neofightr

it's been a long time but the thread is correct. The hornets I flew did not have a civ. ILS we did have a similar ILS for carrier and navy airfields which were integrated in the hud display. I want to say it was officially called CILS, I can't remember. Also we commonly used controller precision approaches, the controllers liked the training experience.

I set my pd to 1.3 anything higher lowers the avg fps to below 90fps consistently. Did you make sure vsynch is off? Some games actually cap frame rates below 90fps if vsynch is on since it's using the monitor settings not the hmd. This is especially true for titles like warthunder.

You do realize that the TI is a whopping 5% faster than a Titan X right? You also need to realize that CPU single-thread performance along with ram speed is a major factor for VR. I have done extensive testing with this sim and the IL2 series and I am confident there is more to it than just the graphics card. This is why I have my 8700k cpu overclocked to 5Ghz and fast high-end DD4 3Ghz ram. I run DCS with all settings maxed (no depth, msaa 2x). I have max vis and max trees. I keep the smokestack settings low because it looks weird maxed out. I have pixel density set to 1.3 and I turn off ASW for the Rift (I prefer world stutter over double-vision on objects when frame-rate occastionaly drops). It is a gorgeous VR experience for me with occasional dips below 90FPS in dense rendering areas like low altitude.

Well it works great for me but I have a high end system (8700k cpu OC @5Ghz/ddr4@3ghz/Titan X video card)

Great job ED. The new map is stunning. I had a blast sightseeing in VR with my F-86. It's clear the engine is very optimized because I had max settings and enjoyed the VR experience immensely. The visibility distance was fantastic for VR. I noticed the new explosion fx when using the SU-25 Frogfoot. Very excited to see more FX implemented. Those rocket explosion FX were stunning, I especiialy like how the dust and smoke lingered for more than just a couple of seconds. I hate how most games don't/can't implement this. Great work guys!! Can't wait to see what's next.

Ah I see another real ball-flyer lurking in this thread. Well said btw.

Spoken like a true officer and a gentleman. :thumbup:

Primarily as a trainer with a small subset used for specialized missions. Remember the D model sacrificed fuel for that 2nd seat so it had less range than a single seat. The Marines used a lot more Ds than the Navy. The F model was the primary replacement for the Tomcat. So I remember Tomcat RIOs expecting to transition to the F during the early 2000s. I am not sure how that program eventually worked out (I was done flying by then). I don't think all the RIOs transferred over and I suspect there isn't as many Fs as they are Es in the inventory.

The mystery pic bit was amusing. I suspect the early hornets used the advanced version of this type of moving map film.

No that diagram applies to the ship landings as well. It just simplifies what is expected for the pilot to do when using the aoa bracket. Remember that when using the throttle as per the diagram the plane's computers are maintaining the optimum AOA. Just like I stated earlier. Thus there is no mention of using the stick for AoA corrections because the FCS is suppose to take care of it. I believe all maritime f18 pilots have a basic understanding of ball flying even if they don't land on carriers but the carrier pilots land exactly the same way at the field as they do on the ship. They have to to remain consistent. Part of the routine training for carrier pilots is field carrier landing practice (FCLPs). It's mandatory to do a certain amount of these sessions before heading out to the ship if the pilot has been away from the ship for more than a week or 2 if I recall. Go look up Oceana or lemoore in google maps and look at the pictures of the runways and you will see a concentration of touchdown tire marks off centerline near the thresholds of the runway where they have a carrier box marked out and you will also make out the AOLS. Remember the Advanced Optical landing system (the ball) is the other half of the equation that has not been discussed in this thread. Once that comes online for the game, then you f18 fans/carrier pilot fans out there will get the true picture of what it takes to land on a ship. :book:

I am not sure about the later models of the hornet but in my time it was up to the pilot to use autothrottles which uses the the Flight Control System to maintain onspeed while the pilot directs the plane with the stick. The pilot is still in control of the plane and using autothrottles (mode 1a) can be done anywhere. There is an autolanding mode (mode 1) that the Hornet has that uses the CLS telemetry provided by the ship's nav aid system to allow the hornet to land on the carrier hands off. This was not very reliable back in my day. No idea if it's still a feature and how good it is nowadays with the new hornets.

And how many carrier landings do these pilots have right now? Landing at an airfield does not require you to "hook a wire" does it? Back in my day, only the french landed on US carriers and they were E2 hawkeye pilots. I did a search and found no evidence of british f18 pilots landing on carriers. Did you know that most US Marine f18 pilots don't land on carriers? Only 1 squadron in each of their air wings are designated to fly off carriers the rest use airfields only. Let me make this clear, I know I already stated this earlier in another long thread, but there is an autothrottles mode that the F18 has that indeed makes you do the opposite of what I have been talking about. The computer now controls throttle and AOA and all you do is use the stick to stay on glideslope as a result you will push on the stick to correct for high glideslope and pull on the stick for low glideslope corrections. BUT guess what the computer is doing while you push and pull on the stick? The exact same process I have been describing but only better and more precise since it's a computer. This was not a common choice for pilots because it was backwards and would degrade your skills at flying manually. Some pilots did use this option but they were typically terrible "ball" flyers and were desperate for all the help they could get. It sure would be the go to mode for those landing on airfields only (i.e. the british, marines and other non-carrier f18 pilots).

