Victory205

Well done. It's fun to fly, isn't it?

My pleasure. Feel free to pass it along. Hopefully, it will make everyone’s transition to the F-4E go smoothly. It’s an amazing aircraft and the module is a ton of fun to fly. We also have a window to revisit some nuances in the F14 flight model. When that is complete, I’ll update and post new F14 tips. I alone made the decision to pull them because the rapid updates we were making in the FM made them obsolete and confusing. That’s on me, not Heatblur. Hopefully, it won’t be too long.

“Jester” isn’t a person, it’s a system. Similar to how pilots refer to any autopilot, from a simple single axis wing leveler to a triple redundant, CATIII Autoland capable auto flight system as “George”.

Surviving FAM-1 in the Phantom. Congratulations on your purchase of the F-4E Phantom II. It is a sweet flying beast, with enormous depth and versatility. It’s easy to fly while being tactically challenging. The aircraft is versatile, and the era it dominated was interesting, a combination that produces hours upon hours of engaging fun. First, don’t be intimidated by the hulking beast. The surprising little secret is that it’s easy to fly. The Phantom is honest and uncomplicated procedurally, the engines are responsive and powerful, and the slats make it feel responsive, but also stable and precise. You point it where you want to go, push the throttles up and man, does it go! As you would expect, Heatblur has delved deep into accurate modeling of systems and aerodynamics, and the result is a nuanced, detailed simulation of the F-4E. You will discover small details as you explore the aircraft and systems, they’ve even simulated the influence of engine exhaust flow on the stabilator due to its anhedral. How cool is that? From broad testing experience and SME feedback, I recommend starting with a pitch curve of at least 10 for the F-4. The simulator is faithful to the real F4E, which is sensitive in pitch. Experiment and refine your axis tuning for your controller from there. I am currently using a non-FFB stick with a 4 inch extension and heavy spring tension, 12 works for me. Map your controls. You only need pitch, roll, rudders, brakes, gear, flaps, nose wheel steering, speed brakes, trim in all axis and drag chute for this hop. Keyboard and clicking will be fine for the rest. We won’t be killing MiGs just yet. This guide is meant to be a quick and dirty “FAM-1” guide to get you in the air and safely back to earth. We’ll also have some fun in between. I know you’re eager to give it a try, so skip startup and begin on the runway, ready to launch. Fly a clean jet today, or throw on a centerline drop tank for starters. The trim will already be set (understand that due to the way the bellows/trim system interacts, until airspeed increases, the stabilator will be positioned full leading edge down on the ground), engines running, check that the flaps are down, let’s go. Normal Takeoff and Climb. Apply full afterburner, position stick full aft when Jester calls 80 knots and hold it there. Nose-wheel steering until the rudder becomes effective ~70KIAS (the NWS button must be held during operation). If you drift and need nose-wheel steering to correct, then center the rudder pedals before re-engaging. With full aft stick, the aircraft will rotate on its own when it’s ready to fly, ease off back stick to hold it at 10-12º nose up pitch attitude. Our intrepid F-4 SME’s and and recommended this technique, it works beautifully. Gear and flaps up immediately to avoid overspeed. Both have limit speeds of 250 KIAS. Min flap retract is 180 KIAS, which is only a consideration during military power takeoffs. Jester will let you know when they’re up. Terminate burner at 300 KIAS. You’re in the air, easy peasy, nothing to it. Climb at 350 to intercept .9 Mach. Mil power climbs at 350 KIAS initially require just over 20º of pitch. In Max afterburner, it will climb into the mid twenties at .9 Mach at over 30º nose high. Beast mode. Setting 3000 pph per engine results in a cruise Mach between .84 at FL 250 and .90 at FL350. That’s a fuel burn of 100 pounds per minute. Fuel planning couldn’t be simpler. Mil power at FL350 tops out just below Mach, around .97 IMN. Ease the nose down and it will go supersonic without afterburner. There is a little Mach Tuck going through transonic. Overall, the pitch changes are mild, trim is sensitive. Be quick with your thumb. 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. Maneuvering Flight ROLL AUG off for maneuvering. Always roll using coordinated rudder and aileron. The higher the AOA, feed in more rudder as ailerons are less effective. Rudder only rolls are smooth and predictable. Reducing AOA increases roll rate. Experiment at different AOA’s and speeds, it will come to you quickly. Best sustained turns with typical Air to Air load outs at medium combat altitudes (SL to 15,000) range from 520-480 KIAS. Even with light pitch forces, flying a consistent, sustained turn is relatively easy. Smooth corrections pay big dividends. Control bank angle primarily with your feet. I checked the sustained turn G capability today from SL to 15,000 MSL, and it’s on the money. Gross weight affects performance of course, but if you’re doing your part, you’ll be able to hold 7.0 G on the deck, and 5.1 G while turning level at 15,000 MSL. I’m quite impressed with how stable the Phantom is at high G loads. You can already sense that the F-4E needs and loves airspeed. Use a 500 KIAS entry speed for a mil power loop, 450 with burner. A 4-5G pull up to 19.2 units will result in 200-230 knots or so over the top. It takes a lot of intentional baffoonery at very low speeds to depart controlled flight, which commonly shows up as a nose slice opposite to the direction of aileron input. The recovery controls are neutralize ailerons and rudder, unload with stick well forward (5 degrees AOA is a good target), and pull the throttles back to idle power. If the engines compressor stall, no big deal, go to idle, they recover quickly. Continue to hold up to full forward stick and let the aircraft do what it wants to do during post stall gyrations. As nose falls below horizon, and speed increases to 200 knots, you are flying again, so it’s safe to carefully roll with rudder and aileron to wings level, then pull up in light buffet, approximately 17 units, don’t exceed 19.2 units in the pullout. Spin recovery controls are rudder opposite the yaw/turn needle and lateral stick into (the primary recovery control is aileron), but perhaps the biggest shock having heard all of the lore, it is difficult to get the slatted F-4E to spin, even intentionally. That said, if the aircraft doesn’t recover, pull