8/19 Open beta version: Wake turbulence?

Hopefully this generates more light than heat, but was just getting into the air to air refueling mission, and was wondering if the wake turbulence off of the KC-135 is what should be expected? It really kept trying to flipnthe plane over. That seems a bit extreme, but I'm not the expert so wanted to ask if that is what I should be expecting in terms of turbulence. Aircraft was configured in bomb mode and at about 5-10 units of AoA, at sprint 0.7 mach at 15kft.

Thank you,

Harry Voyager

Not extreme at all, it's really how it works and it's something pilots are trained to deal with, it has caused planes to crash as well as damage.

Explanation video:

FAA video showing it in action:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6K1ArSyiuI

Wiki link describing it:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake_turbulence

Encounter by a small plane:

Crash caused by it:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Mexico_City_Learjet_crash

I’ve had the pleasure of meeting wake turbulence in an RJ behind a 737. It’s pretty well modeled. Granted that’s not exactly the same size comparison, but the effects are pretty close.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The effects off of big aircraft are fine.

The effects off of other fighters seems to be exaggerated. You can't do a simultaneous Tomcat launch off the Stennis in DCS without the wingman getting bounced around.

The effects off of big aircraft are fine.

 

The effects off of other fighters seems to be exaggerated. You can't do a simultaneous Tomcat launch off the Stennis in DCS without the wingman getting bounced around.

Wonder if that's more an issue with the Stennis being too small and therefor the cats being too close together?

Maybe. Although carriers prior to the Stennis could simo-launch Tomcats and they were smaller carriers in real life as well.

Maybe. Although carriers prior to the Stennis could simo-launch Tomcats and they were smaller carriers in real life as well.

Source?

Seems like not possible at least for Cats 1&2 on the Nimitz Class.

It's not possible from Cats 1&2 on any extant carrier, to my understanding. I'm talking about launching from Cats 1&4. When done in DCS I get hit by mad wake turbulence if my timing is even the slightest bit off.

The in between wingmen wake turbulence has been thoroughly tested by our SMEs, which lead to adjustments mainly in the frequency of compressor stalls behind the jet wash, but the wake turbulence got approved as is. (Fun fact, it is one of the fondest testing memories to have real tomcat pilots fly your wing and ride your wake. :)) Also, do not forget, the Tomcat is not really a small plane. Fly behind a hornet and it is already way less, etc.

But should turbulence be noticeable when doing a Cat 1/4 simo launch?

But should turbulence be noticeable when doing a Cat 1/4 simo launch?

Should be 1 and 3 simultaneous and 2 and 4 simultaneous launches. They would do 1 and 4 as the launch paths intersect. :thumbup:

So, if you follow this rule and proper departure procedures, you shouldn't hit any wake turbulence from departing aircraft.

I thought it was 3 that intersected. I'll have to check my missions again.

I thought it was 3 that intersected. I'll have to check my missions again.

1 and 3 a parallel. 2 and 4 intersect but a long way out in front of the boat. Doing the departure procedure deconflicts them, plus 2 is in front of 4.

As I understand it, the reason you see the jets make a sharp turn immediately after clearing the deck is to minimize the wake turbulence behind them for the next a/c to launch.

Good to know. So when lining up for the tanker, how was it usually handled? Push fast through the heavy area? Approach from specific vectors? On the training mission, the wingman set up on the port side and the tanker decided to tank me from the port side, which seemed very tight for the amount of bouncing around I was getting.

Is this something one just gets used to, or are there procedures to mitigate it?

Wake turbulence sinks behind the generating aircraft. I probably have it wrong, but I try to stay above and outboard of the wingtip vortexes until I'm ready to move into precontact, then I dip below and line up on the pod.

Which tanker? I've only done the S-3 so far but I never experienced any turbulence. The few times I tried the KC-130 a long time ago I don't recall any turbulence either.

you need to stay below the wings. If you are hitting the Wake Turbulence, you are wrong.

drop down on the left, come under the wing tip vortex, line up and pull up a little and remain under the wing. If you are hitting the wake, that close, you are too high.

I'm actually getting the worst of it pretty far out. What I was doing was trying to line up on the tanker from the spawn point and keep a slow closure all the way in, but was getting kicked around rather a lot. So instead, come in from below the tanker until your close then climb into the slot?

I'll have to record and post some tracks, but don't know how valuable those will be with the track uncertainty :/

As I understand it, the reason you see the jets make a sharp turn immediately after clearing the deck is to minimize the wake turbulence behind them for the next a/c to launch.

Safety reasons. Aircraft departing CAT 1 and 2 make a right turn, and aircraft departing in CAT 3 and 4 make a left turn. This is a safety procedure to ensure if the aircraft ditch in the sea it will not be in front of carrier and usually the ones with live ordnance.

Cheers,

F.

Which tanker? I've only done the S-3 so far but I never experienced any turbulence. The few times I tried the KC-130 a long time ago I don't recall any turbulence either.

Make sure you have wake turbulence turned on in the options. Both have wake turbulence (all the planes do).

I'm actually getting the worst of it pretty far out. What I was doing was trying to line up on the tanker from the spawn point and keep a slow closure all the way in, but was getting kicked around rather a lot. So instead, come in from below the tanker until your close then climb into the slot?

 

I'll have to record and post some tracks, but don't know how valuable those will be with the track uncertainty :/

Ah, there is your issue. Wake turbulence descends the farther out you go.

Proper Tanker approach is to move in on the port side (left) away from the wake. Once established in the port observation hold (formation on the left wing), you get cleared into pre contact position.

From the left hold, descend to be below the wing and engine line and slide to the right inline with the pod. Call pre contact and wait for the basket to extend out. you should not be that far behind the tanker, you just slid to the right from the hold.

Then come up just a tad to be in line with the basket and move forward and plug it.

when don't tanking, retract probe, drop altitude slightly and reduce airspeed to drop back. Then slide to the starboard observation hold and climb up to wing height. Come forward a bit and then fly formation while you wait for your wingman.

Ok, two questions:

1: What are the commands to get your wingman to leave the port observation hold position?

2: What are the formation reference points for the KC-135?

Actually, third question: If tanking off of the starbord wing, donyiu still start from the pprtbhold, or from somewhere else?

Actually, third question: If tanking off of the starbord wing, donyiu still start from the pprtbhold, or from somewhere else?

I don't know about AI wingman, I fly in an air wing.

I dont know the official references for the tanker but here is why I do.

I fly co-altitude with the wing tip, and put my eye line down the leading edge of the wing so that it looks like a straight line. Then keep a reasonable spacing. (maybe someone knows the official bearing lines to hold.

If you are going to have to tank from the Starboard wing, you will start from the port observation hold, transition right slightly behind, and below the guy on the left wing. Then the rest is just like the left wing. Come up call pre-contact and grab gas. Stay below the engine line as to not hit wake turbulence and jet wash.