Setting realistic expectations for the Hornet

Yea he wasn't doing it right...because he was trying to control rate of descent with power alone as he was used to (as you suggest is the 'only way'), instead of adding control stick input as well.

 

But don't worry, If 20yrs in the military has taught me anything, it's that a pilot is always right...even when he is wrong :smilewink:. Period.

no need for the spike, i think it's stuff getting lost in interpretation and different focal points. the f-14 was a special snowflake, and while some of its behaviors would prove an exception to the rule, it doesn't disprove the principle -- and in fact, paul nickell himself described throttle for descent as the expected proper behavior. in the end he never describes what his final technique was to nail the landings, like whether dlcs allowed him to avoid pitch adjustments.

finally, as obvious as it is, it ought to be noted that f-14 techniques are less relevant to the fa-18 than fa-18 techniques.

im sure what you'd be doing is neither running away nor going for guns but rather dragging him into a good position for your wingman's shot.

 

other things revelation has already covered well enough.

Oh that's right just like in Top Gun, my trusty wingman is in position and ready to make that kill.

Sorry but real life isn't that neat and in the heat of battle (even simulated battle) sometimes wingmen lose sight of you or are way out of position.

I remember this one training mission where my wingmen and I were about to engage two Egyptian F16 fighters. All was going according to plan until my lead lost sight of the bandits as we approach the merge, I call out visual on the contacts and as briefed I took the lead at this point, within 30 seconds after merging and making our hard turns my wingman loses sight of me all the while I was now falling into position on the six of one of the F16s (he obviously did not see us).

Things got really exciting when I called trigger down over the radio, the F16 decided to execute an aggressive maneuver to get me off him by actually hitting his chaff button (out of habit to break my gun lock) and releasing actual chaff. This was a big no no because it came very close fodding my engines. The training was called off at that point.

The point is neither my wingmen nor I had visual of each other after I took the lead and engaged a bandit and I assumed he was in position backing me up but he no where close to supporting me and I never did figure out where the other F16 was.

That is how real life goes, it's random and even the best of plans fall apart once the action starts.

And I will assume this revelation fellow is an actual tactical pilot as well and has covered this topic well enough:smilewink:.

Ok sry i was confused. Where were you stationed? What aircraft carrier did you typically operate from? Who was your CAG?

Sorry but I don't think it's necessary to conduct a background check, you either take my word for it or assume I am troll lying through my teeth getting off by fooling everyone on this board.

I am not interesting in posting my bio but I will say I was mentioned in the "air warriors" book.

Yea he wasn't doing it right...because he was trying to control rate of descent with power alone as he was used to (as you suggest is the 'only way'), instead of adding control stick input as well.

 

But don't worry, If 20yrs in the military has taught me anything, it's that a pilot is always right...even when he is wrong :smilewink:. Period.

 

Back on topic.

The LSO gave him a slap in the face because he saw that this FNG was ignoring all the training he just went through in Meridian and was determined to stay on glideslope no matter what it took to impress no one.

In the end the LSO probably saved his career (assuming he had one) and his life by getting him to drop the bad habits (using stick and throttle for glideslope) before they formed. Bad habits that you clearly think are valid for some reason.

no need for the spike, i think it's stuff getting lost in interpretation and different focal points. the f-14 was a special snowflake, and while some of its behaviors would prove an exception to the rule, it doesn't disprove the principle -- and in fact, paul nickell himself described throttle for descent as the expected proper behavior. in the end he never describes what his final technique was to nail the landings, like whether dlcs allowed him to avoid pitch adjustments.

 

finally, as obvious as it is, it ought to be noted that f-14 techniques are less relevant to the fa-18 than fa-18 techniques.

I don't get it, you guys think the basic role of the stick and throttle for carrier landings are somehow subject to pilot interpretation and nuance based on the jet they fly. They simply are not, this goes all the way back to dawn of jet carrier aviation when the optical lens was first introduced and jet speeds started to increase.

The technique for controlling the craft (any craft) was well-established in the 60s and from then on designs of the jets were made to ensure the pilot could adhere to these techniques consistently so that no matter what jet trainer they flew (T-2,TA4, T45) their valuable honed skills (accrued over hundreds of training hours) with stick and throttle would transfer easily to the new fleet jet craft, whether it was the F4 S3,A6, A7, F14 or 18 they all consistently behave the same way when given the exact same inputs. Sure some planes required the airbrake out to ensure high throttle settings for faster spoolup times while others didn't. The F14 had a pilot aid to compensate for the huge wingspan and the hornet had larger control surfaces controlled by computers but in the end they all behaved exactly the same when given the same basic inputs.

You can argue that the jets of the 50s and early 60s may have had deviations due to the early nature of the jet age sure but not the current and last gen jets.

And whenever a pilot comes along who decides that he/she is somehow going to game the system and has a better way to nail this glideslope and decides to deviate from the rules he gets blown up asap before he gets into trouble. And those that stubbornly refuse gets flushed out before they become a tragic mishap.

no need for the spike, i think it's stuff getting lost in interpretation and different focal points. the f-14 was a special snowflake, and while some of its behaviors would prove an exception to the rule, it doesn't disprove the principle -- and in fact, paul nickell himself described throttle for descent as the expected proper behavior. in the end he never describes what his final technique was to nail the landings, like whether dlcs allowed him to avoid pitch adjustments.

 

finally, as obvious as it is, it ought to be noted that f-14 techniques are less relevant to the fa-18 than fa-18 techniques.

Agreed, maybe when he has calmed down a little he might re-read the story with a little less bias and realise exactly what is actually going on.

Nevertheless, I am looking forward to discovering some of these special behaviours, and you are correct - slightly derailed the F/A-18 thread lol.

Ok sry i was confused. Where were you stationed? What aircraft carrier did you typically operate from? Who was your CAG?

I would put down good money that he is who he says he is. Navy pilots talk a certain way and he knows the language. If you know what to look for you can tell who is and is not who they say they are if they claim to be in the military.

I just hope the dcs hornet flys around the boat such that the sim rewards the proper technique. Its really hard to bring the nose up when your fast but high, and visa versa when your slow but low. Just relying on the trombone movements with the left hand for glideslope is really counterintuitive. But if dcs bites when you do it wrong that would be great.

Agreed, maybe when he has calmed down a little he might re-read the story with a little less bias and realise exactly what is actually going on.

 

Nevertheless, I am looking forward to discovering some of these special behaviours, and you are correct - slightly derailed the F/A-18 thread lol.

I am calm and I did read the article and I read between the lines and saw what he was doing with the plane. That line where he says his RIO saw the ball go from the upper edge and rapidly all the way down tells me he was pushing the nose down with the stick while pulling back with the throttle.

This is about the time when the LSO screams power and gives the wave off lights when at the ship.

It reminds me of one of my very first flights in the T2 when I was first being introduced to the lens. I am pretty sure I did the same thing and didn't realize it all I remember was my instructor getting really excited with his voice and slamming the throttles forward because we were about to drop like a rock while only 100 ft in the air and the spool up times were really bad in the guppy. Since this was one of my very first jet flights I was given some slack like most students are during this formative time and did not get a down.

That memory and debrief was seared in my brain and kept me from never ever using the stick for glideslope corrections again.

Sorry but I don't think it's necessary to conduct a background check, you either take my word for it or assume I am troll lying through my teeth getting off by fooling everyone on this board.

 

I am not interesting in posting my bio but I will say I was mentioned in the "air warriors" book.

Well pardon me sir, but I call complete BS. You don't want to post even your most remedial credentials. You say you're mentioned in that book, but give no reference to anything you actually accomplished there. How does anyone have any respect for you at all? How about this, im God. Why? Because I said so on a forum.. RL pilots certainly dont come here to brag. The worst part is everyone you drag along with you.

Well pardon me sir, but I call complete BS. You don't want to post even your most remedial credentials. You say you're mentioned in that book, but give no reference to anything you actually accomplished there. How does anyone have any respect for you at all? How about this, im God. Why? Because I said so on a forum.. RL pilots certainly dont come here to brag. The worst part is everyone you drag along with you.

Be as cynical as you want but I like my privacy in this age of the internet.

Those that know the business well enough know if I am lying.

would be nice if we could go back to useful fa-18 info instead of this whole circumlocution from vietnam to credibility attacks on everyone.

+1

Thank you so much for the sharing Neofightr, and like many readers I am so pleased to read something else than posts made by "web-xperts" who got their "knowledge" reading articles on the web or wherever.

Please keep going with amazing stories about trainings and advises to handle the beast :thumbup:. Do you have tips about air refueling ?

neofightr,

Thanks for the info. I hope you feel compel to tell us more stories and more information. I am former USAF F-16 mechanic (by title not merit) and love to hear about aircraft.

neofightr, thank you for chiming in. Alot has been learned from your posts. I did not know about the burble. One can only hope that ED does make carrier landings more difficult. Have you seen Su-33 PFM yet? We'd like to know if you think its right for this class of carrier based craft (behaviour wise).

I agree the hornet is a handful. The other day I saw a video of two seater hornet pulling Gs that the pilot had to rest his right hand on the canopy and it was very sluggish. Very few cones of vapour on wings and it felt like the turn rate faded quickly. I believe it was running against F-16 or F-14. Of course I wouldnt know bupkiss when it comes to fighters except maybe divide thrust over weight to get twr, and the doghouse.. It is surely nice of you to chime in and give us your opinion and if possible would be great too if you could assist ED and BST to tune the models.

Got a question for you, which part of the cockpit do you reference to be on the wire during landing? do you use the HUD static elements to line up?

neofightr please ignore the doubters. Unfortunately it's going to happen. Don't even reply to that nonsense they will soon get bored.

This is a great thread. For us PC Pilot Warriors, it's fascinating getting such insight into the world you experienced and we try to simulate. Your original post was one of the best reads on that stuff I have seen in years. A real eye opener for me.

Many thanks.

Agreed with the others, Neofightr, thanks for the input, I enjoyed reading it.

neofightr, keep it coming, I enjoy reading every sentence :thumbup:

I have a few questions, about a bit of everything.

1. This is a bit of a hot and ever ongoing topic around these parts. How hard easy is it actually to spot your foe, or loose sight of your foe, in a merge. How close are we with DCS really? And at what range, on a good day, can you expect to spot certain size jets?

2. When watching cockpit view carrier landings, and seeing how much stick movement there is, how much of that is actually seat of the pants inputs / reactions?

3. How much does the F-18 talk to you, when high AOA? I read somewhere that the F-15 is a bit of a chatterbox in that regard, shaking / buffeting like mad, while the F-16 does little to nothing.

Just look at what happend to the 9x fired over Syria recently, what would the pilot have done if his 120 had missed too?

Probably keep launching more missiles, as Pitts and Tollini did with that MiG-25 (2 AIM-7 and 3 AIM-9 for one kill) or Watrous on a MiG-23 (all 4 AIM-7), both in ODS. One thing is thinking that the technology is not working and fear that they would need to use the gun, and another actually doing it.

One thing is thinking that the technology is not working and fear that they would need to use the gun, and another actually doing it.

That's a great point.

Hi Neofghtr,

Hope you doing all right. I like your posts pretty much. Keep it coming and, please, please, disregard the haters and keyboard warriors (with all due respect to them). Your info is much appreciated and your posts are very informative.

Keep it up and thank you very much for you patience.

All the best,

Sydy

Hi Neofghtr,

 

Hope you doing all right. I like your posts pretty much. Keep it coming and, please, please, disregard the haters and keyboard warriors (with all due respect to them). Your info is much appreciated and your posts are very informative.

 

Keep it up and thank you very much for you patience.

 

All the best,

 

Sydy

Agreed 100%

neofightr,

Thanks for the info. I hope you feel compel to tell us more stories and more information. I am former USAF F-16 mechanic (by title not merit) and love to hear about aircraft.

I was always envious of the navy pilots that got a chance to fly the F16 via the exchange programs.

Although the falcon is not as good a dogfighter as the hornet she was built for speed. Just looking at those razor thin wings and engine dominated fuselage told you that she was the corvette of jetfighters and could leave the hornet in the dust if she wanted too. I would have loved to flown in that plane and marvel at her performance.

Looking forward to the day ED does the F16.

Got a question for you, which part of the cockpit do you reference to be on the wire during landing? do you use the HUD static elements to line up?

When landing on a carrier the pilot is trained early on not to reference anything in the cockpit other than the AOA indexer (in the hud or on the upper side dash). It is imperative that pilot's attention is on the indexer and meatball with an occassional milisecond glance at the center line of the landing box to correct for alignment. You are either just eyeballing it with the nose of your plane or using the huds symbol for the center of the plane.

There is simply no time to reference anything else. You can see that when looking at the videos of the pilots in action.

Now after you catch a wire, you are not sure which one you caught until you reference your wing to where it stops on the carrier deck. If the plane feels really forward and you are just past the OLS platform then you caught the 4 wire. If you see the OLS platform well in front of you when you come to a stop then you caught the 1 wire.

If you are "railing it" then you are keeping the meatball lined up dead straight with the datum lines or half a meatball high, this will make sure you catch either the 2 or 3 wire. This changes if the LSOs are having you target a specific wire other than the 3 wire.

Note: this is based on my experience with the old-school Optical fresnel lens system. I never had the chance to try out the improved system that came online after I stopped flying.

Since we have a Hornet-Driver around here, I have a question.

Did you ever used the 10x AIM-120 2x AIM-9 loadout in Combat?