Just Getting Into Carrier Ops - Where to Start

[Rich]

Tarps, if you downloaded Ark from Flying Stations recently then there is nothing wrong with the ship the problem will be in the aircraft model and or your flying, which aircraft are you having problems with.

Both the Victorious and Ark should be steaming at 29 kts in Manila bay

Trike gear gives very little in the way of problems.

Made a few landings aboard HMS Ark Royal in Manila Bay. Very nice ship model (love the "meatball" lights) but my landings just aren't working out, too many nose-overs and cartwheels down the deck. So far I still prefer the old FS9 carrier ops with Arrestor Cables or the RCBCO gauges, and fixed-position carriers.

 

[TARPSBird]

Rich,
Yes, I d/l'ed the Ark Royal from Flying Stations and I'm sure there's nothing wrong with it. I'm going to practice some more with other aircraft and other CV's and see if I can minimize the catastrophic results when I land. Will update later. Thanks everybody for their comments so far, much helpful info here.

 

[TARPSBird]

Some of you who've already posted here will disagree, but I'm beginning to think the carrier ops feature in FSX favors modern tricycle-gear aircraft types over the older tail-draggers. I am still trying to get aboard Ark Royal without nosing over as I run out the wire. I have flown Tim Conrad's A-1 (with and without Rich's revised tailhook entries), Just Flight F4F-3 and -4, and Paul Clawson's BT-1 and F4B-4 and always the same results: catch a wire, run it out, nose over. It's not just the Ark Royal, but the static carriers I place with the AI Carriers utility as well. On the other hand, today I ran the Ark's deck in Milton's F7F-3 and Dino Cattaneo's new beta T-45 and trapped every time with no problems at all but of course they have nose gear. I'm going to try the vintage planes on Michael Davies' USS Leyte and see if the results are any different. My frustration level remains high.

 

[SkippyBing]

Some of you who've already posted her will disagree, but I'm beginning to think the carrier ops feature in FSX favors modern tricycle-gear aircraft types over the older tail-draggers. I am still trying to get aboard Ark Royal without nosing over as I run out the wire. I have flown Tim Conrad's A-1 (with and without Rich's revised tailhook entries), Just Flight F4F-3 and -4, and Paul Clawson's BT-1 and F4B-4 and always the same results: catch a wire, run it out, nose over. It's not just the Ark Royal, but the static carriers I place with the AI Carriers utility as well. On the other hand, today I ran the Ark's deck in Milton's F7F-3 and Dino Cattaneo's new beta T-45 and trapped every time with no problems at all but of course they have nose gear. I'm going to try the vintage planes on Michael Davies' USS Leyte and see if the results are any different. My frustration level remains high.

How fast are you landing?

As an example I've been practising in the AF Corsair so I can get a video together showing the circuit the RN used in the 40s/50s (probably similar to the USNs). From the pilot's notes for the real thing the speed on finals should be 75-80kts and flying on at that I've had no crashes. 5kts slower and it stalls which is pretty much unrecoverable at low level, 5kts faster and it's much more likely to nose over and crash.

All this is with the ship only doing 26kts into an 8 knot headwind.

For the approach and landing you should be in the three point attitude (more or less) and at the cut chop the throttle and pull the stick back to maintain that attitude.

The full circuit is:

Wait - Large oval orbit at 1000'.
Approach circuit - Descend to 300' on downwind leg and then turn to position for a pass down the starboard side of the carrier at cruise speed (I use 180kts for the Corsair) hook down.
Break - At least half a mile ahead of the carrier (10 seconds at 180kts) commence a rate 2 turn onto the downwind leg (at 180kts a rate 1 turn is 45 degrees angle of bank).
Downwind - Slow to approach speed (I use 100kts for no obvious reason) lower flaps and gear (avoid balloning or it all gets emotional later on)
Finals - Abeam the stern of the carrier start your finals turn* aiming for a point half a carrier length behind the ship for your roll out.
Short finals - If everything has gone right you'll now be a few hundred yards behind the ship on the centreline, from here apply the techinique detailed above speed at attitude being vital.

I've also been using the LSO gauge included with the Swordfish to keep me on course once the Corsair's nose obscures the carrier and shifting the viewpoint up and right to try and look past it.