the drag chute. The aircraft will pitch nose down and accelerate. Either jettison the chute or let it fail when airspeed exceeds ~250knots. If you see a nose slice, it’s probably the ailerons causing it. Center the stick, reduce the angle of attack. The AJB-7 attitude indicator is so well designed that it can be used to fly precise aerobatic maneuvers, including rolling out on a specific heading, without looking outside the cockpit. The indicator is surrounded by the primary flight instruments, so in addition to the heading marks on the AJB-7 itself, you can see airspeed, AOA, altitude and the VSI in your peripheral vision, without shifting your scan. It’s all right there. Try this. Referencing the attitude indicator, pull up wings level and peg the nose exactly in the middle of the black dot that depicts 90º up, then pull the throttles to idle and do a lovely tail slide. If you get it right, the aircraft will back down, and full aft stick will make it flop forward, full forward stick will make it flop on to its back. Hold controls neutral, and it will pendulum past vertical at the bottom, where inertial dominates aerodynamics, just as a real fighter does. The AJB-7 clearly indicates where the closest horizon is to roll and pull out with minimal altitude loss. You can use it to pull out of a hairy maneuver on a specific heading, bugging out directly at home plate, where you can change out your underwear. Landing Max landing weight is 46,000 pounds. We aren’t too concerned with limitations for our hop today, but you don’t want to get into bad habits either. That’s about 12,000lbs of fuel for our configuration today, shouldn’t be a problem. At max landing weight, a stable on-speed landing AOA of 19.2 works out to 168 KIAS. If we were down to 3000 lbs of fuel using today’s configuration, on-speed would be 151 KIAS. Overhead breaks at 350-400 KIAS work well. 4000 pph will result in 400 KIAS on the run in. In this speed range, idle power in the break is fine, speed brakes are not necessary. If you do use the boards during a faster break entry, they should be manually retracted on downwind. If you are struggling to hold altitude when dirty, then you forgot to retract the speed brakes. Seat full up for landing. It’s difficult to see over the nose, so you may need to use RCTL+RSHFT+8 to raise cockpit camera. Extend gear and flaps at 250 KIAS, get the power back up as the aircraft decelerates towards 180 knots. That’s minimum speed on downwind, but slow to the “on-speed” AOA of 19.2 units (the big white square) before or during the first part of the final turn. Jester will talk you through the simple Landing Checklist. For reference, when level downwind, pitch will be 10-11º, and ballpark fuel flow with be ~4000 pph per engine. The aural tone and indexers give plenty of feedback. Gear and flap extension both cause a very mild pitch down. Flaps extend when decelerating through around 210 KIAS. Flaps will retract in the air if over-sped. Like most fighters, you’ll need to add power around the approach turn to control rate of descent. It doesn’t take much. Perform all rolling in the pattern with coordinated rudder and aileron. Trim and pitch are sensitive in the landing configuration, faithful to the aircraft, so smooth inputs are required. Fly with your fingertips. Due to the -5.25 degree thrust line of the J79 engines, adding power causes the nose to pitch down, reducing it causes a pitch up. It’s exactly opposite of the F-14. When you push with your left hand, you will need a slight pull with your right and vice versa. It’s also a happy little airplane during approach, with the AOA tone beeping and chirping. In fact, it’s quite easy to get on the runway in one piece. All of that cheerful noise should be a clue that the Phantom is flown while referencing AOA in the landing pattern. If you are struggling, try flying a little fast, with the AOA needle at the bottom of the white, “on-speed” index mark, around 17-18 units. We aren’t landing on the ship, so a little fast is fine as you get familiar, you have plenty of runway to work with. Use the “bug on the windshield” for glide path reference. Just like landing a Cessna. If you are addicted, you’ll quickly wean yourself off of HUDs. If you get behind the power curve, above 19.2 units or more, understand that excessive AOA causes enormous drag that if unchecked, will dramatically increase descent rate. To recover, forward stick to reduce AOA immediately is critical, while adding lots of power. You need both, don’t try to power out, reduce AOA with pitch. Danger of stall buffet and nose slice lurks above 25 units. In the flare, you may need to look to the left or right through the windshield side panel to see the runway, like Lindbergh did flying the Spirit of St Louis. It’s where you look when landing tail draggers or even fat nosed single engined Cessnas. Some instructors call it “The Lindbergh Reference”. I find that carrying power into the flare makes for a smoother landing. Arrest the rate of descent before you ease the power and let it settle. If you are fast, then pulling more power in the flare is fine. When you try a carrier landing, and we all know that you will, keep in mind that you will need a significantly wider abeam distance. The F-4E lacks the BLC flaps of the Navy versions, so you’ll be flying a much faster approach turn with a wider turn radius. The LSO’s will be nervously eyeing the net. Good luck. Single engine approaches are simple. Only real change is you a little faster, at 17 units, the yaw due to asymmetric thrust is easily controlled with rudder, even in burner. Fly a straight in approach using gentle bank angles and you’ll be fine. It helps to get rid of most of your fuel before landing with an engine that is “uninterested in further toil”. The F-4E also has a nifty flight director on it’s remarkable AJB-7 attitude indicator that makes ILS approaches a piece of cake. ILS freq is set on the pilot’s left console. The controls for what drives the needles are on the lower right side of the instrument panel. Give it a whirl, flight directors are amazing. After touchdown, lower the nose, pop the chute, hold the stick aft, and enjoy Jester’s compliments on your landing as you roll out. I bet that you land it on the first try. When clear of the runway, there is nothing like opening the canopies and enjoying the sound of two J-79’s while enjoying some fresh Phantom Air. Soak up the satisfaction of a flight well-flown as you taxi back to the ramp. You just experienced what it is like to fly an iconic fighter that continues to menace the skies even today. Damn, that was fun. Maybe that's why Jester loves to say, “We have the best job in the world.”

Our beloved aircraft was called one of three things- “Tomcat”, “Turkey”, or “F14”. I also never heard anyone call it “The Tom” until long after it was retired. “The Cat” meant catapult in the Navy. An aviator didn’t fly the Cat, he or she got launched by one. It sounds a bit confusing for a Cat on the Cat for a Cat Shot. The Airboss would confuse the hell out of the deck crew if he had to say, “Suspend CAT 2, the Cat has a malfunction!”. The crew wouldn’t know where the problem was, in the aircraft, or in the launching system. “Cat” also was used in other aviation terms. Cat I, II and III ILS approaches. Cat A,B,C,D instrument classification for approach miniums (has to do with approach speeds vs weather minimums), and Category of RAG student, based on whether a new guy from training command, or a transition from another fleet aircraft, or refresher for someone who had been qualified in the same aircraft on a previous tour. Other differences abound. Such as “Bag” meant flight suit in the Navy, it didn’t refer to external fuel tanks. I've got a briefing in a half hour, I gotta go put on my bag and grab a cup of Joe. Fuel tanks were called “drops” or wait for it, “tanks”. A flight in the USAF is a "ride", in the Navy, it's a "hop", even if it lasts 14 hours, includes six inflight refueling and crosses an ocean. “The Jet” nomenclature came from the USAF, usually used to ascribe drama to a mundane maneuver or situation. They were always talking about “I put nine G’s on THE JET”, or ”the jet SWAPPED ENDS and the left engine FLAMED OUT”. The Navy called an aircraft…believe it or not, “an aircraft”. In recent years, “the jet” seems to have been universally adopted, and even new airline pilots who arrived after transitioning from flying bug smashers now sneer about the proper way to fly “the jet”. For some reason, the term that grinds my gears is “fighter jet”. It’s a dorky sounding term coined by hairsprayed newsreaders on crummy cable television broadcasts. Media uses has made "fighter jet" main stream. So if fighter jet makes sense, then why do we not call a P51 a “fighter prop”? But wait, “cargo jet” sounds perfectly fine, but someone calling a C-130 a “cargo prop” would sound odd. Media also uses the term “Tarmac” incorrectly. “The passengers were stuck on the tarmac for twenty minutes while the crew removed the anaconda from the copilots rudder pedals…” There are three official places “The Jet” can be located on an airport- “a runway, a taxiway, or a ramp”. Some of those surfaces are constructed of “tarmac”, most are concrete. Why aren’t passengers suffering on “The Concrete” during routine cockpit reptile removal? My favorite on this grave, linguistic quandary is a passage by astronaut Michael Collins- a broadly educated, thoughtful man, describing how NASA changed the word “nominal” from meaning “a trifling, or small amount”, into a new usage describing an event as being “normal”. I think of him every time some kid from SpaceX utters it during a Falcon launch to dramatically convey that the payload fairing jettisoned without hitting anything important. Courtesy of NASA, the new meaning of “nominal” made it into the dictionary. I can’t bear to look to see if “fighter jet” has polluted Webster’s hallowed pages yet. Depressingly, it probably has. During the height of the space program, NASA terms also found their way into military aviation, where pilots began to call something that wasn't working as it should, “an anomaly". I heard an A4 pilot say that she couldn't get the canopy to open because there was an "anomaly in the handle linkage". Scrub the launch, get Gene Krantz on the horn, break out the emergency procedures manual and run the "anomaly in the handle" procedure! If a celebrity uses a term incorrectly, it will be instantly adopted. I met John Travolta long ago in the middle of nowhere in an airport FBO. He was on a break while he training for his multi-engine rating with one of my old instructors. Years later, he was on a PBS show talking about how he had a total electrical failure due to a “Transducer Rectifier” failure in his Gulfstream II. No Mr Barbarino, it’s called a “Transformer Rectifier”, and it converts AC power into DC power. That single interview resulted in years of newbie jet pilots going on about Transducers that weren’t installed in their “Jets”. If you’ve read Shakespeare, you know that language naturally evolves, so this is all in fun, but there is no doubt that in an effort to sound cool, participants in aviation, like most endeavors, often end up appearing silly. It’s part of what makes aviation so much fun.

