Victory205

Watched Reflected’s video. It’s pretty good, but someone needs to let him know that he breaks like a pu**y. I’ve seen airliners roll faster and pull harder than that. Co-ordinated rudder and aileron for rolling in the landing pattern please. Don’t get caught up in absolute engine rpm for adjustments, most pilots use fuel flow in most jets, and consider whatever they do reference as ball park settings. Kidding aside, taking it easy as you build confidence in your abilities is a smart way to approach any new aircraft.

Believe it or not, the F14 did have a provision for the flaps and slats to automatically retract. If the flap handle was in the normal range (ie, not in emergency), then an overspeed that exceeded 225 KIAS would auto retract the main flap panels. However, this feature was removed in an airframe change (AYC 660P1). I am not sure of the actual timeframe of the change, but I never flew an aircraft that had the auto retract capability. Auto retract was originally confined to certain BuNo's, but was removed in all aircraft by the airframe change. I'm not 100% sure why it was removed, but if memory serves, it was likely due to inadvertent retractions occurring below the 225 KIAS trigger speed. Exceeding 225 KIAS with the landing flaps extended is one of the three states that activates the "Reduce Speed" warning light, so all F14 aircraft will show that warning. All F14's also have an AUX FLAPS blow back feature due to a bypass valve located within the aux flap control section of the combine hydraulic system. So technically, the F14 does have a blow back feature, but only for the AUX FLAPS.

Sea Level charts are not as useful because the Ps curves tend to get flat, even more so for high TW aircraft. The real charts are OK for comparing max speeds, but sea level charts make it difficult to ascertain targeted sustained turn velocities. FWIW, we typically used 15,000 for comparison, if you take a look, you’ll instantly see why. For an out of plane extension and reversal, perhaps the most important aspect is ensuring that your opponent’s energy state is bled down enough that a). He can’t follow, and b). He can’t get his nose on you to launch a weapon that can track. The latter is tough in today’s world of all aspect missiles, it wasn’t much of a problem when the F-4 was fighting MiG 17’s and 21’s. Randy Cunningham’s famous 1v1 against the mythical “Colonel Toon” (who didn’t exist) was an example of what happens when you initiate a vertical extension and your opponent has the energy and the capacity to follow. Duke knew that the MiG 17 had plenty of energy, but he went vertical anyway because he had never encountered a MiG pilot with the ability to use the vertical. One last tip. Don’t trim during BFM. It’s particularly bad in a simulator as it masks what little feedback you receive from your control stick. We don’t have the luxury of feeling G forces, at least until affordable home centrifuges become a thing.

The F14 was grossly over performing when it came out, which took a considerable amount of time to match to the performance charts. In due course, @fat creasonused an innovative technique to solve. Your perspective may be biased depending upon when you purchased the module, because we went from ridiculously high max speeds and maneuvering capabilities, to slightly underperforming, before @fat creason designed a brilliant method to solve a complex, tedious challenge. A significant challenge was solving the DCS modeling of external stores drag. The F-4E is matching the performance in the charted config that are accessible right now. Reading or watching videos and declaring a “feeling” that it’s on or off isn’t a valid method. If something is discovered, to be in error, then it will be checked and tuned. I think it performs better than my own (unsubstantiated) personal expectations, but I had to recalibrate to much higher corner velocities for max performance after studying the performance charts. Those higher speeds require fine control inputs for max performance.

LOL, that’s kind of cute, but using the white reference mark at the bottom of the VDI display is correct. The marks are there to aid in instrument flying, so 10, 20, 20, 45, and 60º are more useful than your interpretation.

Thank you, I watch the first couple of minutes and I’ll look at the rest of it a bit later. Quickly. The F14 has a couple of bobweights, springs and an Eddy Current Damper between the control stick and the flight control surfaces, all modified by the SAS computers. The F-4 has a bellows that loosely performs the function of the ECD by increasing pitch forces at high G. There is a lot going on under the surface in the Tomcat that most aren’t familiar with to produce it’s handling characteristics. Can you give us and idea of your real world flying experience for reference? What general types of aircraft and whether you’ve flow aerobatic maneuvers in the real world. It’s Memorial Day here and I’m leaving to attend a ceremony for our fallen brethren. Remember.

Can you post a video that includes the control stick and controls indicator of the specific problem that you are having as describe above? Include the aircraft load out and fuel state and altitude. We should be able to see the rest. It would help if you would share the technique are you using during roll inputs, and exactly what you mean by “unload after pull”? Are you referencing a roll reversal during a high G turn or a transition from turning flight to a zero G unload for an attempted bug out? Also include your stick model, extension if any, rudder pedals and curves, etc. Does your rig allow you to rest your forearm on your thigh or the arm of your chair? I’m not seeing problems during such maneuvers.

You have a good attitude and strong grasp of ACM concepts (I should call it BFM, since we’re flying a USAF Phantom). Trying different tactics, speeds, maneuvers and evaluating the results is how you improve.

I’m not sure if some of the commenters here understand how flight control systems work in a non-reversible hydraulic system typically found on conventional control tactical jets. In such control systems, the pilot never feels aerodynamic loads on the controls, nor are the weight or balance of the controls themselves transmitted to the stick . Sitting on the ground where the aircraft can’t generate more than one G, a pilot displacing the stick from its neutral point only feels springs, bobweights and friction. Those forces get heavier in the air only as G loads are felt on any bobweights in the system. Most of such systems move the stick during trim operations. Inputs such as Mach trim, or an integrated trim system inputs that independently offset flap, speedbrake and auxiliary inputs like DLC engagement or actuation generally don’t move the stick, nor do stability augmentation system inputs to the flight surfaces. For a sim player with a spring stick controller, the physical stick’s location frequently doesn’t follow the virtual stick in the game. On the ground for instance, in the F14, F5, F86, etc, if the player actuates the pitch trim only without touching the physical stick, then the virtual stick will move on screen, but the player’s physical stick doesn’t. The two are out of synch, so to speak. Another is that the physical stick has a symmetric throw in all axis, but the real aircraft don’t, with the neutral point well forward in the arc, so that more aft stick throw is available than forward stick. The F14 also has a physical pitch curve already built into its system, so you can see that the module’s virtual stick doesn’t follow the player’s physical stick in a 1:1 fashion. For trimming, the only force available to produce an out of trim force is the spring in the stick. So as the player trims out those spring forces, he must concurrently move the stick opposite the trim direction. You can test this in the aforementioned aircraft by trimming at 500 knots, then slowing to 150 knots without trimming. Note the trimmed stick position at 500 knots against a reference point on the instrument panel, then decelerate while the back pressure against the spring. Note a reference the stick ends up. Then trim out the forces to maintain 150 knots. You will notice that the stick is in the same place with respect to the instrument panel, but you have unconsciously moved your physical stick to back to its center, neutral spring position. If you don’t compensate, and hold your physical stick fixed in position while trimming aft during this exercise, then the virtual aircraft will enter a climb. The F-4E behaves the same way during this exercise, the only difference is that the stick moves slightly with trim inputs, which manifest just like trim inputs in the other jets listed. I’ll let Grover explain the F-4E pitch control system, he’ll likely blow your socks off, but hopefully this background information helps clear up the nuances and limitations of real trim vs virtual. You can put me down for one of the guys who finds the F-4E solid and easy to fly because of its emulation of the bellows system. It’s very pitch stable in holding a constant G, and I’m not seeing any of the behavior you’ve describe during roll reversals (which I checked again today in a variety of conditions). I would add that I have a WingWing base with a 120mm extension, with the heaviest springs I could find and a pitch curve of 12. This provides a more familiar feel as I’m used to much higher stick force per G than most stock controllers provide. I’ve found that it makes tanking, carrier landings and trimming straightforward.. I was pretty comfortable in the F-4E module straightaway. It trims and flys similarly to a grossly overpowered A-4, but believe it or not, the A-4 was more sensitive in pitch and roll than the F-4E.

I have the same setup, which was used for the landing config trim exercise above. The “videos above” were in a different thread, which puts them more “sideways” than “above”. Here you go-

That ain’t it. While “planes on sticks” can be a useful training tool, many instructors perform physics defying maneuvers with them, inches apart, when he should be standing across the room to make the relative maneuver to scale. The gent in the video was describing a high G roll guns defense, rolling with rudder at high alpha. He reversed the roll with his sticks, but stated that he was “continuing the roll”, implying same direction. The delta winged 106 could do a single bat turn, after which it was dead in the water. I can “sort of” do the NFWS rudder reversal in our F-4E, but it takes a long time to execute, and isn’t what I would call an easily “repeatable” maneuver. It’s quicker to just roll and put the lift vector on your opponent than to attempt a reversal that swaps ends at low speed. Two things to keep in mind- • It was an extension used to gain separation and geometry from an opponent that had either only a guns or rear aspect IR missiles. • In contrast to the hard winged Navy F-4B/J’s in the aforementioned book, we have a “soft winged” F-4E. Even with our slats locked in (which I also tried), the F-4E has fixed slats on the outer wing panels, not to mention a different CG and aerodynamic profile due to the under nose gun installation. Vertical rudder reversals by the way, were being done in the F8 community before the Phantom guys adopted it during the unpleasantries in Southeast Asia. Don’t want to spoil the fun for you, so I’ll let you guys figure it out. It’s sort of an inertial maneuver, to give you a hint.

You are referencing the possibility that your control software may be increasing the dwell time of the button press. For those having difficulties, it would be beneficial to list your stick and software assuming that you employ your manufacturer’s control app or a something else. The more information, the better chance of tracking down problems. We had a host of folks testing the module with a variety of controllers. The videos posted above look typical of what I see when trimming. The only way I can duplicate the long stick stick forward pulse is to hold the trim control button rather than click it. Flying an aircraft with an aft CG will make pitch inputs more sensitive as well. Lastly, you want to use a trim hat that has a good quality spring on your stick so you get a positive click and strong rebound that reduces dwell time. Avoid mushy four way switches!

OK gents, I just trimmed out a 46,000 lb F-4E in the landing config with 4SP aboard at 800 MSL on the Caucuses Map. Sat there level for over four minutes using gentle rudder inputs to keep the wings level. The parameters were 168 KIAS, 87% rpm, 4700pph per engine fuel flow at exactly 19.2 units AOA with the aural tone constant. This is the way the F-4E flew, with sensitive pitch and trim. All of this was tested with detailed scrutiny, discussed at length, retested, ad nauseum. In due course, the SME's who flew the jet described it as correct. The overall handling feel reminds me a lot of the TA-4J, which is a quite a bit more sensitive in pitch and especially roll. Use very quick trim inputs, your right arm needs to be supported on your thigh or on the arm of a chair. It's obviously a finger tip aircraft, as was the real jet. Don't forget that the thrust line causes a pitch down as power is applied, pitch up as power is reduced. In the landing config, there is almost never a reason to input more than one quick click of pitch trim at a time. When you are stabilized on approach, you can also make very fine power adjustments using only one throttle. I find the thing quite stable over all, easily holding ±50 feet at max mach. It's more honest and easier to control than some of the DCS "warbirds" in pitch. It's very easy to maneuver under G as well. You simply need to stay after it and gain experience. Make friends with it, practice, and press on. The cool aspect was that when the aircraft flew over a ridge with a couple hundred feet, it picked up a 300 fpm rate of climb, then phugoided back to it's original state in one cycle after clearing the ridge. Perhaps it was DCS/HB modeling ground effect?

The topic was how to win at BFM, not who is best at whipping up on the AI. I was hoping against hope that you gents would be discussing corner velocities, control blending, maneuver airspeeds and switchology. My signature explains much of what is going on here.

“Do you ever wonder why…?” As written in the article itself, it’s meant to be humorous. There was a VF41 RIO who did a fine impression of Andy Rooney at Fo’c’sle Follies. “Do you ever wonder why all of the aircraft spotted on the bow are launched off of the waist cats, and all of the aircraft spotted on the stern are launched off of the bow?” Add to the list- aircraft aren’t “parked” on an aircraft carrier, instead, they are “spotted”.

Good answers to common issues can be found here-

Before posting non-flying questions in this thread, please check here for answers to common issues-

The problem is not having time to read the entire manual. It’s not bothering to take ten seconds to search before blurting out, “where the damned flaps switch”! The one that frightens me is that so many of you steely eye moustache growing fighter pilots never thought to try holding in the NWS button to turn “the jet”. The manual is very good. I use it constantly. I’d have never found the guarded slat lockout switch without it, that little critter was hiding.

If you are on the ground, then this is Correct. From Zabuzard- “The bellows system pulls at the stick with increasing airspeed, while the bobweight system pushes the stick forward with increasing G. In flight and when you are trimmed out well, these forces roughly balance each other out naturally. On ground however, the bellows measure airspeed 0 and hence do not add any force that would counter the bobweight system pushing the stick forward. You also will not see trim doing anything in that situation, since the trimming merely changes the length of the lever the bellows can apply force to the stick and not moving the stick around directly.”

You are on the right track.

You would need to match the CG, configuration and indicated air speed of the aircraft in your videos for a valid comparison.

Please ask your free flight spawn issue question in the Bugs and Problems sub forum. You’ll get a quicker response and help others who may be having the same issue. AFCS should be off on the ground. If you are trying to learn to fly the thing, keep it off in the air too. Takeoffs are pretty simple, are you using the recommended technique described in the OP here and in the manual? ROLL AUG off for maneuvering flight in the air, reasons are similar to the Tomcat. It makes departure resistance worse. There are a few pilots reporting that they have spun the Phantom. I have my doubts, because the soft winged slatted E model isn’t prone to spinning, even intentionally. It will enter an oscillatory departure, but it isn’t a developed spin. Do you gents know how to recognize a spin?

Mach number is the ratio between your aircraft's actual speed and the local speed of sound, which is directly proportional to temperature. Temperature decreases proportionally with altitude, so the speed of sound at SL is 661 knots, reducing linearly to 573 KTAS at 36000 MSL, above which it remains constant. That’s true airspeed, not indicated. The real world isn't that predictable of course, so the aircraft's Mach indicator uses pressure and temperature to calculate relative Mach number. It's a fairly complex calculation, because friction causes the local air temperature to rise at high airspeeds. You may have noticed that that jet aircraft performance charts show maximum attainable velocities at 36000 feet MSL. The reason is that FL360 is the location of the tropopause, where temperature stops decreasing with increasing altitude. The minimum temperature remains constant at -57ºC. This all assumes standard day conditions (definition), but as you know, the real world temperatures and height of the tropopause are quite different. So Mach meters are complex instruments that use local temperature, ram rise and dynamic pressure to calculate the Mach ratio that a pilot sees in the cockpit. The practical matter is 36000 feet is where the speed of sound is lowest, and due to reduced air density, the ratio of thrust versus drag is optimal. When you unload and descend to denser, warmer air, even though thrust increases, you are also fighting both higher parasitic drag, and chasing an increasing Mach number ratio. The figures that I posted for level flight (the exact number was 2.057 IMN at 35,000), were achieved with a completely level acceleration run. Flying an unloaded descent added .20 IMN (Indicated Mach Number) to the maximum speed. You can probably do better, post your results. Think about your Max Mach profile, and what altitude you would want to end your acceleration descent. To add to the challenge, we could specify a requirement to take off from an airfield, fly the profile and land safely on an airfield. Don't cheat by using "unlimited fuel", but configuration is your choice. This is where it gets interesting. You could also test for max speed attainable at MIL power only. As an aside, there is often shear turbulence at and within 4000 feet below the tropopause. Next time you have a bumpy cruise phase in an airliner, ask your pilot if they were fighting turbulence because we were too heavy to climb above "The Trope". Don't mention that you know me when you do it though.

When you quote speeds, it’s meaningless without altitude and configuration. With four sparrows in the missile wells I consistently saw Mach 2.03 at FL350 and 1.12 at sea level. That’s right on the Dash-One charted speeds. “Operationally, the F-4E is a Mach 2 aircraft. In level flight, it’s fastest at 35,000, and can achieve the dash one charted speed of just over Mach 2. Unload in a dive, and if you sport an adequate moustache, you can hit 2.2 plus. You can have fun figuring out the profile for that for yourself. At sea level, a low drag configuration tops out at 1.12-1.15 IMN. Adding external stores will reduce max Mach proportionately.”

The answers will be found at the link above.