correct as-is NWS engaged at touchdown

[Czar66]

1 hour ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The problem with using the rudder is that if you need anywhere near a full boot of rudder to get the aircraft to fly straight, it'll transform into a full boot of NWS when the aircraft touches down, which is not something you want even with automatic gain adjustment.

Man...have you ever landed the Hornet with crosswind in DCS? There is no such thing of 'full boot of rudder'. You're talking like this is a Viper.

[Dragon1-1]

Then you obviously didn't notice I said "extreme crosswinds". Every aircraft has a point at which the rudder saturates. For the Hornet, it just takes a lot of crosswind for this to happen. Like I said, it's easier to land in crosswinds because unlike the Viper, it's got an actual rudder (two of them, even), among other things.

[Cab]

On 4/15/2025 at 2:34 PM, Dragon1-1 said:

Hornets come onto land relatively infrequently

It’s a small point, but if I had to bet, I’d say Hornets land on runways more than carriers. 

[Dragon1-1]

The vast majority of a typical US Hornet's flying career is done from the boat, seeing as they're carrier jets used by USN. 

[Draken35]

29 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The vast majority of a typical US Hornet's flying career is done from the boat, seeing as they're carrier jets used by USN. 

The "typical" career of USN Naval aircraft are 6 to 9 months deployed and then 18-24 months at their home (land) base... The attached image matches with all the biographies of naval aviators I've read.   Hardly a "vast" majority.

Regardless, IIRC, for the legacy Hornets , there was a non-flared weight limit (39,000 lbs ? ) as well. 

[Dragon1-1]

Call me when you've got a source that's not made up by an AI. The moment I saw this image I knew you were not being serious. I don't know why do you even waste time posting this junk. Here's a general hint: if AI tells you the sky is blue, you better go look outside.

Edited April 17 by Dragon1-1

[Draken35]

21 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Call me when you've got a source that's not made up by an AI. The moment I saw this image I knew you were not being serious. I don't know why do you even waste time posting this junk. Here's a general hint: if AI tells you the sky is blue, you better go look outside.

It is a very long list of aviation books in Kindle. But you call me when you have a source for your claim first... At least I tried to backup my to claims here with SOME information (reference to the NATOPS and a simple google search) ... You haven't ... But, believe what you want. 

[Dragon1-1]

No, you haven't tried to backup your claims, you used AI. That's a big difference. At least I'm not pretending to use as a "source" something that's well known to produce outright fabrications, including fabricated sources. I admit I posted nothing, but what you posted is worse than nothing.

If NATOPS says anything on how often Hornets are flown from land versus from the boat (we're talking actual flights, not time in a maintenance shed), I haven't found that page.

[Draken35]

My reference to the NATOPS was a couple of days ago regarding the topic of the thread, which you, perhaps, missed ... And the screenshot was just the AI summary of a google search and it matches what I've read in multiple biographies of naval aviators, if you think that is worst that nothing, well, fine. As I said before believe what you want. 
null

 

 

 

[Cab]

4 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The vast majority of a typical US Hornet's flying career is done from the boat, seeing as they're carrier jets used by USN. 

It would be an interesting statistic to know. But I would guess otherwise

[MnMailman]

  There is also the fact that even if something is done irl, that doesn't mean the game has it implemented correctly.  Such may be the case with landing nws, maybe, maybe not.

[jaylw314]

14 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The vast majority of a typical US Hornet's flying career is done from the boat, seeing as they're carrier jets used by USN. 

I don't know about numbers, but I went to school around NAS Miramar in the 80's, and those Hornets did a TON of training there.  We had to stop classes every 15 minutes or so because of the noise from Hornets and Tomcats presumably doing pattern work. At least those Hornets got a lot of landings there, although a lot of them were probably A models.

[mongo52]

I was a maintainer on F18s for 10 yrs. Discounting the 3 years on "shore duty" I can testify we flew more from the beach than the boat.

[Muchocracker]

I don't even know what's being argued about anymore. It doesn't really matter what the hornet squadrons did more or less in its service life. The NATOPS and its checklists are pretty clear on what the NWS is doing for takeoffs and landings. 

[pierscockey]

On 4/16/2025 at 12:32 AM, Dragon1-1 said:

Fortunately, the Hornet won't mind if you instead slam it down sideways, or if one of the wheels touches the ground a little earlier. So you shouldn't need large rudder inputs in first place, just let it straighten itself out.

I know that’s the case for the DCS Hornet.  
 

I can’t remember the name of the show, but that Royal Canadian Air Force series with trainees flying the 2 seater Hornets would regularly end up out of service due to not landing straight.  Some sort of strut would bend and need replacing.  Perhaps they have more delicate undercarriage than Navy hornets?

Edited May 14 by pierscockey

[Dragon1-1]

They should have the same undercarriage, however there's always a limit as to how non-straight you can land. In fact, I manage to break the gear quite a few times on trap after coming back to the Hornet.  It can take a lot, but do this often enough, or simply slam it down hard enough, and stuff will bend.