Where to keep FPM during landing

[Donut]

Of course it was useful, just not precise enough to make it as a primary instrument for flying. Even the A-10C HUD isn't considered as a primary flight instrument. It is an additional aid.

 

...as for the "contemporary", what I meant, was that you would not go to your car dealer and complain that your model from two years ago does not have the fancy entertainment system with voice control, drive assist and such, because "other contemporary cars from one or two years later" do.

It is the same with airplanes. Sometimes the fancy stuff just makes it into the next model. And like with your car you don't strip down the whole thing to integrate the "newer stuff" as long as it does the job.

 

Good stuff shagrat, you make a lot of sense...gives me a new perspective on things.

 

Amazing.. you really need a hug that bad. You are spoiled...

 

Before there were huds there were gauges...

 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

Ugh...was this necessary? It is stuff like this that really makes the Tomcat community an unpleasant place...some of you Tomcat fanatics are nuts! Now, I love the Tomcat and it holds a special place in my heart, but I am also realistic and want to get a better understanding of what was legend and hype, and what was reality.

 

Like I said previously, I obviously know that an aircraft does not need a HUD to land. What I am doing is asking serious questions in which I would like serious answers to in order to get a better understanding of the Tomcat and it's intended functions.

[Chaogen]

Something else to keep in mind, the F-15A and F-16A cockpits did not look like the C models most people are familiar with.

[shagrat]

Good stuff shagrat, you make a lot of sense...gives me a new perspective on things.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ugh...was this necessary? It is stuff like this that really makes the Tomcat community an unpleasant place...some of you Tomcat fanatics are nuts! Now, I love the Tomcat and it holds a special place in my heart, but I am also realistic and want to get a better understanding of what was legend and hype, and what was reality.

 

 

 

Like I said previously, I obviously know that an aircraft does not need a HUD to land. What I am doing is asking serious questions in which I would like serious answers to in order to get a better understanding of the Tomcat and it's intended functions.

Also, we need to accept "our" Tomcat is specifically a mid 90ies model, from the time the NAVY already thought about scrapping the Jet. It proved useful as a strike fighter in the 90ies with the jury rigged LANTIRN we luckily have simulated. It did get an upgrade later and at this point the F-14D was the modernized "contemporary" to the F-15C, F-16C and so on.

But the NAVY kept the F-14A and Bs in service. So there is the old trusty rust bucket from the 80ies flying in parallel to the late 90ies fancy digiplane... like cars on the highways. ;)

[Victory205]

That rust bucket had a propensity to end up at your six hosing 20mm HEI at your ass...

[*Aquila*]

Amazing.. you really need a hug that bad. You are spoiled...

 

Before there were huds there were gauges...

There still are gauges. And to fly a 3.5° Glideslope, you have to do some math to define where to start it and with which parameters, and then you have to fly the plane accordingly. The HUD helps you to do so more easily but HUDs fail and nobody ejects IRL because the HUD has failed. Even in bad weather.

 

The topic is just to admit that the F-14 was never designed to navigate by the the HUD but by the gauges. The HUD is a primary combat tool and a secondary goodie for everything else.

Edited April 15, 2019 by *Aquila*

[shagrat]

That rust bucket had a propensity to end up at your six hosing 20mm HEI at your ass...

Lol... a 1980ies Ferrari GTO will still outrace a modern Corolla.

I am reading "Black Aces High", currently. 1999 first strike on Kosovo and how they overcome the damages/failed systems after the catapult launch of their "rust buckets". ;)

Strike lead needs to abort, second striker uses a Radio Shack GPS to navigate, as the INS is down after launch. I am sure they'll do fine, but the age of the jets is showing, for sure.

I think I need to activate random failures for more realism. :)

... that's what I love about the muscle car vs. family sedan feeling. It is a great rust bucket to fly!

[Larkis]

So im sorry to readd the qestion.

 

 

When im landing on the carrier, where must i place my wings and where the FPM?

 

 

If +5 ist the horizontal, must i place my wings on +13.5 to reach the 8.5° to bringt hook and gear on a line or on 3.5°?

[Strikeeagle345]

So im sorry to readd the qestion.

 

 

When im landing on the carrier, where must i place my wings and where the FPM?

 

 

If +5 ist the horizontal, must i place my wings on +13.5 to reach the 8.5° to bringt hook and gear on a line or on 3.5°?

 

Watch the AoA indicator (get that yellow donut), the Ball and your line-up. thats it.

[Wrench]

To answer OP's actual question:

Standard Glideslope is 3°, so the FPM should be 3° below the horizon, and on the runway threshold. I'm not sure with the hud depression how that would actually look in the Tomcat.

[mwlue]

Hmm so you land based on a descent rate, regardless of where the FPM will be at that descent rate?

 

That's what I do after screwing up the HSI and FPM after pulling too much Gs. :doh:

[Victory205]

Fly-the-ball.

[The AMRAAMer]

To answer OP's actual question:

Standard Glideslope is 3°, so the FPM should be 3° below the horizon, and on the runway threshold. I'm not sure with the hud depression how that would actually look in the Tomcat.

 

thanks, post got a bit hijacked :D

[VampireNZ]

Fly-the-ball.

 

 

Or, if you are in VR...fly the ILS Glideslope. :lol:

[Eagle7907]

Where to keep FPM during landing

 

Can you elaborate on that? I don't quite understand. The pitch ladder is depressed 5 degrees but how Does the indication differ from the wings symbol to the FPM

 

 

 

The pitch ladder and wings symbol are depressed. The FPM isn’t. That’s why to fly straight and level with PFM it’s close to 5 degrees. So a 3 degree descent would be 2 degrees above the pitch ladder horizon.

 

Noticed it’s not exactly 5 degrees on the mark for level flight. It’s about one width of the FPM below 5 degrees up. What’s even more strange is turning greater than 45 degrees of bank, it appears the horizon line of the ladder lines up with the horizon and the FPM?? Crazy.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[stuart666]

Or, if you are in VR...fly the ILS Glideslope. :lol:

 

Yes, thats what im doing for the same reason. In VR you can barely see the ball till you are almost on the deck. Im hoping the increase in performance in VR might make it usable further out when I can finally max out the graphic settings.

 

 

I was sceptical about turning off the hud. But after an epic turn on the Dogfight server, where I lost a the HUD, an engine, no flaps or DLC and had to emergency deploy the hook and the undercart, I managed to land on the Kuznetsov. And whilst I would be the first to admit it broke damn near every rule in the book and the poor crew were heading for the lifeboats as they saw me on final, I did grab the center line. Which I never managed to do before when I was using the hud. So yes, while I need to experiment much more, I think the hud almost certainly is a distraction. It probably leads to overcontrol on the approach.

 

 

Completely counter intuitive of course. But if its how the Jedi masters did it....

Edited April 16, 2019 by stuart666

[Baz000]

I hope this video I created can help some people... I really enjoyed Ironmike's video that he made and I learned alot from it, and so have my friends I fly with.

 

Hope he makes more videos in the future as well...

 

anyways, I tried to go into the weeds into the details of what I was doing so that you could be well informed of every variable I was taking into account.

 

[Jabbers_]

Hmm so you land based on a descent rate, regardless of where the FPM will be at that descent rate?

 

Your FPM is your decent rate ;)

[shagrat]

The pitch ladder and wings symbol are depressed. The FPM isn’t. That’s why to fly straight and level with PFM it’s close to 5 degrees. So a 3 degree descent would be 2 degrees above the pitch ladder horizon.

 

Noticed it’s not exactly 5 degrees on the mark for level flight. It’s about one width of the FPM below 5 degrees up. What’s even more strange is turning greater than 45 degrees of bank, it appears the horizon line of the ladder lines up with the horizon and the FPM?? Crazy.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Actually, the pitch ladder is off most of the time as it is manually adjusted to the horizon and over time or after hard maneuvering is moving. So first you need to fly straight and level with autopilot, then precisely recalibrate the horizon of the pitch ladder, before landing, or omit using FPM and pitch ladder as a precision flight instrument and use the real precision flight instruments aka gauges. ;)

[VampireNZ]

You know you could always use the standard 'old school' method of glide path and touchdown point control (as opposed to a FPM)..select a spot on the runway, if it is rising in the windshield you are going to be short, if it is descending you are going long.

Just pick a spot while at the correct 'angle' (learn the correct sight picture for the runway at the correct angle - long and skinny compared to short and fat, specific runway dependant) and hold the spot in the same place till touchdown using power, while maintaining on-speed.

[shagrat]

You know you could always use the standard 'old school' method of glide path and touchdown point control (as opposed to a FPM)..select a spot on the runway, if it is rising in the windshield you are going to be short, if it is descending you are going long.

Just pick a spot while at the correct 'angle' (learn the correct sight picture for the runway at the correct angle - long and skinny compared to short and fat, specific runway dependant) and hold the spot in the same place till touchdown using power, while maintaining on-speed.

Yep, that's the easy way. ;)

I tend to be a bit too steep, or too shallow most of the time. With the ball and a good lineup, Carrier approach is actually easier than runway landings, but I am getting better at judging the picture.

Biggest issue is not feeling the decent or rise. Still, compared to a WW II warbird with a long nose between you and the runway the F-14 is pretty easy. :smartass:

[VampireNZ]

Yep, that's the easy way. ;)

I tend to be a bit too steep, or too shallow most of the time. With the ball and a good lineup, Carrier approach is actually easier than runway landings, but I am getting better at judging the picture.

Biggest issue is not feeling the decent or rise. Still, compared to a WW II warbird with a long nose between you and the runway the F-14 is pretty easy. :smartass:

 

Yeah locking in that runway sight picture is just experience.

 

There is a nifty mod someone has made that you can place a IFLOLS with meatball beside the runway for field carrier practice (FCP), along with adding a lit carrier landing area. Would help getting the correct runway picture, and using the meatball - so best of both worlds. I just place the unit right beside the lit area in line with the red centre dot.

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3303802/

 

Also a nice mod to enlarge the carrier meatball size for easier use in VR - not tried this one myself yet but will be.

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3300900/?sphrase_id=17002803

[AngryMustang]

Hmm so you land based on a descent rate, regardless of where the FPM will be at that descent rate?

Ask jester to set the DEST WPT to the runway threshold, check your ground speed and apply the following formula

 

[Eagle7907]

Actually, the pitch ladder is off most of the time as it is manually adjusted to the horizon and over time or after hard maneuvering is moving. So first you need to fly straight and level with autopilot, then precisely recalibrate the horizon of the pitch ladder, before landing, or omit using FPM and pitch ladder as a precision flight instrument and use the real precision flight instruments aka gauges. ;)

 

 

 

That makes sense.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Voyager]

Sure, I understand that. However, I don"t understand why it is so far behind in technology compared to it's fellow 4th gen fighters.

 

First flights...

F-14 1970

F-15 1972

F-16 1974

F/A-18 1978

 

There seems to have been an incredible breakthrough in HUD technology after 1970 and for whatever reason, it wasn't until the 1990's that it got a modern HUD.

 

Just looking at the timelines from Wikipedia, it appears the the F-15C was first developed in 1979 and may have received an avionics upgrade in the mid 90's. Similarly, the F/A-18C/D were first deployed in 1987, and the version we have in game may have also received avionics upgrades from the same time period at the F-15C.

 

The F-14B we have appear to have gotten a new RWR display in the 1987 upgrade, but left most of the electronics as they were in the F-14A.

 

If we see the F-14D, that will likely have a glass cockpit more in line wit the versions seen in the version of the F-15C and F/A-18C in DCS right now.

 

So, we've got a mostly early 1970's era cockpit in the F-14B with a couple of late 80's components, while we are probably looking at 1990's era glass cockpits in both the in game F-15C and F/A-18C.

 

On an aside, I was given the understand that the F-14A and B were considered 3 or 3.5 Generation fighters, and that only the F-14D was a full 4th gen jet?

[Strikeeagle345]

Or, if you are in VR...fly the ILS Glideslope. :lol:

 

Or, have an Odyssey+ and you can see the ball just fine :thumbup: