Runway landings vs Carrier landings

[remi]

Hey guys,

 

Would anyone be able to test the following:

 

1) Perform a normal carrier landing on a carrier deck without the hook deployed. As you "bolter", when you pull back on the stick, does the nosegear behave like it's attached to the carrier deck surface?

 

2) Perform a normal carrier landing on a regular runway without the hook deployed but all other carrier settings intact (hook bypass to carrier, anti-skid off), does the nosegear behave like it's attached to the runway surface?

 

 

 

I've noticed strange behavior on the carrier deck surface while landing, and I would like someone to verify this issue. Thanks!

Edited June 1, 2018 by remi

[remi]

Notice how these hornets don't have their "nosewheel" stuck to the runway surface while aero-braking:

[Fuelburner]

This is clearly a bug. In the game it’s impossible to aerobrake the plane because the nose gear always drops down during a normal field landing.

 

 

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[remi]

This is clearly a bug. In the game it’s impossible to aerobrake the plane because the nose gear always drops down during a normal field landing.

 

 

Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

 

What happens if you try to increase your throttle to mil? How long does it take for the nose gear to stay attached to the runway? At what speed are you able to rotate and take-off again?

 

I'm trying to pin down if there is a hard-coded behavior of the landing gear on touching down that causes the nosewheel to become attached to ground surfaces.

[SCU]

It's strange that this was labeled "No Bug". Is there a special technique to get the Hornet to raise its nose after touchdown that we don't know about maybe?

[remi]

It's strange that this was labeled "No Bug". Is there a special technique to get the Hornet to raise its nose after touchdown that we don't know about maybe?

 

I agree, it's definitely a bug, unless this is pre-programmed FCS behavior that isn't documented anywhere else that we know about.

 

I'd look into whether anti-skid/carrier bypass programming has anything to do with this.

[HocusPocus]

From the natops aerobraking is not recommended, and this explanation may explain the behavior you experience? Open question...

 

Track down the runway centerline using rudder pedals to steer the aircraft. Aerodynamic braking is not recommended. Getting the nosewheel on the ground and use of aft stick (programmed in by light braking and slowly pulling the stick aft after touchdown so only the minimum required distance to command full aft stabilator deflection by 100 knots) provides faster deceleration from the stabilators and more directional control with use of the NWS.

[SCU]

Not recommended but should still be possible.

[SCU]

Here's what a former USMC Hornet pilot had to say about this:

 

For us, aerobraking depends upon squadron SOP. I was in one squadron where every landing was to be done like a carrier landing (fly the meatball all the way to touchdown). Another essentially told us to flare the landings to save the stress on the gear and tires, so we got good at our version of aerobraking there (because it was fun, and something a little different than what I was used to). We wouldn't get as high or go as long as the Super guys. We can run into directional controllability issues is you're not careful.

 

From here. The whole AMA is an interesting read, I'd recommend for any one.

So it was basically not that common for the real guys but it was definitely something that was possible and did happen at some squadrons.

Edited June 1, 2018 by SCU

[HocusPocus]

Very interesting stuff, thanks!

I like the "we can run into problems if..." part, meaning that personally I'll stick with the natops recommendations :D

[SCU]

Very interesting stuff, thanks!

I like the "we can run into problems if..." part, meaning that personally I'll stick with the natops recommendations :D

Sure, to each their own. I haven't had the chance recently to fly the Hornet (will be free to do so after next tuesday), but if there is still a problem with keeping the nose up after landing I believe it should be on their to do list of fixes, would also help greatly with bolters where the jet should be able to pitch up much earlier than the edge of the deck.

[Eldur]

It's strange that this was labeled "No Bug". Is there a special technique to get the Hornet to raise its nose after touchdown that we don't know about maybe?

 

I tried doing so. It works, but not very well, when switching to auto flaps shortly before touching down. And as soon as the nose comes down, you're lacking those extraordinarily huge airbrakes mounted on your wings' trailing edges.

[ChasingNeedles]

 

CoG is forward of the aircraft, could be the reason why

[bradleyjs]

 

CoG is forward of the aircraft, could be the reason why

 

That’s what I was thinking, as well. I remember WAGS saying something about it in one the vids.

[jaguara5]

Does anybody know how non US / carrier operators fly the traffic pattern and perform the landing? (i' m interested especially for Finnland and Switzerland)

Carrier wise (350 kts / 800 ft, downwind 600 feet, no flare etc) or more conventionally (e.x. 300 kts 1500 ft initially, with flare etc)?

And also, does anybody know real life tound and go procedure?