44th_Rooster

Very True.....

Not so much automatic......more to it than than just G, since G is only approximate at the start of the break. If you try to maintain a constant G without pulling power, then you might end up at the same speed you started your break at , which is now defeating some of the purpose (bleed speed, configure, and get on the ground). The large things that I see people mess up on in you tube videos is starting the turn and staring at instruments,.... increasing throttle or speed ....which is usually inefficient, .....and not getting there spacing right, ......not banking up hard enough....too fast on downwind....etc the list goes on.... But simply agreeing on a G isn't good enough. You should be standard on a downwind spacing, downwind speed as well few more things.... Remember the purpose of an overhead is to get a bunch of birds on the ground quickly, so don't speed up in turns and get wide to fly a B52 pattern or anything like that,.... or you end up taking forever to get on the ground... Sincerely, "Rooster"

Overheads are a way of life for Mil aviators...... Even the C-130's do em....The Overhead from Tactical form is my favorite.

You are most certainly correct as well. To further the thought, when you receive jets I wouldn't imagine that they are landing at full fuel either which is more where that flight characteristic and "recommendation" is from (But certainly doesn't restrict). Yes every base has its guidance and local procedures but I think specifically I was referring to the really heavy weight. The Note in the Dash 1 gives that recommendation regardless, but it is also just a "note" and not a "caution" or "warning". Overheads with less weight in fuel plus tanks and pods would be normal operation for most pilots. Just not Fat with Fuel in that config is what I would say isn't as safe... Sincerely, "Rooster"

There is alot of general guidance shown above. To add to the general considerations I will say that if you have alot of weight with external tanks (even if the are empty), You still run the extra risk of developing larger slip angles etc in an overhead pattern, because it decreases the directional stability. Even if you add your 2 knots per 1,000lbs above 30,000lbs gross weight. One of the NWC's in the Dash 1 talks about During landing, a straight-in approach or a wide, conservative traffic pattern is "recommended" so that large sideslip angles can be avoided. So heavy weight and external tanks "empty or full" is not the safest configuration to do an Overhead. Sincerely, "Rooster"

Certainly depends on the mission.... in IFR when a wingman has an electrical failure and cant make it back to VFR then it is almost a given that the good jet will lead the bad jet through the weather back home....for a form landing. IRL certain parameters apply for form takeoffs.....weight, loadout, cloud decks visibility, RCR etc..... I think everyone has said that already so I'm probably just repeating the info...

Understood ;) I have seen many as well and I think it just depends on the climate and usage etc.... For example an F-15a that once flew with mild crazing for several years until one day at a 120 Degree Red Flag and then it progressed to have to change in 2 flights. but before that the climate it was in didn't cause it to progress for some reason. "it's usually only a matter of time." So I certainly agree with you the matter of time, but in this case it was a long time as well as many of the other birds I have touched. So perhaps one could say that it just depends on how bad the crazing is etc.....

DITTO...

What you may have seen was called crazing. Crazing is very realistic and a part of real canopies especially that are aged a bit. Scratches are different when it becomes big enough to look like a distant aircraft etc (Then it is changed)....Crazing can get very bad as well but usually not bad enough to change. So for example what you might see in the FC2 canopies is what you would see if your eyeballs were actually looking at it. So that is your real world answer unless you would like more explanation.

OK cool, "My hope is that I would learn some things and pass that on while giving users a sense of accomplishment in a non-combat environment." I think you will achieve your goal, so keep up your good attitude. That defensive spiral is not a single ship aerobatic maneuver. It has to do with something chasing you and adjusting your G's, speed and pursuit curves to solve the problems of angles, range and closure based on trying to survive. So it is not done in the cockpit instruments etc,..... it is done by carefully and quickly observing the bandit/geometry, predicting flight path, reacting to it, re-analysis every few seconds..... So the point is it may not do any good but it may serve your personal goal. Of course I appreciate your your challenge as it is tremendous. So keep up the good attitude and have a good one. Sincerely, "Rooster"

oops posted twice by accident.

