Carrier landings

[Danzig]

without wind = you die ^^ that's the way 

[Mossa666]

I might have found a solution to the problem of not beeing able to get a trap on the Essex when setting it up in ME. I've set up a mission where the carrier was part of a carrier group with support vessels. One of the support vessels was "number 1" in this group. I wasn't able to get a trap in this scenario. When I removed the other vessels (carrier in number 1 again) landing works fine. 

[Maddog-1969]

Another video maybe of interest. No audio, but some interesting footage for those interested in Corsair carrier operations. I hope one day we also get a deck crew and evermore so  pitching deck simulation. 

 

[michelip]

I have the same problem with arresting on the Essex in the Marianas WW2 map.

I have spent hours practising with a wind of 28 kn. Across the deck, with full flaps and despite regular ( about 20-30) good approaches at 90 – 100 kn. The hook refuses to catch. I have tried setting flaps 2 with no benefit.

I have carefully examined my replay footage on an outside (F2) view and I believe my problem is the flight model at low speeds: If on short finals you reduce speed to 90 Kn. The aircraft becomes very unstable by touchdown. If you fly any faster and try to flare a little at the last second to lower the tail, you lift off and miss altogether.

Possible developer solutions:

Check that there is no inherent problem with the Essex model.

Tune the Corsair's flight model to allow more stability and sink at speeds under 100 Kn.

Raise the Essex's wires a couple of inches. (It wouldn't even be visually noticeable)

Lengthen the hook.

Meanwhile, I'll continue to practise.

Regards,

Myself.

[razo+r]

19 minutes ago, michelip said:

I have the same problem with arresting on the Essex in the Marianas WW2 map.

I have spent hours practising with a wind of 28 kn. Across the deck, with full flaps and despite regular ( about 20-30) good approaches at 90 – 100 kn. The hook refuses to catch. I have tried setting flaps 2 with no benefit.

I have carefully examined my replay footage on an outside (F2) view and I believe my problem is the flight model at low speeds: If on short finals you reduce speed to 90 Kn. The aircraft becomes very unstable by touchdown. If you fly any faster and try to flare a little at the last second to lower the tail, you lift off and miss altogether.

Possible developer solutions:

Check that there is no inherent problem with the Essex model.

Tune the Corsair's flight model to allow more stability and sink at speeds under 100 Kn.

Raise the Essex's wires a couple of inches. (It wouldn't even be visually noticeable)

Lengthen the hook.

Meanwhile, I'll continue to practise.

Regards,

Myself.

As many people have no issues catching wires on the Essex, there might be a technique error on your side. Best thing you can do is upload a short track of one of your attempts, that way we can give you precise tipps what to improve.

[Maddog-1969]

Am 27.7.2025 um 09:00 schrieb michelip:

I have the same problem with arresting on the Essex in the Marianas WW2 map.

I have spent hours practising with a wind of 28 kn. Across the deck, with full flaps and despite regular ( about 20-30) good approaches at 90 – 100 kn. The hook refuses to catch. I have tried setting flaps 2 with no benefit.

I have carefully examined my replay footage on an outside (F2) view and I believe my problem is the flight model at low speeds: If on short finals you reduce speed to 90 Kn. The aircraft becomes very unstable by touchdown. If you fly any faster and try to flare a little at the last second to lower the tail, you lift off and miss altogether.

Possible developer solutions:

Check that there is no inherent problem with the Essex model.

Tune the Corsair's flight model to allow more stability and sink at speeds under 100 Kn.

Raise the Essex's wires a couple of inches. (It wouldn't even be visually noticeable)

Lengthen the hook.

Meanwhile, I'll continue to practise.

Regards,

Myself.

Without having seen the footage and having heard of a 'bug' with catching the wire if the carrier is moving in a certain direction on the map, I would suggest not to flare. A carrier aircraft you do not flare, but but fly into the deck. Setup the correct AoA in advance (speed and trim) should ensure that your aircraft (and hook) hit the deck at the right angle to catch the wires. If there is the need to adjust the rate of descend, adjust power and not pitch. Keep on practicing, I took me a while as well. I find this bird more challenging to land on a carrier than your average jet. However, good fun and very rewarding once you figure it out. 

[Saxman]

19 hours ago, Maddog-1969 said:

Without having seen the footage and having heard of a 'bug' with catching the wire if the carrier is moving in a certain direction on the map, I would suggest not to flare. A carrier aircraft you do not flare, but but fly into the deck. Setup the correct AoA in advance (speed and trim) should ensure that your aircraft (and hook) hit the deck at the right angle to catch the wires. If there is the need to adjust the rate of descend, adjust power and not pitch. Keep on practicing, I took me a while as well. I find this bird more challenging to land on a carrier than your average jet. However, good fun and very rewarding once you figure it out. 

That's counter to the training, which has you dip the nose slightly right as you get over the deck, and then flare for a three-point trap.

[Maddog-1969]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb Saxman:

That's counter to the training, which has you dip the nose slightly right as you get over the deck, and then flare for a three-point trap.

Hi Saxman, I am sure you're right. However, just sharing what works for me after watching several Royal Navy carrier Ops video's and practicing the FAA curved approach

Edited August 2 by Maddog-1969

[Saxman]

7 hours ago, Maddog-1969 said:

Hi Saxman, I am sure you're right. However, just sharing what works for me after watching several Royal Navy carrier Ops video's and practicing the FAA curved approach

It's just "the curved approach." VF-17 was already doing it when they completed their carrier qualifications in April, 1943 (the FAA didn't begin training on Corsairs until June...under VF-17's tutelage).

[Holbeach]

I'm following the manuals curved approach.
pretty scary stuff when you first try it, around 250' in the circuit.

But it means with flaps down you are already at the 3 point attitude and with plenty of power on, no wollowing and full view of the deck.

Cross the stern at 200 plus, cut power and it will plonk on the deck.

Better than freelancing and very satisfying.

..

[Cgjunk2]

On 7/9/2025 at 10:03 AM, Maddog-1969 said:

Another video maybe of interest. No audio, but some interesting footage for those interested in Corsair carrier operations. I hope one day we also get a deck crew and evermore so  pitching deck simulation. 

 

The instantaneous acceleration when they are using the cat shot seems pretty intense.  I get a  headache just watching it lol.

[Cgjunk2]

On 7/27/2025 at 2:00 AM, michelip said:

I have the same problem with arresting on the Essex in the Marianas WW2 map.

I have spent hours practising with a wind of 28 kn. Across the deck, with full flaps and despite regular ( about 20-30) good approaches at 90 – 100 kn. The hook refuses to catch. I have tried setting flaps 2 with no benefit.

I have carefully examined my replay footage on an outside (F2) view and I believe my problem is the flight model at low speeds: If on short finals you reduce speed to 90 Kn. The aircraft becomes very unstable by touchdown. If you fly any faster and try to flare a little at the last second to lower the tail, you lift off and miss altogether.

Possible developer solutions:

Check that there is no inherent problem with the Essex model.

Tune the Corsair's flight model to allow more stability and sink at speeds under 100 Kn.

Raise the Essex's wires a couple of inches. (It wouldn't even be visually noticeable)

Lengthen the hook.

Meanwhile, I'll continue to practise.

Regards,

Myself.

The few times that I've landed on the carrier, I've been able to catch a wire for the most part.  But I have noticed that it takes full pitch input with nearly full nose up trim to get nose angle high enough for a three point arrival on the deck.   Seems to fly like a very nose-heavy aircraft with full nose-up trim.

[GTFreeFlyer]

Gear and flaps fully down, trim to 10 deg elevator pitch on the downwind.  That should put you right at 90-100 knots.  Maintain climb rate with throttle. Your goal is to touch the elevator stick almost never.  Throttle inputs all the way down to the deck.  At 90 knots your plane is at the right attitude to catch a wire.  No flare needed.  I’ve watched the same training videos as you where it talks about dropping the nose and then flaring.  This approach is dangerous unless you are quick to act on the rudder pedals.  I never use this technique.  I just fly it down at a stable 90 knots until hitting the deck and it works great.  Correct technique or not, I would have to assume that the real pilots only cared about the end result… “Did I catch that wire?”

[DrDetroit]

On 8/4/2025 at 3:11 PM, GTFreeFlyer said:

Gear and flaps fully down, trim to 10 deg elevator pitch on the downwind.  That should put you right at 90-100 knots.  Maintain climb rate with throttle. Your goal is to touch the elevator stick almost never.  Throttle inputs all the way down to the deck.  At 90 knots your plane is at the right attitude to catch a wire.  No flare needed.  I’ve watched the same training videos as you where it talks about dropping the nose and then flaring.  This approach is dangerous unless you are quick to act on the rudder pedals.  I never use this technique.  I just fly it down at a stable 90 knots until hitting the deck and it works great.  Correct technique or not, I would have to assume that the real pilots only cared about the end result… “Did I catch that wire?”

Good advice, but where should the MAP and blade pitch (RPM) be at when on final leg to the carrier?  This is where I struggle massively; I seem to always come in too fast or too slow during the last few dozen feet before landing, always either ending up fast, at around 110kts, or too slow, at under 90kts.  I'll try to correct last second with throttle, before hitting the deck, but that thing just yaws wildly left/right, depending on if I'm increasing or decreasing throttle.

Anyhow, it's frustrating as hell lol! I can't seem to get the last leg down to where I can consistently land.  I have landed and hooked the wire, but it's like 2 our of 20 times.  I think I need to get the MAP and RPM setting dialed in during the final approach, as well as the 10 degree pitch trim, and that should get me on the deck safely. 

  

Edited 7 hours ago by DrDetroit

[Saxman]

2 hours ago, DrDetroit said:

Good advice, but where should the MAP and blade pitch (RPM) be at when on final leg to the carrier?  This is where I struggle massively; I seem to always come in too fast or too slow during the last few dozen feet before landing, always either ending up fast, at around 110kts, or too slow, at under 90kts.  I'll try to correct last second with throttle, before hitting the deck, but that thing just yaws wildly left/right, depending on if I'm increasing or decreasing throttle.

Anyhow, it's frustrating as hell lol! I can't seem to get the last leg down to where I can consistently land.  I have landed and hooked the wire, but it's like 2 our of 20 times.  I think I need to get the MAP and RPM setting dialed in during the final approach, as well as the 10 degree pitch trim, and that should get me on the deck safely. 

  

RPM should be at 2300, IIRC. It's hard to read, but the placards on the instrument cluster give many of the proper settings for takeoff and landing.

[nephilimborn]

4 hours ago, DrDetroit said:

Good advice, but where should the MAP and blade pitch (RPM) be at when on final leg to the carrier?  This is where I struggle massively; I seem to always come in too fast or too slow during the last few dozen feet before landing, always either ending up fast, at around 110kts, or too slow, at under 90kts.  I'll try to correct last second with throttle, before hitting the deck, but that thing just yaws wildly left/right, depending on if I'm increasing or decreasing throttle.

Anyhow, it's frustrating as hell lol! I can't seem to get the last leg down to where I can consistently land.  I have landed and hooked the wire, but it's like 2 our of 20 times.  I think I need to get the MAP and RPM setting dialed in during the final approach, as well as the 10 degree pitch trim, and that should get me on the deck safely. 

  

@DrDetroit you are doing better than me at this (i am struggling with very similar challenges - too fast or too slow and uncontrolled yaw at the last few seconds); i am lucky to get 3 wire hooks in 50 tries. Many thanks for the advice @Saxman, looking forward to trying out these techniques and generally reducing the amount of extreme profanity i have been uttering lately.

[carbolicus]

5 hours ago, DrDetroit said:

Good advice, but where should the MAP and blade pitch (RPM) be at when on final leg to the carrier?  This is where I struggle massively; I seem to always come in too fast or too slow during the last few dozen feet before landing, always either ending up fast, at around 110kts, or too slow, at under 90kts.  I'll try to correct last second with throttle, before hitting the deck, but that thing just yaws wildly left/right, depending on if I'm increasing or decreasing throttle.

Anyhow, it's frustrating as hell lol! I can't seem to get the last leg down to where I can consistently land.  I have landed and hooked the wire, but it's like 2 our of 20 times.  I think I need to get the MAP and RPM setting dialed in during the final approach, as well as the 10 degree pitch trim, and that should get me on the deck safely

Generally speaking the prop pitch should be set to max RPM on approach so you’ve got the optimum setting for a go around, and also the best response when making power adjustments at a relatively low airspeed.  (However, I know little about high-powered warbirds and it’s possible the SOP was to have the recommended RPM set a bit lower so there was less torque when applying full power for a go-around? - one for the experts!)

But if you’re trimmed out properly then the idea is to react instantly to any deviation from glideslope and airspeed, so things don’t get out of hand and you don’t need any major control inputs which de-stabilise you.  Convention is to use elevator to maintain airspeed, and power to maintain rate of descent - but bear in mind that at low short-field approach speeds power is more or less the most important control, because you are speed-unstable.  Hence power adjustments are your primary control for both airspeed and rate of descent.