• 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

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Need Hornet carrier help

D

dswo

Charter Member 2011
I was starting to get the hang of carrier landings with the Tomcat -- not to the point of being reliable, mind you; but it wasn't a miracle anymore either.

The Hornet seems harder. I'm getting to where I can catch the hook all right, but then the bird inevitably flips over. -- Which is different from flipping the bird, but inspires a contiguous range of emotions.

What am I doing wrong? This is the Hornet from Acceleration.
 
Wings level on trap!

The Hornet seems touchy when landing on a CV. I have found that to prevent tipping over that you landings have to be smooth.

One thing that will help is as you start to tip pushing your stick in the opposite direction seems to help.
 
Hi,

What is the fix ?

This has always bugged me about the F-18, Do not even fly it much now that there are so many other birds to do carrier ops with.

Thx,

Cheers !!
 
The main problem is weight - the Hornet cannot trap at full fuel load so if you do, it will fall over. Also, as others have said, ensure wings are level - or very close to level - at touchdown. It does seem to be a bit finickety at landing, but it is possible.

Personally, I much prefer the CS version of the airfile with their F/A-18D in the XLoad pack. They did the model for the Accel Hornet, but it doesn't look like the FDE is their fault, because the D is much easier to land than the A.
 
1. I would like to think it's the model's fault, not mine, but real life is not usually that flattering.

Hanimichal, I watched your video on YouTube. There's one commenter there who claims to be a real-life Hornet pilot; he says that the FSX model is great in the air but slides around too much on the ground. I also spent some time reading the unofficial F/A-18 forum at fsdreamteam.com forum. You had a couple of conversations there, but you didn't seem to persuade the more experienced pilots. The virtual Blue Angels website has several recommended mods, but contact points are not one of them. Do you know something they don't?

If there's someone here with some relevant, real-world experience who could help settle this? If the real answer is just "Practice more" I can handle that.

2. I also notice that the CS version mentioned by Ian is only about US$12 now. The reviews I've read are somewhat mixed. For the price, I don't care about the Nighthawk not having its own cockpit or flight model. I guess my main concern is framerates; one of the things I like about the Acceleration Hornet is that it's smooth on my hardware.

Meanwhile I'm going to try again with a lighter fuel load.
 
I have no problems at all with frame rate regarding the F/A-18D David. I never fly the F-117, it just doesn't vaguely interest me, so I bought the pack entirely for the two-seat Hornet, which I much prefer the lines of and the load feature is a nice bonus. It sits a lot better and lands massively better than the default Acceleration model. As for it being a single seat VC, well I tend to be looking forwards, not backwards, so don't tend to notice!
 
in real life f-18 when crash in deck carrier dont have spins!

my fix is based in this reality

<object width="445" height="364">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/NpcMHAs81OY&hl=pt-br&fs=1&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></object>
 
Hanimichal said:
in real life f-18 when crash in deck carrier dont have spins! my fix is based in this reality<object height="364" width="445"></object>
Click to expand...

Hanimichal, what I'm about to say is bound to seem rude, so let me preface it with this: thank you for trying to help. Not only did you do the work of experimenting with different contact points, but you also documented it on YouTube -- which is even more work.

About the crash video:

1. It seems to me that the Hornet does spin on the deck when it crashes.

2. Even if it didn't spin, what does this tell us about normal operations?
 
David, GET the CS version!

I never fly the default one anymore. The CS bird is so much better, not only to look at but in handling too. I never noticed any reduction in performance.
Besides, you will be on a CV at sea. Nothing else to render, you should get great frames :engel016:
 
Hanimichal, I dont dispute your fix but watching that vid I would of been surprised if it didnt spin!

He was at a 30+ deg angle & hit on a single wheel. IMO hardly proof of some inherit instability.
 
I was referring to this spin

<object width="445" height="364">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/buAX25AJ_IU&hl=pt-br&fs=1&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="445" height="364"></object>
 
Well, just because I had an excuse to do so, I just popped Bananabob's Green Knights livery onto the default F/A-18A, emptied just the auxiliary tanks to lighten the fuel load and went from Whidbey Island out to the Nimitz, which I had just placed conveniently offshore.

140KIAS steady gave me a steady yellow donut, flew it down, slightly below glideslope on the meatball, straight into a perfectly good trap with no dramatics whatsoever - certainly no spin, very little roll and no crash.

I get massive amounts of roll if I land too fast. That happens every time, and the brakes need to be handled very carefully on runway landings, but that's the only time the aircraft attempts to spin and that can be controlled by not slamming the brakes hard on.

I still much prefer the CS F/A-18D dynamics, but the can easily control the default as well.

All of those crashes on the video look like very fast and heavy landings - pilot error in other words.

Edit: I just did a quick landing and took a video using FRAPS. It'll take a major eternity to upload to YouTube, but should be there before tomorrow. An abysmal landing, way too fast, way too low, but because I lightened the fuel load first, it didn't crash. Carrier aircraft don't land with full fuel tanks!!!

Edit 2: YouTube "failed to convert" the avi file and wants me to re-upload. Er. No. I don't have the time or patience right now. Maybe tomorrow!
 
Imho

I'm not a real-life Hornet pilot...but, during the T-45 and F-14 development, I made hundreds of traps in the Hornet (including the "carrier landing IMC" mission - BTW is not as hard as it may seem provided you follow the the other plane very closely)... so I just want to share my humble opinion:

If you have the right weight, approach speed and yellow donut the Acceleration F-18 will not tilt/spin while landing. My experience is that, when it does it was (almost) always my fault.

Some "fixes" out there make the gear much stronger and almost indestructable...thus making the landing much more forgiving - which is fine, as long as you have fun (I still think that fun is the ultimate goal of recreational flight simming - like it or not, we're talking about videogames) but not very realistic IMHO...

I do not think there is anything wrong with the default FSX Hornet behaviour while landing. On the other hand, ground handling is not perfect...

But again, this is just the opinion of an hobbyst armchair pilot.
 
dswo,

Peter is right, it's all about speed. I've done hundreds of landings with the default F/A-18A without modifications, and it really just comes down to speed.

As for the CS F/A-18D...get it, especially if it's only 12 dollars. It has all the things you'd wish the default had, and more!

182.jpg



Regards, Diego
 
Thank you, all. The consensus seems to be: keep practicing!

Meanwhile, two more questions:

  1. What's a realistic fuel load for a recovering Hornet? 5,000 pounds? 3,000?
  2. My thinking is that it's better to concentrate on one flight model at a time, at least when you're still learning the basics. Has anyone grafted the Xload FDE and aircraft.cfg onto the Acceleration Hornet's external model?
 
1) My rig is set to kg rather than lbs, so I can't comment directly, but I've found that simply setting to the "aux" tanks to 0 on the fuel page puts the weight well within limits for shipborne landings.

2) Nope. But I'll do that right now and see what happens. :)
 
:ernae:

Yes, I agree on the speed, hitting the deck to hard will certainly be rewarded with the bouncing effect as portrayed in the vid, I know it well. I went ahead and purchased the xload, not bad for $14 smacks, Have not tried any carrier landing yet in her, although I'm having a hoot in Mr. stealthy. Also Carrier capable, will have to get me a Carrier populated with A-117, X-f18, and f-14.

Cheers, & thx for the tips, :icon29:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top