Sadly, I had no F4 time. Between the Reserves and Fleet, there were maybe six Navy Phantom squadrons left when I got to Oceana. VF74 and 103 finally transitioned to the F14 during my first deployment. Throughout my career, there were lots of former F4 drivers around, almost all of the Fleet CO/XOs had flown them in combat in SEA. Lot's of wisdom, lots of sea stories that had you on the edge of your seat. My primary instructor in Advanced Strike in the TA4J had flown F4's in combat as well, and was also a former test pilot. Very serious and demanding, but fair. He helped my career a lot, probably got me into fighters, but I don't know for sure. The A4 and F4 had similar instruments, which you will find very user friendly compared to the VDI in the Tomcat. My reserve squadron had transitioned from F4's to F14's six months or so before I showed up. Also, VFMA-112 was sitting across the ramp which gave us plenty of engagements and cooperative flying as well using the F4S. The biggest issue we had with the F4 guys initially was getting them to recalibrate the speeds for maneuvers. The Phantom needed about a hundred to a hundred and fifty knots more for similar maneuvers. First time we went to the ship for a mini workout, our CO was "holding" waiting for our Charlie Time overhead the ship at around 350 knots, lapping all of the Tomcat guys sauntering at the normal ~230KIAS Max Conserve. After having to dodge him a couple of times, somebody finally came up on squadron tac and said, "Hey Skipper, slow down, this isn’t an ACM engagement!" The most memorable F4 pilot I had the pleasure of meeting was CDR Ralph Gaither, who spent seven and a half years in Hoa Lo Prison in Hanoi after being shot down as a 23 year old Ensign in VF84. In 1965, he was flying Phantoms off of USS Independence, shot down, and wasn’t released until 1973, right before turning age 31. When I met CDR Gaither he was CO of DWEST Survival School in Pensacola. At the time, was a 23 year old Ensign as well, who suddenly realized that all of my problems seemed awfully small. When he walked into a room, everyone snapped to, and you could hear a pin drop. He also was the humblest, happiest guy I ever met in the USN. I don't think that he ever had a bad day. Right before I got to VF84, the squadron had sent him a plaque, because he had never received the traditional farewell swag after he was shot down. He passed away in 2019. http://veterantributes.org/TributeDetail.php?recordID=71 Hopefully this provides a little motivation and perspective. You're going to love the Phantom when it drops.

No one old enough to play DCS, especially anyone who fancies themselves an adult, should be falling apart over a video game release date. Joking and humor are natural and add to the fun, but drama and victimhood over such banter is not normal. I would add that it's astonishing to see people here who enjoy history participate in the complaining. From avatars and comments, it's obvious that many of you idolize Robin Olds, who overcame enormous obstacles during his career, and constantly demonstrated courage and strong leadership, yet his admirers get pulled into being upset over extremely trivial matters. You would think that studying the lives of such men (look up James Stockdale) would promote resilience and some level of stoicism. Pre-Orders offer a significant discount in return for the uncertainty and inevitable difficulties in software development and release date projections. It’s a welcome opportunity, all things considered.

You gents do understand that whether you apply the astronomical, or meteorological definitions of the seasons, that the Heatblur statement of “F4 Phantom, coming in Winter 2024”, technically includes December, 2024? The only question is did they mean the whole month, or just the winter solstice to the 31st of December? We have a whole baseball and football season to wait.

If anyone is looking, the formation sight lines are “literally” in the NATOPS Manual, starting in Section 9.2, “Special Procedures”. Lots of good information in that section.

That used to be called “knowing how to fly a tactical jet”. A lost art, evidently. It really is simple- 1. Don’t pull too hard. 2. Be smooth with control inputs. 3. At high AOA, center the stick and roll with rudder only. Keep trying until you are proficient in all of the above. It’s a desktop sim, you’re sitting on your arse in a chair that is firmly on the ground. There is no reason to be intimidated or overwhelmed. Learn one step at a time. A bunch of real pilots from my era, who tend to be dismissive of Youtube Hero’s, especially those who vomit every detail of their lives in public, call those two guys, “Loser” and the “Donkey”. We have a bunch of great guys from a time where drama and nonsense is met with acerbic, but hilarious commentary. Cold, but effective, it’s a valuable tradition.

