveQ said:
I'll give it a go!! It's not that tricky; approach reasonably flat at 150 knots, slow to 135-140 over the fanfail and she'll drop in nicely as long as you're dead straight with the centreline. The JF Lightning is quite stable at low speeds compared with some I could mention....!

DaveQ
Click to expand...

It wouldn't have worked in real life. Aside from the stresses of hitting the deck at that speed, the sink rate at 150 knots was too much for the pilot to control. The Lightning landed best at an approach speed of 190 knots indicated, to arrive over the keys at 175 knots and touch down on the numbers at 165 knots - all on a 3.5 degree glideslope.

The Sea Lightning was designed to launch the same way that the Buccaneer did - nose in the air.

Dave
 
I guessed that the FDE of the JF model is overly stable, which is what allows me to pull off this ridiculous stunt. With 50+% fuel and full flaps, the controls only start getting really mushy under 135 KIAS which is itself ridiculous!:kilroy: Oh well, off to have a go on the Ark whilst the missus is out shopping.... Wish me luck!

D/L - the reason the carrier's not moving is I'm using FSRecorder and the carrier will continue on regardless if it's set to move...!

DaveQ

Oh and btw, if you want a nose-up launch, you can play with the launch assistance settings.
 
Well done. :applause:

If you want a more 'realistic' FDE for the JF Lightning, it's available at their website - but only for those not of a nervous disposition! :icon30:

Does your strip ASI work properly? They haven't managed to fix mine as yet. I get mach, but no knots.

Dave
 
DaveQ said:
I guessed that the FDE of the JF model is overly stable
Click to expand...

Pretty much why I havn't bothered picking it up, the Lightning/Frightning is supposed to be a real b**** at low speed, the Thirdwire default Lightnings seem reasonably convincing, plus you get to go Badger and Bear hunting in them :jump:

Craig
 
dhazelgrove said:
Well done. :applause:

If you want a more 'realistic' FDE for the JF Lightning, it's available at their website - but only for those not of a nervous disposition! :icon30:

Does your strip ASI work properly? They haven't managed to fix mine as yet. I get mach, but no knots.

Dave
Click to expand...

Thanks Dave, I'll check it out. And I seem to be reading knots OK.
 
Very interesting.
Is this a Just Flight freeware Lightning? Where could I get it, if so?
 
dhazelgrove said:
Well done. :applause:

If you want a more 'realistic' FDE for the JF Lightning, it's available at their website - but only for those not of a nervous disposition! :icon30:

Does your strip ASI work properly? They haven't managed to fix mine as yet. I get mach, but no knots.

Dave
Click to expand...

My ASI strip works; KIAS is indicated by a small red needle. As you can see in the pic below, Alphasim has a white needle with an extra white horizontal line which makes it easier to read. No clue which one is historically correct or maybe both if they used different ASI versions? Both models are consistent in having a moving Mach strip and a static KIAS strip.
 
jinx said:
Very interesting.
Is this a Just Flight freeware Lightning? Where could I get it, if so?
Click to expand...

Just Flight do a free demo (on their website) fully operable single plane, becomes unusable above 1000ft, so I guess it can still be used to take off and carrier landings if you want to try it.
 
DaveQ said:
D/L - the reason the carrier's not moving is I'm using FSRecorder and the carrier will continue on regardless if it's set to move...!
Click to expand...

I've been meaning to try the newish alpha of FS Recorder.

"Update 19.08.2012

I updated the FSX version (download below), the following problems should be fixed now:

* Playback of recorded date and time could result in lockup during AI traffic loading.
* When recording AI traffic, objects other than aircraft (ground vehicles, etc.) were recorded as well (but not played back)"

If this means moving carrier playback is working. Has anyone actually got it working?
 
Hi DaveQ, I trust you knew I was kidding ... :)

I'm curious about your comment about "nose-up" takeoffs using the FSX-A cat function - I used to think it was a highly complex issue, involving the mdl ... it would be nice to know it's easy to get some models (Sea Venom, etc) to launch right .... thanks!!

DL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top