Kuznetsov landing pattern... or not?

Having recently carried out my first few carrier landings with the Su-33, and having watched Lex Talionis's awesome F/A-18C YouTube tutorials (seriously, check them out if you fly the Hornet) I was inspired to wonder what the correct pattern is for landing on the Kuznetsov.

Obviously unlike the US carriers, the nav system in the Su-33 tells you that you should fly a bog standard 1000m altitude, 15Km, 3 degree, -5 m/s approach. It appears that the straight-in approach demanded by the return & landing navigation modes on the Su-33, together with the landing localizer beam, does in fact line you up with the angled deck of the ship.

So, I tried to find information about what the actual landing pattern is for the Kuznetsov. I read the manual. I watched every YouTube video I could find of the actual ship, including some video of the ship during operations off of Syria.

Nowhere, and I mean nowhere, could I find anything that indicates that the Russian naval squadrons use anything other than the standard straight-in approach. The only references I could find to anything different involved a few Su-33's being put in a holding pattern when the ship suffered a cable break.

Is it this simple then? Do they simply stack aircraft inbound so that they all fly the standard 15 Km straight-in approach with proper time intervals between landing aircraft? Does anyone know any more about the use of any sort of landing pattern?

I’ve never found anything either. You might want to ask the question in the Russian forum. Just ask in English. If anyone knows anything, they’ll respond.

After the 1:49 mark you can see a 33 in landing configuration on the downwind, which indicates to me that they do seem to fly a tight pattern for landing as well. Of course, that's pure speculation on my part, but judging by the fly by there it seems plausible:

Here's another interesting one; from the 1:03 mark, you can see a left turn to the short final for landing through the HUD of a Mig-29K:

After the 1:49 mark you can see a 33 in landing configuration on the downwind, which indicates to me that they do seem to fly a tight pattern for landing as well. Of course, that's pure speculation on my part, but judging by the fly by there it seems plausible:

 

Here's another interesting one; from the 1:03 mark, you can see a left turn to the short final for landing through the HUD of a Mig-29K:

Could well be, though the impression I got there was that they were doing touch & go landing practice. Could well be wrong though.

Even more surprising was seeing a flight path marker in the MiG-29K HUD. Not sure if it was the video FPS, but the refresh rate looked horribly slow. To me that slow a refresh rate would make the FPM a nasty distraction rather than anything useful. Could just have been the frame rate of the camera though.

I'll ask in the Russian forum.

Even more surprising was seeing a flight path marker in the MiG-29K HUD.

That's what I thought as well. To the right of it there was some chevron (<) that seens to indicate being on-speed when aligned with the flight path marker. Maybe the MiG-29K has a special carrier approach HUD mode then.

Anway, the way how the MiG left turned into final could be viewed as another indicator that Russian Navy pilots fly indeed similar pattern as their western counterparts.

OK, the reply I had on the Russian forum translates as:

When landing Su-33 on the deck of Kuznetsov, the cruiser is moving forward.

Stroke in the standard way "by the box." The approach itself is performed using instruments using the "Moon".

Schemes are unlikely to be found.

I'm guessing that the 'moon' means the HSI & VSI with the landing needles. Makes sense I guess. Small wonder that ED has difficulties with bringing us DCS level Russian aircraft if even the approach pattern is classified :(

Given that the Su-33 is so much bigger & heavier than the F/A-18C I'm guessing that the pattern is going to be bigger than the one for the US carrier but outside of that looks like we'll have to invent our own.

Not sure where this hints at something being classified in there...? The "schemes are unlikely to be found" statement? Schemes here being some diagrams online or so?

Guess "by the box" means a box pattern similar to what you see in-game on the HDD on the right in RTN mode, right? The rest makes sense.

Btw - I tried to fly a similar landing pattern that I've been doing with the Hornet using the Su-33 "Take Off" Instant Action mission in the Caucasus (the 33 is light on fuel there). Works really well!

I took the "schemes are unlikely to be found" as meaning that the exact parameters of the pattern aren't available anywhere and extrapolated that to mean they're classified. Conjecture on my part.

I'll give the Hornet pattern a try to see how it works out, but sounds like it works fine.

...

I'll give the Hornet pattern a try to see how it works out, but sounds like it works fine.

Just like to mention that the pattern the MiG used extends much further than the US pattern. After the final turn, the MiG took about 60 sec to reach the deck. Hornets take about 15 seconds, IIRC. I'm sure there's a bit of speed differential between the two but it's not going to be that much.

Edit: I wonder... If you switch to landing mode before you are close to the touchdown point, you are directed to a point about midway down the glideslope. Might be interesting to count time down from there.

OK, the reply I had on the Russian forum translates as:

 

I'm guessing that the 'moon' means the HSI & VSI with the landing needles.

He is referring to the aircraft carrier's optical landing line-up system called "Luna 3"(i.e. "moon"), which interacts with the aircraft's navigation system.

http://www.elektropribor.spb.ru/newprod/en/enew_vert_luna_3e.pdf

That's good to know! Thanks Alfa!

He is referring to the aircraft carrier's optical landing line-up system called "Luna 3"(i.e. "moon"), which interacts with the aircraft's navigation system.

 

http://www.elektropribor.spb.ru/newprod/en/enew_vert_luna_3e.pdf

Ah I see. Thanks for the clarification :thumbup:

Just like to mention that the pattern the MiG used extends much further than the US pattern. After the final turn, the MiG took about 60 sec to reach the deck. Hornets take about 15 seconds, IIRC. I'm sure there's a bit of speed differential between the two but it's not going to be that much.

 

 

Edit: I wonder... If you switch to landing mode before you are close to the touchdown point, you are directed to a point about midway down the glideslope. Might be interesting to count time down from there.

