Ha!, been around forever, and I only just discovered them
Been landing the Ant T-28 on one all night, and now been searching for what's out there. Found a bunch of WWII and of course Nimitz 2
Has anyone seen a modern version of the USS Lexington (Essex Class) with the angled deck out there in the wild?
Given my love of anything Naval training, it would be the perfect addition to have CVT-16.
Soo... I had been landing the AF Scrub and Ant T-28 just fine on I think it was a default FSX carrier. For the last couple of hours I had set up what I think was the Nimitz 2 model out in the Gulf of Mexico and tried to land the Milton Shupe S2 tracker on it, and I landed "ok" a couple of times, but, mostly, I'd land on the deck, and the plane would tip to the right as if the main wheel was falling through and I'd start bouncing off the deck (or crash with crashing turned on).
Is there anything I can do about that? Do the contact points need adjustment? Spring rate on the landing gear? Perfect some technique I haven't discovered yet? (gotta blame the tools, right?)
Not the easiest plane to approach with either, get the approach speed just a little off and it falls like a rock, or come in just a little hot and it floats on by..... (not to mention my controller needed better setup, the throttle had repeat on so I was having a tough time controlling the throttle for a while). I was using full flaps, I wonder if I need to back off a notch? Probably should read up on flying it by the numbers, huh?
CIMOGT - ESSEX-CLASS AIRCRAFT CARRIER FSX P3D at sim market has
-CVA-31 USS BON HOMME RICHARD
-CVA-19 USS HANCOCK
-CVA-16 USS LEXINGTON
Rob Schreiber
Cool, Thanks!
Just type “carrier” into the search box here and you’ll bring up a few lengthy and detailed threads on all you need to know to get up and running - I’ve barely dipped my toe in that pool, but there’s a whole carrier ops world out there!
Try landing with the speed brake OUT. You will need more power, but float tendency will decrease considerably. This is real world technique. You are on the "back side" of the power curve, small speed and ROD changes are easier to control with smooth throttle and attitude adjustments.Originally Posted by FlyingsCool
………………….. Not the easiest plane to approach with either, get the approach speed just a little off and it falls like a rock, or come in just a little hot and it floats on by..... (not to mention my controller needed better setup, the throttle had repeat on so I was having a tough time controlling the throttle for a while). I was using full flaps, I wonder if I need to back off a notch? Probably should read up on flying it by the numbers, huh?
Thanks! I didn't even realize the Tracker had a speed brake. Kind of assumed it was something like that. I'll try that.
I was talking about the T-28: the S-2/C-1/E-1 series had no speed brakes.
Also, I doubt if any Navy plane made carrier landings with anything other than full flaps, unless an engine out or hydraulic system problem. Even then it usually winds up being an arresting gear limit or tail hook limit problem. Max landing weight and wind over the deck usually have to be adjusted for such emergencies.
Oh, yeah, the T-28 was easy to land on the deck. But it's also true I was using a default carrier, and not the Nimitz v2, so there might be some differences there. But, yes, the T-28 was easy to get on the deck, and, yes, I was using the speed brake. It was the Grummans I was having difficulty with:
1. As you suggested, I was behind the power curve on approach. I was trying to maintain 90 kts on approach, and, according to some of Milton's notes I found last night, I should keep it up at around 115 I think (there is some contradictory notes floating around).
and
2. There was bouncing involved, I'd get it down on the deck, catch a wire, and the right wheel would sink into the deck. I've seen people talking about issues with bouncing on the decks of carriers, and I know if contact points are a little off that can cause stability issues. Same issue with crashing on and off. I'm not saying that's what it is, just asking the question to get some insight. It might also be an issue with the carrier? Or, heaven forbid, it could be an issue with my landing technique(!!).
So I spent last night looking around for more info for a while. I should probably find a POH, eh? hmm.
Those Grummans are sure pretty airplanes, thank you Milton and everyone else who worked on them. I've got to spend some time with them to learn how to fly them properly.
Tom
Last edited by FlyingsCool; February 6th, 2019 at 08:41.
Check your fuel. You shouldn't have much more than 30% total. Then with that weight check the specs for the aircraft and see what the approach and landing speeds are with full flaps.
It's also a good idea to make a few practice runs with the hook up. Since you're using FSX there are a couple carrier related missions included. They use the F-18 but you should be able to substitute.
Hope some of this helps.
Excellent point! I had FULL fuel in all cases. Didn't even think of that. It was the Grumman I was having the most issues landing.
Land lubbing is a lot easier
(It used to be a source of pride for me to be able to land my airplane in the shortest distance from touchdown to stop, such that I could exit at the 1st turnoff at KASH (in the old runway configuration). I had 1100 ft to play with, so it wasn't that awesome. But it was fun. I used to own a share in a '73 Piper Challenger (Cherokee 180). I'm hoping to get back to flying for real again this year
Back to the original subject of the thread... Looks like I could mod the Oriskany model here in the library to be CVT-16, since it's an angled deck Essex class carrier....
Put a 16 on it and call it a day
Why can't anything be easy?
Turns out the Ident marks for the Oriskany models are hardcoded into the model, so the change neccessary isn't just a change in texture
Members who have read this thread: 1
Posting Permissions
FSX
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks