Help with carrier landing pattern

[Jack McCoy]

you need to adjust your turn at the 90 so you’re crossing the ships wake right at the point it’s disappearing. We are normally 30 degrees from final bearing (260) at this point.

I find this "picture" to be very important.

 

To OP, for wind over deck, considering the sliding taxi bug, I set up the carrier speed at 11 kts (ME default), and the wind at 14 kts. The carrier course is set at double the deck offset angle (2x9) to the right of the wind. For example, carrier heading 90, wind FROM 72 (252 in ME). No sliding, minimal pitching, and the Case 1 numbers match. Also make sure you're not overweight (33000 lbs).

[bkthunder]

Well, here's one thing I don't get.

 

some of you seem to set-up the carrier so the wind is straight down the angled deck (and not the BRC). This doesn't make too much sense to me (but again, it could totally be how they do it IRL), because:

 

1. In a no-wind situation, the carrier travels at 30 kts and those 30kts of wind over deck are straight down the BRC, not the angled deck (unless the carrier can go sideways, which it can't).

 

2. If the carrier set itself up to have the wind lined up with the angled deck, then it's creating cross-wind problems during the initial, downwind and base turns. E.g. the wind would be pushing the jet towards the ship during downwind, meaning you'd have to fly the reverse of BRC minus X degrees to correct for the wind.

[GIJoe]

Well, here's one thing I don't get.

 

some of you seem to set-up the carrier so the wind is straight down the angled deck (and not the BRC). This doesn't make too much sense to me (but again, it could totally be how they do it IRL)...

 

 

From a former USN Officer of the Deck qualified on carriers, that is exactly how we did it. Maneuver the ship to place winds straight down the angle. I concede that with no true wind, you probably set up somewhat of a crosswind situation with own-ship driving the winds over deck.

[David OC]

Well, here's one thing I don't get.

 

some of you seem to set-up the carrier so the wind is straight down the angled deck (and not the BRC). This doesn't make too much sense to me (but again, it could totally be how they do it IRL), because:

 

1. In a no-wind situation, the carrier travels at 30 kts and those 30kts of wind over deck are straight down the BRC, not the angled deck (unless the carrier can go sideways, which it can't).

 

2. If the carrier set itself up to have the wind lined up with the angled deck, then it's creating cross-wind problems during the initial, downwind and base turns. E.g. the wind would be pushing the jet towards the ship during downwind, meaning you'd have to fly the reverse of BRC minus X degrees to correct for the wind.

 

When it's a powered straight down the carrier path, that's when you get weird island burble affect that can really mess up your groove in close, not sure if it's fully modeled in sim?

 

Lex talks about how the wind is straight down the angled runway here.

 

It's just a very dynamic thing to do that is difficult and needs to be practiced all the time to be proficient.

[bkthunder]

Cool, thanks for the answers guys.

Sounds like IRL you would encounter both situations, so as far as setting the game up, you can go with no wind and carrier speeding at 27-30 kts.

 

I so wish the burble effect was simulated! It would make for a more realistic experience, as well as looking more authentic in videos (you would see a lot more of the typical aileron/elevon rapid adjustments).

 

OT: Speaking of turbulence, wish some turbulence was simulated also when AA refueling...

[Doum76]

Cool, thanks for the answers guys.

Sounds like IRL you would encounter both situations, so as far as setting the game up, you can go with no wind and carrier speeding at 27-30 kts.

 

I so wish the burble effect was simulated! It would make for a more realistic experience, as well as looking more authentic in videos (you would see a lot more of the typical aileron/elevon rapid adjustments).

 

OT: Speaking of turbulence, wish some turbulence was simulated also when AA refueling...

 

 

Dude, if you do add turbulence when AAR, you would create a DCS Bold community, with tons of people tearing all their hairs appart, :joystick: Without turbulenceas for now, lots of people are already struggling for it, even in the Hornet which is, IMO, the easiest to refuel mid-air.

[bkthunder]

Dude, if you do add turbulence when AAR, you would create a DCS Bold community, with tons of people tearing all their hairs appart, :joystick: Without turbulenceas for now, lots of people are already struggling for it, even in the Hornet which is, IMO, the easiest to refuel mid-air.

 

Lol, well, that would be a good reason to call them Blad Eagles :lol:

 

AAR is not difficult, just takes practice as everything else. I learnt AAR on Falcon 4.0 back in 1998-1999, god knows how many of those poor tankers I shot down in anger before getting the gist of it. Then all of a sudden something clicked, and I was able to refuel smooth as butter.