Assuming a point 7Km from touchdown, which is roughly half of the standard 15Km straight-in approach, and a speed of 260 Km/h = 72 m/s, that equates to 97 seconds to touchdown.

60 seconds for the MiG-29K would equate to 4.3 Km at 260 Km/h approach speed.

I wish those RT videos of the Kuznetsov showed more. We could probably calculate a fairly accurate set of parameters for the circuit :detective:

Edited to add: having watched the MiG-29K video again I'm sure the HUD is saying that he's at 0.25M which under standard conditions would = 85m/s which would mean a final approach of 5.1 Km. Interesting.

That's good to know! Thanks Alfa!

You are welcome :)

Ah I see. Thanks for the clarification :thumbup:

NP :)

I don't know the answer to your original question though(never really thought about it), but maybe you can pick up something from this nice reportage of a visit to the Severomorsk-3 airbase(home of the 279 KIAP):

https://onepamop.livejournal.com/823062.html

NP :)

 

I don't know the answer to your original question though(never really thought about it), but maybe you can pick up something from this nice reportage of a visit to the Severomorsk-3 airbase(home of the 279 KIAP):

 

https://onepamop.livejournal.com/823062.html

Fascinating page, thanks for the link! There are what appear to be approach / departure plates for their airfield in one of the photos (the photo of the chap giving the meteoro briefing) but sadly not for the carrier.

Some other points of interest: very fitting that the squadron commander is Colonel Yevgeny Kuznetsov :) also very interesting to see photos of their ground training system. The in-cockpit views and instrument panel of the non-cockpit setup look very much like the old Flanker 2.0 cockpits from about 2001. Wonder if it's still running an early version of our sim...

Fascinating page, thanks for the link! There are what appear to be approach / departure plates for their airfield in one of the photos (the photo of the chap giving the meteoro briefing) but sadly not for the carrier.

Yeah and there is also that photo with the notebook and map on the table, but no nothing specifically on the carrier.

Some other points of interest: very fitting that the squadron commander is Colonel Yevgeny Kuznetsov :)

Heh yeah it is :) - he is actually the commander of the whole regiment(both squadrons).

also very interesting to see photos of their ground training system. The in-cockpit views and instrument panel of the non-cockpit setup look very much like the old Flanker 2.0 cockpits from about 2001. Wonder if it's still running an early version of our sim...

Hm in what way do you mean? . The old Su-33 cockpit in Flanker 2 and Lock-on were(apart from being rather inaccurate) depicting the pre-operational version(test aircraft from 1990) and had several differences in the cockpit layout - e.g. had the old version of the ADI(same as in the Su-27) and the small(round) fuel gauge in the instrument panel(not in a separate housing on top of the IPV) etc.

Hm in what way do you mean? . The old Su-33 cockpit in Flanker 2 and Lock-on were(apart from being rather inaccurate) depicting the pre-operational version(test aircraft from 1990) and had several differences in the cockpit layout - e.g. had the old version of the ADI(same as in the Su-27) and the small(round) fuel gauge in the instrument panel(not in a separate housing on top of the IPV) etc.

I remember the instrument layout being vaguely wrong but mainly I was thinking of the flat duck egg blue colour, and the lack of any sort of 3d instrument panel like the modern 6DOF cockpits have.

I remember the instrument layout being vaguely wrong but mainly I was thinking of the flat duck egg blue colour, and the lack of any sort of 3d instrument panel like the modern 6DOF cockpits have.

Ah ok :) - I thought you meant in terms of the layout.

Their full cockpit simulator does have some minor differences in this respect compared to the more current actual cockpits(see attachment).

But then practically all photos of operational Su-33s you can find on the net show a slightly different layout, so it seems it has been a continuous W.I.P.

When we come in to land right echelon, We take a right offset to the carrier, Once you just pass the end of the ramp break, The pattern is pretty much the same as the F-18, Only difference were using is we enter at 250 meters at 600 kmph with 2tons of fuel, Once at the end of the ramp break left at 60 bank angle reduce power to 350 from there on, Once downwind you should be no more than 3.0nm and a min of 2.5nm, We also take a very short base leg at 2.0km this is to reduce time and get us down quicker than going the full 11 15km out, Landing is at 250, Instead of calling the ball, We call it riding the bow, Ill record a vid on it, Its still W.I.P tho.

Edit: I also noticed and i didnt know until i was flying it, If your near full load and full fuel on take off, Make sure your inlet grids are set they cause drag on take off ;)

is this something you made up

W.I.P........... I didnt say thats the correct procedure, What you got?

Could well be, though the impression I got there was that they were doing touch & go landing practice. Could well be wrong though.

 

Even more surprising was seeing a flight path marker in the MiG-29K HUD. Not sure if it was the video FPS, but the refresh rate looked horribly slow. To me that slow a refresh rate would make the FPM a nasty distraction rather than anything useful. Could just have been the frame rate of the camera though.

 

I'll ask in the Russian forum.

The MiG 29K has been a little bit “westernized” per Indian Navy request.

Russian Navy adopted the MiG 29K with minimal modification.

Plus, despite the Red Star, it looks like pre-delivery Vikra sea trial.

Edit: I also noticed and i didnt know until i was flying it, If your near full load and full fuel on take off, Make sure your inlet grids are set they cause drag on take off ;)

Yep, pretty sure I've got my wheels wet a couple of times in similar situations. Makes for a very hairy takeoff.

Still haven't found any definite figures for a Kuznetsov pattern, and I guess with the damage to the ship a while ago we may never know, but for now I've been using a 5Km final approach leg which seems to work well for anything except very heavy approaches.