I'm with GJS. If all you are doing is madly typing in coordinates and flying following a line, then you're missing all of the fun. That's why I'm so looking forward to the Phantom, it's going to go a long way towards weaning people off of the crutches, and perhaps, changing their mindset into one of a real world pilot. You can't count on the automation or the INS or even the TACAN. The dirty little secret that you are missing, is that flying an attack or recce run at low level using time, heading and ground speed is a BLAST! I'll probably put up a little paper are TARPS in the F14 forum shortly, on where to find how to do this, and some examples and tips. Otherwise, TARPS from stored point to point in a sim will be boring. Learning to navigate isn't difficult, and it unshackles you from electronics, which results in confidence of knowing that if it all gets taken down, you can still find your way to the target and get home. My guess is that I share a lot of the same, fond memories as G.J.S, sitting around a table, telling sea stories while mission planning with my mates. More later. F4 Learning Curve The F4 is going to be easy to fly for those who know how to fly a regular old airplane. It's easier to land than the F14, it doesn't have the trim changes that the Tomcat has with wing sweep and power inputs, and it has a superior attitude reference in the AJB-7 ADI. You can do a full aerobatic sequence referencing nothing but the ADI. We had a similar instrument, the AJB-3 in the TA-4J, and on a student's first flight in the aircraft, they performed a "squirrel cage" sequence, under the bag, in the back seat. Rolls, loop, half cuban eight, Immelmann, split-S. It's magnificent. The Phantom is going to be a ton of fun. Change your mindset, embrace basic flight tasks like trimming, which become second nature in mere minutes. The F4 is a very straightforward airplane. Everyone I know who flew it loved it.

How long do we have to study before the written test?

The bi-directional pump transfers pressure, not fluid. They use exiting fluid in the system with the failed pump. Transfer pumps are common on twin engine hydraulic control/systems aircraft. They don’t transfer fluid for obvious reasons, a leak in one system would deplete the other. Basically, it’s redundancy for a failed hydraulic pump, not for a fluid leak. They do create a single point failure should the bi-directional pump catastrophically itself fail, which happened to me in an airliner, thankfully sitting on the ramp, waiting for a gate.

Seems like many of you are finally realizing that “fighter pilots” are simply normal people, and are not worthy of Kim Kardashian level celebrity worship. I find myself optimistic this fine day, having discovered that there might be hope for the world after all. Very well written summation, @cheezit. I would add that the reason for the depressing choices on parts support and the upgrade timeline was the result of SECNAV’s insistance on a 600 ship Navy. It turned out to be based on overstated intelligence on the Russian Naval capabilities, but the procurement, manning and maintenance costs of those ships, which spend most of their lives sitting in port and in maintenance, was astronomical. As Reagan and Gorbachev cooled tensions (Defense spending peaked around 1987), and especially after the USSR collapsed and true capacity was revealed and no longer a threat, it was payback time for the USN’s steamrolling of the years of budget dominance. There was a priority of total hulls over total quality present during the time of @Cheezit’s analysis above.

This occurs due to “Mach Lever Shift” of the Mach Lever System. Mach lever shift increases engine idle speed in the subsonic and high AOA regime to provide increased stall margins. Below 0.9 IMN, if AOA is increased to 18 units or more, the CADC input to the Mach lever trim system is replaced by a fixed value equivalent to 1.3 IMN, which spools up the engine automatically, regardless of throttle lever position. It’s modeled correctly.

^^^^This is the way. Find the attitude plus power for the landing configuration for level, the 180 to 90 turn, and final. Then it is a matter of constant adjustments around this values. It’s supposed to be difficult. If I haven’t flown in awhile, it will take at least 5-10 passes to recalibrate the required inputs and corrections. Before attempting a new carrier session, I always begin by practicing level turns, the break maneuver and extended pattern maneuvering until I can consistently make the aircraft do what it needs to do.

How are you HUD cripples going to land the F4J/S on the ship?

Used to dip my wing to salute him when taking off to the south out of KTUS. He was incarcerated in the US Penitentiary down there, just off the end of the runway.