*A rate 1 turn at 100kts (~15 degrees of bank) has the same radius as a rate 2 turn at 180kts which makes life easier.

 

[delta_lima]

Ditto to what Skippy, Rich, et al have said.

I'd partially agree that taildraggers are genearlly a bit trickier - the Swordfish excluded - with the Victorious under steam and with a headwind, it really is superbly easy to land. Again, try Richardson's Sea Hornet - also very easy to land if you really have a tail dragger itch.

For now, I'd shelve the Corsair - it wasn't called the "Ensign Eliminator" for no reason, and in the sim, it's no different. As Skippy points out, there's barely a 10kt window between stall and overspeeding on touchdown. Coupled with the poor visibility from the long nose, you have almost every complexity working against you. With time, and a curved final approach, that one too, can be mastered.

Skip is dead on. It sounds like a speed issue. You have to consistently be within just a few kts of the particular plane's ideal touchdown speed, given weight, fuel, etc. I made a post a while back about practicing landings on land strips - if you trouble placing the wheels on the exact spot (numbers or keys), at the same speed on a repetitive basis, it means you're just going to struggle that much more aboard a carrier. With too much speed, even if you land right on your target spot, you're going to bounce - embarrassing on a field, but on a carrier, it means you've bounced clear over wires.

So again, a few points:

1. Stick to trikes for now, again - give Richardson's Gannet a try, as an example. She's a fat girl - but she makes you look good. I guarantee it. If it must be US, then the T-28 Trojan is a good alternative, though not nearly as forgiving.

2. Get consistently good landing on airfields - as if it was a carrier - right fuel, weight, approach, etc. Especially your approach and touchdown speed - as well as the AoA. Completely master those two.

3. Repeat point 2 on carrier.

There's no black art ... :ernae:

dl

 

[Rich]

Tarps read this thread.

DL Robs Sea Hornet hook settings are what I gave him during Beta testing

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?53221-Wildcat

Tarps did you change Tims hook settings to these and add the launch assistance bit
which is cat launch

These are the tailhook and launch settings I had on Tims Spad settings

[tailhook]
tailhook_length = 6.0
tailhook_position = -25.000, 0.000, -0.500
cable_force_adjust = 6.0

[launch_assistance]
launch_bar_pivot = 4.41,0.00,-3.5
launch_bar_lug = 10.6, 0.0, -9.50

 

[Rich]

Changing ships to try to eradicate nose over on tail draggers is a waste of time since the problem is with the aircraft, nosewheel aircraft have a nose wheel which stops them tipping
forward, taildraggers rely on hook position to apply enough leverage through the fuselage to stop them tipping forward, very often the hook settings have been copy pasted from some other model and are useless, if you are getting nose over try changing the hook position a bit further back towards the tail ie, change -20.100 to -20.500 and if necessary
add .500 untill it stops tipping forward, that is a basic fix and not refined

[TailHook]
tailhook_length = 2.50
tailhook_position = -20.100, 0.000, -0.500
cable_force_adjust = 2.0

 

[expat]

No problem with tail draggers using RCBCO 3.0 for FSX on either moving or fixed location aircraft carriers here. This program is ingenious and sorts out all your carrier ops needs.

Worth considering as newcomers are encouraged to train with user friendly props - suggest Piglet's Skyraider - with lower approach speeds than jets. Though a trike, Milton's latest F7F Tigercat traps easier than most. I can even land (and take off) on the WWII cv's with no arresting gear. It's a real STOL fighter.

 

[TARPSBird]

Rich,
I used your modified [Tailhook] line group for my Just Flight F4F's and it worked great. No nose-overs. Thanks for that tweak. Will go back to Piglet's A-1 tomorrow and try your other settings.

 

[Rich]

expat, Using those gauges you can launch or have a arrested landing anywhere even in the middle of the Sahara desert, a ship is not needed.

There is no doubt the gauges are very useful for people without accel or diminished ability to get on a carrier but not very realistic for those that have it.

Went to Kent once I think is it near Dover ?

 

[expat]

Went to Kent once I think is it near Dover ?

Indeed, but I am orginally a Connecticut Yankee . .

In defence of the RCBCO 3.0 for FSX, yes you can launch and trap anywhere - if you use the global settings - but having used several different techniques including the built-in FSX Accel method I can honestly say it is pretty realistic.

I often fly and trap 50's and 60's era USN a/c - Phantom, Crusader, Vigilante - and I keep crash detection on so if I get slightly out of shape it's a ramp strike or an auger into the deck. Avoiding a crash makes it pretty intense and requires concentration and discipline.

Thing is, because the wires stretch across the entire width of the deck, unless you try to land near the bow cats, the "global" setting for lat/long coordinates make little difference. At that point it would be an obvious wave-off anyway and go-around. It is no less of a challenge compared with FS9 where one had to carefully measure out the defined trap zone for each and every cv. That, together with the great launch and trap sounds make this probably an under appreciated and under-used program.

Try it - you'll like it.

 

[nazca_steve]

1. Stick to trikes for now, again - give Richardson's Gannet a try, as an example. She's a fat girl - but she makes you look good. I guarantee it. If it must be US, then the T-28 Trojan is a good alternative, though not nearly as forgiving.


dl

DL, love that comment on the Gannet being a fat girl but makes you look good. Actually this is a pleasant suprise to me, having had the opportunity once to sit in a Gannet cockpit, the first thought that went through my head was 'how the heck would you land this thing?' being so high up and all. Yet, as you say, I have read the real thing was easy (hah) to put down, and nice to hear RR's Gannet is the same.

 

[delta_lima]

DL, love that comment on the Gannet being a fat girl but makes you look good. Actually this is a pleasant suprise to me, having had the opportunity once to sit in a Gannet cockpit, the first thought that went through my head was 'how the heck would you land this thing?' being so high up and all. Yet, as you say, I have read the real thing was easy (hah) to put down, and nice to hear RR's Gannet is the same.

Alas, there was perhaps more lattitude in my comment for the ribald than I anticipated when I typed it, now that I re-read it ... Little harm done, though, I suppose, if it helps illustrate the point to Tarps.

Reminds me of another important life lesson I learned years ago, when I was a young 2Lt, an understanding Sgt Major sought to illustrate his point with a story. It involved a young bull, his dad, an old bull, both standing on a hill, looking down on a field of cows ....

The "moral" in that story has proven invaluable in business, and bringing this all back to the matter at hand, may be the point I was unwittingly trying to share with Tarps insofar as starting off with slow, easier aircraft ....

Hope you're coming along ok there, TB!

dl

 

[TARPSBird]

Still trying to get aboard HMS Ark Royal with Tim Conrad's Spad. I'm using Rich's revised tailhook line entries. Come in at about 90-95 kts over the ramp, wings level, don't dive for the deck, flare, touch down right in the wires and the freakin' plane still noses over - or worse, it flips end over end and goes berserk. I have made one successful landing out of all my attempts. No offense to the Microsoft wizards who came up with the Acceleration carrier features, but I don't think it should be this hard to land on a damn flight sim CV.

 

[Rich]

Tarps have you tried landing the Spad on Victorious ??

I just brought the Spad back into my FSX and did some check flights, landed on a static angle deck carrier 20 kts over speed default weights caught No1 wire and no nose over.

Checked on moving Ark this time getting screenies which will show air speed etc, I am wondering if you have the right approach angle and not catching the wires at right angles

 

[Rich]

While it is good practice to approach at the right speed, weight and rate of descent these screenshots show everything over the desired perfection.

 

[Rich]

The reason I do not use Tims Skyraider is because I stick to aircraft used by the Royal Navy and unfortunately the only Skyraider the RN used was the AEW version of which Tim does not have a model.

What Tim released is excellent no problems there only needed tail hook setup.

 

[TARPSBird]

Rich, I am making my approach in line with the angle deck and not the ship's centerline. In your screenshots, is that a gauge of some sort that shows the wire you catch and your speed and rate of descent?

 

[Rich]

Tarps, did'nt think you were making that mistake but explore all avenues I can't see for the life of me why you are getting that behavior !! I have no problems as you can see even over weight, over speed etc. Still try on Vic and or other straight deck carriers.

Yes that gauge records wire caught, airspeed and rate of descent, the -800 ft was from about 5 ft above deck level.

 

[TARPSBird]

Is that gauge available from FlightSim.com or elsewhere?