Probably the same with carrier landings ;)

[Jar_VFA-113]

Dude, if you do add turbulence when AAR, you would create a DCS Bold community, with tons of people tearing all their hairs appart,

 

Lol, well, that would be a good reason to call them Blad Eagles :lol:

 

We gotta go for spelling Bawld wrong three times in a row :D

 

VFA-113 uses ship generated WOD because it’s maximises the drift left effect of the angled deck.

Plus strong wind just makes everything else harder in DCS ;)

[Jack McCoy]

To have wind straight down the deck, equal wind and carrier speed, and ship's course 2x deck angle to the right of oncoming wind. For example, 14 kts/14kts, wind FROM 72 (252 in Mission Editor), course 72+2x9=90. There are other combinations, but this one is easy to remember and always exact.

 

Given the carrier is on an optimal course, note that the burble will be most present in low wind conditions.

 

I personally set up carrier at 11kts and wind at 14kts (equal enough) to avoid the current sliding-taxi-on-carrier bug.

 

--

 

As JAR pointed out, "no hair" is spelled "BALD". :)

[Nealius]

I don't follow the 2x deck angle part. Let's say BRC is 270. Deck is offset left approximately 10 degrees. Setting wind 260 would put the wind over the landing portion of the deck, would it not?

[Jack McCoy]

I don't follow the 2x deck angle part. Let's say BRC is 270. Deck is offset left approximately 10 degrees. Setting wind 260 would put the wind over the landing portion of the deck, would it not?

No. Stennis deck is 9 degrees, so offset by 18 degrees. This is not speculation but MathCad analytics. :smartass:

[Nealius]

If the deck is offset by 9 degrees then why should the wind be offset 18 degrees? That will give you a crosswind 9 degrees from the left.

[Jack McCoy]

It's a simple problem of vectors. You want to counteract crosswind effect of moving ship.

 

2x angled deck and same speed as boat will give you that.

 

Exactly. The rule of thumb I determined and outlined above, if drawn on paper, will form an isosceles triangle.

[Nealius]

This is confusing. I need an ELI5.

 

BRC 270°, wind offset 18° left gives wind from 252°, which is of course 9° left of the angled deck. Which indeed does make an isosceles triangle with the BRC. But how does that cancel out the "wind" of the ship moving forward?

[David OC]

If you and the wind were straight down the 9 deg angle, as the ship go's forward at 14 kts you would need to correct right....right LOL. (Come right for line up) His angled the wind on more of an angle to push you to the right as you approach the ship to allow for it's speed of 14 kts moving to the right.

Edited July 8, 2018 by David OC

[Nealius]

That somewhat makes sense. I just don't see it in action in the actual sim. I typically set the carrier speed to 17kts, then 10kts wind straight down the angled deck and I've never noticed having to make any corrections to the right.

[David OC]

That somewhat makes sense. I just don't see it in action in the actual sim. I typically set the carrier speed to 17kts, then 10kts wind straight down the angled deck and I've never noticed having to make any corrections to the right.

 

I was thinking the same at first, Lex said straight down the angled deck? Not sure if you should or they do IRL allow for the ship movement also with (true wind) direction? As the wind speeds up the ship slows down. No wind, well your correcting to the right no matter what. Also your that close in the groove not sure if it's really needed.

 

Interesting post

 

 

 

I didn't realise they allow a 30 deg port offset on these small ships when landing helicopters to allow for the blade rotation.

 

 

.

Edited July 8, 2018 by David OC

[Jack McCoy]

That somewhat makes sense. I just don't see it in action in the actual sim. I typically set the carrier speed to 17kts, then 10kts wind straight down the angled deck and I've never noticed having to make any corrections to the right.

 

I added the vectors to your image.

 

Another spectacular observation I made was that under any combination of wind and carrier speed that yield down-the-deck wind of 25-30kts, steering the ship roughly in the neighborhood of "ideal" course always results in cross winds under 5kts. That's why you're not noticing much difference.

 

Try this as an experiment: taxi on centerline at the very end of the angled deck and then eject. If you set carrier course according to my rule of thumb, the parachute will land VERY close to the centerline, in the back of the ship. ;)

 

A few oddities related to this:

1) The Stennis flag is not affected by wind; just an animation.

2) While parked on the boat, the wingtip vortices (bug) are not influenced by natural wind, just carrier movement induced wind.

Edited July 8, 2018 by Jack McCoy