Flying Issues...

"Well he got to the bottom safe and sound
Everybody asked Bandit how he made it down
He said folks when the truck picked up too much speed
I just run along beside it and drug my feet" --- The Legend, Jerry Reed

Ivan, maybe a long, low, and slow approach? At what airspeed can you lower the landing gear? Shouldn't they add some nice drag, and allow you to brake to a stop?

I try not to flap on landings, more fun to ride the brakes and try to my propeller out of the dirt :isadizzy: (A lot easier with the tricycle landing gear on some planes, like the A-20, A-26, B-25, etc...)
 
Hello guys:wavey:
I did my test at AAC_Ripe on runway 180. It is as long and wide as any stock CFS1 runway.

I performed few landings, as it was not what BoeingB17 was asking, but I did mine using the tri-colors VASI of the two main runways at Ripe. It gives a glide path of 3°.

5 nautical miles from the threshold, I went to 0% throttle and nose up to get under 150MPH TAS. Gear down, full flaps, I went on the green ball 'till touch-down, maintaining a speed between 128-150MPH. Nose up for a three-points landing, full breaks until I got under 80-70 MPH.

Lateral control has a very wide amplitude. You can bleed speed going side slipping right and left, a bit like a downhill skier. Landing speed around 130MPH is quite fine, but 3° glide path is even more important.

Will go back and make a few more landings...

P.S.- Did a dozen or so landings at Ripe.

Saved a flight with the a/c pointing to runway 360 at 2 700ft, distance of 5nm, speed 180MPH TAS.

Ideally, it should be ± 1 500ft at 5 nm, so I had to find a way to descend and bleed speed to get under 150MPH.

So I went nose up, throttle 0%. Went up to about 3 200ft before I went under 150MPH, then went full flaps, gear down. Easing on the stick, I tried to keep a/c under 150 by side-slipping while going down to catch the green slope.

Aircraft would go up to 170MPH nevertheless, but this is still acceptable once flaps are fully deployed. Once "on the ball", I would go straight, maintaining the a/c within 130/140MPH with throttle.

I would try to get on the threshold at 130MPH, nosing-up a bit for a three point landing. Once on ground, full breaks. This way, I could come to a full stop within ½ of the runway lenght.

I tried other methods, but they all failed. Diving down and redressing as I was about to mow the landscape, I was still going over 250MPH on the treshold! Maintaining nose up with full flaps and gear down, I was still going to overshoot the runway. Stall horn start at 109MPH TAS in that configuration, but a/c doen't go lower than 107-108! Interesting fact; my stick was pulled to its maximum at that time, so I couldnt get it to go slower. Tried to get to the ground diving and redressing at the last moment... and went in a ball of fire.:banghead:
 
Hello Hubbabubba,

3 degree glide path seems rather shallow. I did not try to go nose up to bleed off speed. The full power run had taken me to about 228 knots and I just throttled back to see how long it would take to bleed down to 150 knots (my self determined safe flaps speed). It took an awfully long time. With flaps down, it bled off speed quite fast, to the point where I needed to add power to maintain altitude. This was a "test" landing over water to get a feel for how far out to being the approach.

Hello Pratt&Whitney,

There is a limiting speed for landing gear as well. On the P-47, it is 250 mph, but on most aircraft, it is much lower. I believe on the Spitfire, it is only about 120 mph. I figure 150 knots is a pretty reasonable average. On the real aircraft, lowering the gear at a higher speed may damage the gear or airframe.

- Ivan.
 
3° is the standard for any glide path instrument. I know because I did extensive research on the subject before building my tri-color VASI. That "golden number" was determined in the mid 30's and hasn't changed since. It is the same for any a/c, big or small, fast or slow.

It is the same standard everywhere, on land or on aircraft carriers. It would only depart from the 3° when natural obstacles are in the way.

HERE for "corroborating" evidence!:jump:

I always try to keep under 150MPH TAS before lowering flaps or gears, 250MPH for "navalized" version, when I want to play "by the book". In MP games, I will not hesitate to go full flaps, gear down, 300 feet from the treshold!:costumes:
 
Hello Hubbabubba,

Didn't know about the glide path. I actually use 150 knots (172.5 mph) as my flap and gear limiting speed. I found that number to be pretty reasonable for bombers of that era and fairly representative or just a touch high for fighters of that era.

For fighters that allow combat flaps, I restrict this to around 25% below 250 mph IAS.

What do you mean by "Navalized version"?

- Ivan.
 
Navalized version are a/c built for or modified for aircraft carrier operation. They tend to have strengthened gears, flaps, and overall airframe and can normally operate at higher speed. An old member of Joint Ops used to fly a Corsair in WWII and was telling us that one way they had found to get rid of a pursuing "Jap" was to dive and, as they were diving, to get the gear down, well in excess of official limits.

The pursuer who was foolish enough to dive behind would pass in front of the prey.:gameoff:
If he tried to get his gear down, they would be ripped-off. Any way, he was "cooked".

This is why I give them 250MPH instead of 150MPH for flap-gear operation limit. Of course, I don't fly much Japanese a/c...:kilroy:
 
Hi Hubbabubba,

Yes, Navalized aircraft are stressed a bit higher in terms of typically stronger gear for the high descent rate landing, a stronger tail cone to reduce the chance of the tail pulling off with the arrestor hook.

The rest of the story is that their speed limitations for flap deployment were not any greater, at least not for the Corsair and Hellcat. The Corsair had a special setting for the landing gear that would NOT extend the tail wheel. The main gear would come down partially (not fully because the wind resistance would prevent it) but enough to act as an air brake. If the regular gear extension were used in a dive, it would rip the tail gear doors off!

The Seafire never did properly make the transition to naval aircraft because its airframe just could not take the beating. Some land planes were stressed much higher than expected. Maximum gear down speed for a P-47 was 250 mph....

I don't think that navalized really made all that much difference for the most part. Consider that the F8F Bearcat had very low stress limits on its wings even though it was the "ultimate" in naval fighters.

The typical Japanese fighter (The A6M Reisen) had very low dive speed limits (400-460 mph) because of an overly light structure. With that in mind, it would make more sense (unless you are flying a Wildcat) to let the dive speed build a bit and outrun the pursuer by 100 mph or so.

- Ivan.
 
We both know that airspeed has no real effect on gears or flaps in CFS1. You can go full flaps while going 400MPH without any danger.

All a/c of the era had their little idiosyncrasies. My choices are as arbitrary as yours.

Now, if you want to second guess a WWII veteran and his tactics...:kilroy:
 
Hello Hubbabubba,

I poked around at the AIR file for the C-54 yesterday. What I found was that the wing efficiency was set at about 1500. Lower is better. Typical settings are more like 4000-7000.

You are absolutely right about arbitrary limitations. Mine are no better than yours, but at least we are both trying to make the game a bit more realistic.

- Ivan.
 
P-40D/E

175 mph Landing Gear
140 mph Flaps
175 mph Cowl Flaps

Just some additional information.
- Ivan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top