When I say “turn off the HUD” in the landing pattern, it’s because that is the only way that you are going to learn the skills you need to be a skilled (sim) aviator. It’s the same whether you’re flying a desktop sim, a full motion sim, or an actual aircraft. The Navy teaches “Attitude Instrument Flying” from day one. Tiny adjustments result in performance changes in jets due to both higher energy states and simple vector state geometry. One degree of pitch has a higher value at the end of a velocity vector has a larger vertical resultant. Reference the VDI, it’s got better fidelity. Eventually, you can turn that off too, and fly referencing the horizon for tactical flying. Each one G airspeed (or on speed AOA in the landing config) has a corresponding pitch attitude and power setting. For example, at max trap weight, level flight at 15 units AOA in landing config, takes about 10º nose high and 3300 pph fuel flow per engine (this is from memory, it changes slightly as we tweak the FM with each release). This also changes with weight and stores, but it’s relatively minor, a degree or two in pitch and a few hundred pph in fuel flow. It will get you in the ballpark. Same for turning flight, which requires a slight increase in pitch attitude and additional thrust. Practice turns, find out what pitch and power is required for those too. The goal is to be able to take your hand off of the stick without the aircraft pitch attitude changing. Trim will take constant attention, and should become natural and second nature. In the break, is similar, but dynamic since speeds and configuration is changing. Attitude is still the key, and angle of bank is used to control that attitude. As speed decreases, you’ll need more pitch and less bank. The HUD in the F14A/B was not designed to be used as a primary flight instrument. The horizon line, FPM and VSI jittered and lagged, depending upon the quality of alignment. Quality of alignment was usually worse at sea. It was common to have “runaway winds” with a SINS alignment at sea, caused by observables during the alignment. This resulted in the FPM being pegged and out of view. HUDs also overheated and failed, regularly. If you take the training wheels off, then you’ll learn to ride your bike. Note the pitch and power required for a desired speed and configuration. Write them down, be able to reproduce them. You’re life will get very, very easy.

With respect to visual engagements, because of the weapons that the F-4E carried during the bulk of its service, you’re going to have to learn to maneuver to your opponents rear quarter. It’s going to be fun to watch, but the skills required will make you a better ACM driver. No more put the lift vector on, feet on the instrument panel, pull as hard as you can with both hands and pretend that you are ace of the base in your sporty F18. I can’t wait.

You might like Riding Rockets by Mike Mullane. He was in the same astronaut class and has coverage of some of Hoot’s antics at NASA. Entertaining and interesting book that will open your eyes with respect to NASA management. Good friend of mine was a Captain at Southwest and flew with Hoot. He had nothing but good things to say about him.

Hmmmm.

I didn’t correlate which callsign went with which liar. My apologies.

Vince’s “guess” was “30 seconds”, not five as Maxin misquoted. I ran into Aiello in a pilot lounge a long time ago, not too long after he was hired. He had already done a podcast on the F14. I asked him about why he didn’t push back on some of the BS that was already piling up from his interviews. He basically shrugged his shoulders, and the gist was that the show was about entertainment, not a documentary, and he didn’t have the technical expertise to argue against whomever was on the show. I got the drift that the purpose was about clicks and cash, not so much accuracy. He was a NFWS instructor at Fallon by the way, a very different course and mindset than Miramar in the 1970’s and 80’s. The interview does highlight one aspect that is ignored by Tomcat lovers. The F14 was unreliable in comparison to the newer fighters coming online, which was the main driver of its retirement. Everyone points to Dick Cheney as some sort of Darth Vader character, but had the Tomcat had 85% FMC numbers and maintenance man hours in the teens, we’d still by flying the F14E/F strike fighters today. My view is that to achieve Gen 5 reliability, the entire F14 airframe would have had to have been gutted with redesigned systems (not all) and updated avionics. Possible, but costly given the changes in threat and focus when the decision was made. One of the RIO’s in our squadron ended up making RADM, and was a CAG, XO of USS Constellation, held posts in OPNAV in Air Warfare, and Commanded THIRD FLEET. He mentioned that Tomcat maintenance became a morale issue. The Hornet wrenches were sitting around their shops playing cribbage and acey-duecy, while F14 troops worked all night to get enough jets up to make the flight schedule for the next evolution. It was Naval Aviators, based on operational and cost considerations, working in the groups described above, who ultimately made the recommendation to kill the Tomcat.

For perspective, the Space Shuttle accelerated at ~3G on its way to low earth orbit. The fantasy F14B in the video could almost keep up with it below the troposphere.