OK, so now I understand what you are doing. I must say that sounds almost impossible to do effectively. The problem with what you might be doing is creating an instrument course for which you are calling a contact course,...also there are many reasons this kind of training is done fluidly in one spot. Lazy eights have very simple parameters. For example we can use the USAF T-6II since it is what you would learn to do contact flying in. This is how a Lazy eight would be executed: It doesn't start with a dive... 6.18. Lazy Eight: 6.18.1. Objective. Maintain coordinated flight through two successive, symmetric, opposite direction turns that define the maneuver. 6.18.2. Description. This is a slow, lazy maneuver that describes a horizontal figure eight at the horizon. The horizon line bisects this figure eight lengthwise. Pitch, bank, and airspeed constantly change. The maneuver is complete after two 180-degree turns with the aircraft in level flight. 6.18.2.1. Airspeed. 200 to 220 KIAS. 6.18.2.2. Power. 50 to 60 percent torque. 6.18.2.3. Attitude. Entry: wings level, 90 degrees MAX bank, 45 degrees MAX nose-high pitch. 6.18.2.4. Altitude. Approximately 2,000 feet above and 1,000 below entry altitude. 6.18.2.5. FCP Visual Reference. Bottom foot on or slightly above horizon at top of leaf, feet splitting horizon as you come through horizon, top foot on horizon at bottom of leaf. 6.18.3. Procedure. Control pressure constantly changes because of changing bank, pitch, and airspeed. To help fly symmetrical leaves, select a prominent point on the horizon (90 degrees off aircraft heading, for example, off the shoulder) or a ground reference, such as a section line or road (perpendicular to aircraft). Selected points should be far enough from the aircraft (not beneath the wing) so you won‘t fly over it. Mentally project an imaginary line from the aircraft to the horizon. Look in the direction of flight turn and clear throughout the maneuver. Lazy Eight. 6.18.3.1. Begin in straight-and-level flight with briefed entry airspeed and power setting. Select the desired reference point on the horizon or ground, and align the aircraft so the reference point is directly off a wingtip. Blend aileron, rudder, and elevator pressures simultaneously to start a gradual climbing turn in the direction of the reference point. The initial bank should be very shallow to prevent excessive turn rate. As the nose is raised, the airspeed decreases, causing the rate of turn to increase. Time the turn and pull-up so the nose reaches the highest pitch attitude (approximately 45 degrees) when the aircraft has turned 45 degrees or halfway to the reference point. Use outside references and the attitude indicator to cross-check these pitch-and-bank attitudes. Bank continues to increase as the nose falls. The aircraft should be pointed at the reference point as a maximum bank of 80 to 90 degrees is reached and the nose reaches the horizon. The lowest airspeed occurs just as the nose reaches the horizon (approximately 100 knots below entry airspeed). 6.18.3.2. Do not freeze the pitch or bank at the horizon. Passing the horizon, let the nose fall, and begin rolling out of bank. The second half of the leaf (nose below horizon) should be symmetric and approximately the same size as the first half (nose above the horizon). The bank should change at the same rate as during the nose-up portion of the leaf. When the aircraft has turned 135 degrees, the nose should be at its lowest attitude and the bank should be 45 degrees. Continue blending control stick and rudder pressure to simultaneously raise the nose and level the wings. Monitor the progress of the turn by checking the outside reference point (off opposite shoulder from maneuver start). The aircraft should be wings level at entry airspeed as the nose reaches the horizon, having completed 180 degrees of turn. Without pausing, begin the second leaf in the opposite direction of the first. 6.18.4. Technique: 6.18.4.1. Set up perpendicular to a long road or section line. Visualize the road as the straight line part of a dollar sign ($). The two turns of the maneuver complete the ―S‖ portion of the dollar sign. If ground references are unavailable, the heading bug can be set to the initial heading and used to monitor the progress of the turns. 6.18.4.2. During the nose-up part of turns, pull to put the bottom foot (foot on inside of turn) on top of the horizon and roll around it until approximately reaching a 60-degree bank. 6.18.4.3. When bringing the nose back to the horizon from a nose-low attitude, the number of knots below wings level airspeed should be approximately equal to the number of degrees NL. Example: If the desired wings-level airspeed is 220 knots, the airspeed should be approximately 190 knots at 30 degrees NL, 200 knots at 20 degrees NL, etc. This same principle can apply to the Warthog with just slightly different parameters. Spiral Dives?? Not sure where that fits in logically during your training... I am not sure that I could explain in detail why I am not sure why this would work efficiently..... when you could just demo do the procedure and have a stud learn to do it properly,...also teaching how to manage energy in a MOA is a huge priority and if are teaching one manuever at a time without the flexibility to decide what maneuver you are currently opted for to stay in a MOA and also have enough SA to fly good aerobatics and learn energy management then it might defeat the purpose of traditional military training. Consider creating one large MOA and thats all and have the stud stay inside that MOA and complete all aero within that small box in the sky defined off of a TACAN or something. Energy Management, turn radius,turn rate, God's G, Basic Aircraft Control, Aircraft Handling Characteristics, Situational Awareness, Airmanship.....etc can be taught all in one with this type of training. Don't let me discourage you completely but I must say that there is more than meets the eye with this type of training. And the reasons for this way are many... Hope this helps or provides a thought, Sincerely, "Rooster"

So the question is for Sabre-TLA. What kind of details might you need?. Why wont it play the way you want? Are you speaking of mission builder type problems or understand maneuvers and the parameters associated with them etc? Or how to perform them? Perhaps I may suggest something, Sincerely, "Rooster"

So why would no one pass it? You must have a reason or purpose?

RCR-runway condition (I.E. snow, ice, and wet) readings do vary the procedures a bit, but never to dig the nose down to stop in this type of military aircraft,....usually the RCR procedure just accounts for the longer landing roll distance needed..... thats all to do with T.O.L.D. calculations (Take Off and Landing Data) A Different procedure for example might be to land a bit more firm retract flaps at touchdown and use less braking power for a wet runway or standing water which might cause hydroplaning.... Still never to dig nose wheel down at all.

Just a thought but you will "Hook" a real world check if you do not land sucessfully :) Not to state the obvious but you also have 3 required critical areas during checkrides. Any of these are hookable items which fail the entire ride... So if you have an unsafe approach to landing but still survive, it will be a Hook. And if you damage obviously it could be a washout of training all together. But we do not have to worry about that with the reset button I guess. But I would consder it extremely embarrassing. 1. Airmanship 2. Safety 3. Flight Discipline Sincerely, "Rooster"

True EtherealN, but just to confirm, We dont do very short field landings in the A-10 :) This is what you should be doing in the Warthog. If available your DCS runway does not require maximum braking, speed should be reduced by aerodynamic braking and also extending speed brakes 100%. Following aerodynamic braking, smoothly lower the nose to the runway prior to loss of elevator effectiveness. This is standard and very simple to follow. Sincerely, "Rooster"

Something to consider is never doing any of this single ship. Making sure that after your formation stage you never fly as a single ship again. Begin to build a picture of mutual support, and always pay attention to how mutual support can be best used in a scenario. You should consider also the Fighter Fundamentals type training with BFM and ACM. Sincerely, "Rooster"

Do not push down on your nose tire after landing. You hold your nose tire off the ground after landing or at least slight back pressure to extend nose strut.... Unless you wish to risk popping your nose tire, losing directional control and departing a prepared surface just because your experience tells you to push full nose down..... ;) By the way using aerobraking in the real world helps the brakes to not heat up and pop the tires 20 minutes after you leave the jet for the O-Club. Pisses the crewchief off.... Sincerely, "Rooster"

Systems knowledge and such is nothing hard to master. Sure a couple of hard weeks to learn the majority. Just flying and operating switchology is the simple wrote memory. So what. Executing a mission as a mission commander of a 6 ship with expert skill and strategy is totally different and far more the judge of a skilled combat pilot....compared to whether or not they can do the basics such as push buttons... Even just basic mutual support as a wing-man is not easy... And yes USAF training is alot of blood in the water in some cases,....its not a school to learn how to press buttons.....You better show up to school with all this stuff down pat so that you can start the real training...... Make sense at all?? "for god's sake why do military waste money for training pilots for years, when we have these guys here?" You need to understand all this stuff you studs learn about this sim is bare minimum type stuff... This switchology is not what determines a pilot combat skill. In addition this has nothing to do with a stud who has been flying falcon for 1,000 hours either. Force tactics do not just happen because you have virtual stick time.... even if you've been gaming for 10 years..... Sincerely, "Rooster"

Awesome...

Yes you are right. I should not have posted this here. I will fix that for next time. Thanks.

My name is "Rooster" and I got my callsign along time ago because I listen to Heavy Metal music at my job so I could stay motivated even though you would NEVER guess it if you met me in person. The Death Metal Rooster is popular on YouTube. Just for the Laugh so you know what I am listening to if I am engaged with you by myself....

Seriously folks..... A Flightsim or game whatever the heck you want to call it was built not out of fresh imagination like Star Wars or something like that.... It was built to MIRROR a few things from the Real World. The Radar was built in the real world to Operate and provide certain features for the Operator... So when you have a flightsim that tries to simulate a few things on a Radar you can Operate it how ever you want... Operate using what we claim is real world procedures or a mix thereof... Or Operate it however you want... Please don't post telling me about how your terminology calls FC2 a game instead of a flightsim etc... Or that the Eagle Radar in FC2 is porked really bad to the point of not being called an Eagle Radar... That is not my intention to talk any of that. You are not telling me anything I haven't thought of........... but I will say that I Certainly haven't lived with Mom in Decades hehe So that being said. To each his own and I do agree with Tyger and his program... but I understand that it is not very sensitive to those lacking skills or not fully understand the depth and reasoning behind the training philosophy etc... Tyger MAY NOT be as sensitive to peoples emotions same as GG and myself about skill level and discipline, but I must say that there is something to all this so called standardization thing... Lots of Rote memorization and flow verify switchology methodology and constant problem solving and analysis in a cockpit is the BACKBONE of a Fighter Pilot for example. He does not survive well without it in the real world. So meerly saying rote memorization is all you guys focus on in the end of training is probably not the case. I would venture to say that after this program is complete with all your skills and rote memory knowledge you know have the opportunity as a team standardized together to mesh on another level of basic pride, advanced learning together and communication improvement etc... (Standardization at a certain level is priceless when in the right control of good leadership and good followership) I have much more fun when my wingman and I are in the same boat of knowledge and basic skill level.... Respectfully my humble opinion, "44th_Rooster"

F-15A/C are hard wired for A2G but never utilized for reasons. In other words you can plug a MK 82 if you want to where the External Tank is Hung. For the F-15A/C to meet the multi-role type requirements now a days it must do ground strafing.