Victory205

That's because you used improper control inputs followed by an improper recovery procedure. You deserved to crash... ;) Jabbers really should pull down or update his video on maneuvering. His spin recovery is AFU and will be even worse in the F14A.

What other landing questions have you flummoxed, other than a general lack of practice and flying skills? ;) I've updated the Landing Tips paper based on some of the questions here, and want to know if I've missed anything.

Human emotions and perceptions are a fascinating subject... ;)

DLC results in a six knot increase in approach speed at 15 units AOA. You are increasing that amount of energy to offset the loss of lift of the spoilers in the neutral position. You will get a mild pitch down with DLC engagement requiring re-trimming.

You don’t know iceman.

In reality, they were 9 on one side, 11 on the other, 22 and 17, 33 and 19. The guy that etched those was drunk for two weeks straight before he got to work.. :)

No, I was just describing to The Geniuses how there were two filters that snapped onto the VDI and HSD. They would fly off sometimes on the cat shot, and hit you in the chest. The problem was that you were blinded by the display. I used to tape them on and carried the same little roll of masking tape for three cruises. I love the way HB has modeled it.

It was deemed impossible. So it happened twice. God Bless the Fleet Naval Aviator.

The DCS lens roll angle isn’t models AFAIK. Some behavior is DCS carrier modeling. The F14 is still early access. Changes are a comin’.

The way some of you land, the Tomcat should either shear the CDP or the hook point, or pull the whole stinger off of the keel. I'm going to update the Landing Paper with Lens Roll angle and hook to eye this weekend. The DCS ship is far too forgiving of bad technique. Better learn to land on speed. Just catching a wire and patting yourself on the back is rubbish. If I had my way, I'd arm up the stern CIWS and shoot down anyone who is three knots fast.

F18. Little kids can land that thing on the boat while text messaging and taking selfies... ;)

EXACTLY! The module provides excellent feedback, so did the buffet cues in the aircraft. It pitched with power, and as I said in the Handling Tips monograph, analog instruments are easier to interpret for pilots in many situations. The rate of change of a needle is easy to pick up, as is the position of a needle. Little sags or tiny rates are easy for the eye to discern immediately. A digital readout, especially as implemented in a HUD, doesn't provide rate of change information very well, and requires reading, discerning and digesting the meaning of a numeric value. Analog, you just glance and get the picture. Digital/tape displays in airliners added trend vectors on the readouts to help with this. The F14D ASI info on the HUD actually mimicked a round gauge to some degree. It had a pointer with a numeric readout in the middle. Some of the General Aviation "glass cockpits" are ridiculously cluttered and unintuitive. The premise is that massive amounts of information is a good thing. It really isn't. You want useful information displayed, and everything else hidden until needed. We had a TPS grad in our squadron who had flown the Hornet at Pax River. He mentioned great difficulty in transitioning TPS students to basic instrument flight using the digits on its HUD. TPS grads didn't get access to long schools and lots of sim time when evaluating an aircraft. That was the entire point. The HUD in general, was often listed as a design deficiency for instrument flight. That said, a pilot eventually learns to deal with it, but the idea that one is better than another isn't as clear cut as many believe.

Depends upon the quality of your pattern and landings. Just getting it on the ship tells us nothing really. You can see what I am referencing in several posts above.

This makes me happy...

Yeah, I'd prefer photon torpedoes and a cloaking device, that that wasn't reality way back when. As far as war, it's someone else's turn...

Is it a rebuild into the F14A+, which was eventually redesigned the B?

That's about right. Look up Adiabatic Lapse Rate. Report your findings here.

Mach number is nothing more than a ratio of an object's actual dynamic pressure related to the speed of sound at a particular air density. Speed of sound varies primarily with temperature, so it really doesn't tell you precisely what you need for maneuvering per se. .7 Mach at SL is a lot more maneuvering energy than .7 Mach at 50,000 feet. Go sample this, you have a simulator in your hands. Report back at the difference in G capability in those two situations.

It works from the landing area where you come to a stop after a trap, with a slight right turn and off of the bow. Less than half of the ship's length. Think there is 15 knots of wind or so? Try it off of the small decks with some natural wind set up.

He's right. IAS is essentially Q, which is what the airframe feels for lift generation. Slightly oversimplified of course.

No, no, there was no parallax! :) It just placed the aircraft reference symbol in the geometric center of the windscreen. The guy that approved it at Grumman is probably dead. I mentioned early in my involvement to the HB guys that you had to stick your face close to the glare shield to see the edges of the symbology. Sitting normally, the edges were masked. The videos you see are taken by a camera much closer than the pilots eye and are deceiving. We actually have it easier in the sim than in the aircraft.

Actually, in FM testing, I routinely deck run on the Stennis after trapping to save time. Breaking a host of rules obviously, using burner, below Vmcg, etc. It works. Touch and goes work fine now, after a lot of super secret tweaking. ;)

@Oldfox. I don't know. Maybe it was to put the reference in the middle of the windscreen. There was no combining glass, the symbology was projected on the windscreen itself. Wasn't designed for primary flight information far better than anything else at the time. That rapidly changed. Took forever for the USN to upgrade it. Too busy spending money on ships that we really didn't need.

The whole aircraft is IFR certified, lol. Flat means too shallow glide slope, rising ball, maybe a bolter.

For all of my joshing about the Hornet, it owns the upper left quadrant of the flight envelope. Foolish to go one circle with that. I got the sense that some guys liked one curve because the didn't like sustained, high G's, and the wanted the fight closer to keep sight easier. I've beaten F18's in a pure, neutral start 1v1 in an F14A, and stayed neutral with a well flown Hornet and experienced USMC pilot, but it took patience, executing the basics well (why I stress practice and buffet cues) and sometimes an over stress inspection. Honestly, It is a great little turner, until you loaded it up with tanks. USMC got them before USN, so there wasn't as much experience and most of the Navy guys I saw came from A7's. Marines came from F4's and were a little better at ACM initially. I never saw a Super Hornet.