The attitude remains constant when you are on the target AoA (green donut). When the AoA is fluctuating due to stick input the attitude is no longer constant. The flight computers do a great job of maintaining AoA while you adjust the throttles for glideslope correction, only in real turbulent scenarios do you see the computer falling behind (slightly). After doing a search on the internet I was surprised to see not much discussion about the AOA indexer. The AOA indexer sole purpose is to indicate optimum lift angle for the wings. Just higher than optimum and you will stall when at slow speeds and buffet/degrade turn ability at high speeds leading to a stall eventually. For carrier pilots, the AOA indexer not only provides the ideal angle for maximum lift but it also sets the target attitude that the plane and hook are designed for in engaging the wires on touchdown at the ship at the given range of speed. In addition this optimum lift angle is also the optimum for the engines thrust to give you the best effect for glideslope correction. So when not on the optimum AoA, the engines are doing a less effective job in correcting for glideslope because surprise the wings are no longer lifting at their best. This is why it's so bad to use the stick to influence climb and descent when on glideslope. Oh and yes, you are moving the stick during glideslope but it's latterally so you can align with the centerline of the carrier box. During my search on the internet I was surprised to read that only recently has general civilian aviation began discussing the common use of an AoA indexer to avoid stall accidents. This knowledge of AoA indicating has been around since almost the beginning and I always assumed general aviation decided the other existing methods (wing buffeting/noise) for stall alerts was enough.

No the map itself was a static background on a sort of film that scrolled with symbology projected/displayed over it. It's been so long that it's hard to remember if this was the exact detail. I spent more time with digital maps that I don't remember much about the old map tech. But the map films were preloaded depending on where we were in the world. I am sure if you look around on the internet you are bound to find an old documentary talking about it.

For AOA corrections this is true but for glideslope corrections no. This is a slippery slope to take if you use the stick for glideslope corrections in conjunction with throttle. What starts out as gentle nudges becomes more pronounced when bigger corrections are needed due to turbulence in the groove and the burble in-close. Your brain will want to use more stick movement to speed up the correction of power being made. This ends up being a double whammy because when you are correcting for a high on glideslope by reducing power and pushing the stick forward you are exponentially adding too much correction. By limiting stick movement to adjust for AOA only and NOT for glideslope correction you avoid this scenario. It's also essential to keep the attitude of the plane at a constant to avoid the tailhook from slapping the deck (stick pulled back) or missing the wires altogether (stick pushed forward). This is why I had only my thumb and index finger on the stick during the groove and in-close because AOA corrections required very little stick influence not because of the plane aerodynamic stability but because the flight computers were maintaining the AOA. The only time you needed to correct AOA was during lots of turbulence when the computers were under heavy load in maintaining AOA. There is a reason why all pilots in a carrier air wing don't get consistently high landing grades when trapping at the boat. Those that discipline their technique with the stick tend to stay above average in the grades where those that do not end up with lower avg grades, more bolters and more no-grades.

Nicely done! That's typically how smooth night landings are. Daytime tends to be more challenging due to thermals and turbulence and the daytime carrier landing pattern. The fact that you were slightly fast on AOA (occasional yellow) is a good thing compared to being slightly slow (occasional red). Being on the slow side adds more drag to the plane making the engines less affecting for glideslope where the opposite occurs when you are slightly fast. If you want to up the challenge try doing the daytime landing pattern, this will add more difficulty since you will be coming out of a turn and into the groove, which will have you fast and you will have a small window to figure out onspeed wings level again just before touchdown. To answer another post about stick usage, when I flew the hornet in the groove, I had a light touch on the stick namely just my thumb and index finger to avoid influencing (hamfisting) the stick.

You are correct, they dial in the settings based on what the pilot communicates as he is about to land.

Looks great, hope this works out for you.

Sorry I have yet to check out tanking. I will definitely check it out once the F18 module is out. I will definitely have a good reference to see how tanking is for the game when I can do it in the F18. If you are sensing the tanker pulling away from you (while maintaining speed) then something is not right.

Agreed. This is like from another universe to me as a hornet pilot. Bottom line, if you mess with the stick you change your attitude ever so slightly which will result in a hook slap or bolter in-close, assuming you are maintaining a decent glidepath. Typically messing with the stick to help with glidepath causes you to be all over the place on the glidepath which will have paddles screaming "WAVE OFF" before you get a chance to hit the back end of the carrier or pancake yourself on the flight deck. This breifing almost makes me think this guy is a P3, E6A or helo guy by trade, excellent pilot I am sure but from another world of flying.

nice pic.

Thanks for the kind words. I will be creating a new thread on my impressions of the Hornet module once it's released.

Yeah, you guys on the flight deck had a hard life. I know you worked your butts off just so we flyboys could do our jobs. So dangerous when the flight ops are going. I once saw a brown shirt run across the aft section with a jet just 10 seconds from touchdown. Needless to say he had an invite to go see the air boss that day.

Thanks for the kind words. I was in El Centro during my training days. I remember it quite well because we had some wicked winds (30+kts) down the runway one time. Really made approach interesting in my T45. I kept thinking so this is what it's like to land on the carrier (still was months away from my first CLP).

Heh, better hope you fire half of them off before you get to the merge. :lol: