When and how will carrier landings be improved?

[GunSlingerAUS]

Please correct me if wrong, but currently landing the Tomcat on a carrier seems extremely simplified. To my surprise, I managed to land my very first Tomcat carrier landing without any hassles, even though I absolutely slammed it into the deck. HB talks at length about how working with its SMEs has meant rigorous adherence to the real world Tomcat experience, so it puzzles me that such a fundamental part of the Tomcat experience appears to be so incorrect.

 

HB has mentioned in the past that bolters will be worked on, but this seems to have been bumped down the priority list. There's also the problem that the undercarriage and airframe is indestructible when reacting to heavy landings Also, the physics when hitting the deck seems really strange - almost as if I'm landing in a big marshmallow, and not a steel deck. I've bounced 100 feet into the air after snagging a wire, only to watch the nose gently float down and make contact with the deck nice and peacefully.

 

Am I the only one who thinks that accurate carrier landings should be high on the list of things that need to be resolved? Other than the hook bolter, are there any other things to do with the physicality of landing that will be improved?

[Naquaii]

So you're saying you bounced 100 feet up into the air and still trapped? :music_whistling:

 

In all seriousness though, afaik what we're talking about here is looking at adding hook skipping etc and having the position of the hook actually influence the trap. If we can manage this you'd need to be more careful with AoA et al when landing.

[Biggus]

If we can manage this you'd need to be more careful with AoA et al when landing.

Bring it on. I'm looking forward to this too.

 

 

[CoBlue]

Am I the only one who thinks that accurate carrier landings should be high on the list of things that need to be resolved? Other than the hook bolter, are there any other things to do with the physicality of landing that will be improved?

You're not alone.

https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/english/licensed-third-party-projects/heatblur-simulations/dcs-f-14a-b/263051-disappointment-trap-model-forestall

https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/english/licensed-third-party-projects/heatblur-simulations/dcs-f-14a-b/7130001-hook-skip-and-bolter-logic

 

[fat creason]

We haven't forgotten about this, it's on the list.

[Wildwind]

I'm glad to hear that this is still on the agenda, but I do hope y'all fix the AoA indexer brightness first, or I'll have no hope of ever landing on the boat again :p

[fat creason]

I'm not on the art side so I can't speak to the AoA indexer, but I mostly look at the AOA indicator (should be at 15 units) when landing and have no issues.

[9thHunt]

Please correct me if wrong, but currently landing the Tomcat on a carrier seems extremely simplified. To my surprise, I managed to land my very first Tomcat carrier landing without any hassles, even though I absolutely slammed it into the deck. HB talks at length about how working with its SMEs has meant rigorous adherence to the real world Tomcat experience, so it puzzles me that such a fundamental part of the Tomcat experience appears to be so incorrect.

 

HB has mentioned in the past that bolters will be worked on, but this seems to have been bumped down the priority list. There's also the problem that the undercarriage and airframe is indestructible when reacting to heavy landings Also, the physics when hitting the deck seems really strange - almost as if I'm landing in a big marshmallow, and not a steel deck. I've bounced 100 feet into the air after snagging a wire, only to watch the nose gently float down and make contact with the deck nice and peacefully.

 

Am I the only one who thinks that accurate carrier landings should be high on the list of things that need to be resolved? Other than the hook bolter, are there any other things to do with the physicality of landing that will be improved?

 

Not to discount your experience, but I've had pretty much the exact opposite experience landing the Tomcat. I have yet to experience an oleo bounce like that, and I have definitely seen damage to the undercarriage after hard landings. The only significant issue I've run into has been Jester calling out "Bolter" when I've actually managed to trap.

[Wildwind]

I'm not on the art side so I can't speak to the AoA indexer, but I mostly look at the AOA indicator (should be at 15 units) when landing and have no issues.

 

I have a bit of a hard time reading that indicator (and also the airspeed indicator), probably due to the fact that I'm playing on three 24" monitors, and they're set further back than I'd like for them to be. I may just have to move the 42" TV from the other room to my desk and use that instead. If nothing else, it would go a long way to making the default FoV feel less wonky.

[Uxi]

At least to match ED's execution on the Hornet, though most seem to have a higher bar set for HB. Seems most reasonable to at least have skips however Jester is determining there should be a bolter (even when there isn't). Things like broken tail hooks and cables making us be ready to eject or not would be more to HB's reputation.

[Nealius]

 

I have a bit of a hard time reading that indicator (and also the airspeed indicator), probably due to the fact that I'm playing on three 24" monitors, and they're set further back than I'd like for them to be. I may just have to move the 42" TV from the other room to my desk and use that instead. If nothing else, it would go a long way to making the default FoV feel less wonky.

 

Check the E-bracket in the HUD. A lot of people say it's inaccurate, but I find it perfectly accurate. The naysayers just don't know how to use it. The E bracket follows the same principle as in the Hornet, except instead of aligning with the FPM/VV, you align it with the Tomcat's fixed T in the HUD. While crossreferencing the E bracket in the HUD and the AoA indexer I have not found a single discrepancy.

[Wildwind]

 

Check the E-bracket in the HUD. A lot of people say it's inaccurate, but I find it perfectly accurate. The naysayers just don't know how to use it. The E bracket follows the same principle as in the Hornet, except instead of aligning with the FPM/VV, you align it with the Tomcat's fixed T in the HUD. While crossreferencing the E bracket in the HUD and the AoA indexer I have not found a single discrepancy.

 

My experience is that the E-bracket lags (and, as I understand it, this is accurate to the real aircraft).

 

That said, I did move the larger monitor to my desk tonight, and I can read the instruments a lot better now.

[Nealius]

Ah yes, it does lag a bit, but once you get a feel for the jet you can predict that and things are smooth.

[GunSlingerAUS]

So you're saying you bounced 100 feet up into the air and still trapped? :music_whistling:

 

 

Pretty much - come in at an angle that should utterly destroy any aircraft, no matter how hardened the naval undercarriage, somehow snag a wire, then watch the nose float from about 60 degrees nose up, gently down onto the deck. It feels rather weird.