Litening for Hornet

You can flare a little bit on airfield.A decent decend rate:pilotfly:

 

On carrier you may land the hornet at decend rate of -1200 feet per min at the last second,which will never happen on an airstrip.

Sure, you can flare but it's not designed to do that so you shouldn't.

Sure, you can flare but it's not designed to do that so you shouldn't.

Yes,Hornet hit the airstrip when landing.AFAIK there is a min decend rate about -700 feet per min.Compared with -1200 feet,it;s a decent decend rate.

Also,Mover a real Hornet pilot mentioned he actually flared when landing.

Couple of reasons.

 

1) Habit patterns.

 

2) This jet is prone to planing link issues. Flaring makes you more susceptible and can be harder to control should the planing link fail.

 

Otherwise, it's a great jet to flare. I flared all the time as an adversary pilot that didn't go to the boat. Easiest airplane to land smoothly I've ever flown.

You could just raise the nose, typically. Put the velocity vector (Flight path marker? whichever it's called in this jet) just below the horizon line and hold it.

You can also see Hornet of other country flare when landing.

Sure, you can flare but it's not designed to do that so you shouldn't.

Also another real pilot Lex Talionis also mentioned about flaring

.. sure you can flair. We flared at the field to not stress the gimbal on the L POD. As long as it didn't impede on habit patterns for when you did go to the boat.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would just stick the landing, nothings going to break

Yes,Hornet hit the airstrip when landing.AFAIK there is a min decend rate about -700 feet per min.Compared with -1200 feet,it;s a decent decend rate.

 

 

 

Also,Mover a real Hornet pilot mentioned he actually flared when landing.

 

 

 

 

You can also see Hornet of other country flare when landing.

I've seen the video and he also mentions he does that because he personally likes to do that. Again...landing the Hornet appropriately means, to me, that you shouldn't flare. Regardless, I'm looking forward to the update!

Every aircraft can be flared when landing. You don't have to bump it on the runway, if you don't have to catch a wire on the boat.

Every aircraft can be flared when landing. You don't have to bump it on the runway, if you don't have to catch a wire on the boat.

To each his own

Happy to get the LANTIRN pod here hopefully within the next few weeks. Maybe ED will introduce the JDAMs earlier as well with this available.

Every aircraft can be flared when landing. You don't have to bump it on the runway, if you don't have to catch a wire on the boat.

Correct, you can flare all day long in any aircraft. However, this is not what Naval Aviators are taught when they go through training on the T-45, hornet or any other carrier based aircraft and is not the norm when landing at airfields. Granted there are those that may choose to flare, but it is not the way it is taught regardless of opinion.

You guys crack me up... The F-18C can land just fine on a carrier with a LITENING pod on its center line. The centerline fuel tank is much larger (27" diameter) than the LITENING pod (16" diameter), and they don't bang tanks on the decks...

Not gonna happen. The litening will let us have a TGP sooner, but not this sooner.

In fact the engineer that was to make the ATFLIR was to do it after the Harm, so i guess we will have Harm before any TGP.

 

Although the litening will be the same as in the A10C, the HMI integration is not the same, so there is work to do.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

I would like to get any material that highlights difference between the AA/AQ-28 ALTFLIR targeting pod and the AN/AAQ-28 litening targeting pod.

I think they mean it’s delicate. Not so much it’s size.

Centerline for the USMC F/A-18’s.

Correct, you can flare all day long in any aircraft. However, this is not what Naval Aviators are taught when they go through training on the T-45, hornet or any other carrier based aircraft and is not the norm when landing at airfields. Granted there are those that may choose to flare, but it is not the way it is taught regardless of opinion.

The F/A-18 isn't used by US Navy only. Other users, such as Switzerland, have no aircraft carriers (at least I've never seen one on Lake Constance). Why should they smash their Hornets to the ground at high sinking rates, just because the plane was designed for carrier landings? You can also make material-friendly landings by flaring - the taxpayer will be grateful. :smilewink:

ATFLIRs are used on the carrier due to (1) Being slightly lighter in weight and (2) The USMC uses the ATFLIR at sea due to being supplied by the Navy logistically. Switching pods does not require software upgrades or changes. When they back to their land bases, they switch back to the Litening

So what are the notable differences between the two?

Read the doc linked 2 pages before: cost and availability - no factor for us virtuals...

You land the Hornet the same way on an airstrip as you do on a carrier...

Kinda. Touchdown might be the same, but the stopping isn't.

The Hornet is prohibited from carrier landings with a centre line tank with more than 500lbs in it. It might be the centre line pylon doesn't like to hold onto heavy objects during a rapid deceleration. Just a guess!

Interesting read (about the insignificant capability differences between the two pods). Given that, if I were ED, after the Litening pod is delivered, I would prioritize the ATFLIR pod way down the list.

Interesting read (about the insignificant capability differences between the two pods). Given that, if I were ED, after the Litening pod is delivered, I would prioritize the ATFLIR pod way down the list.

I agree with this 100%!! :thumbup:

Don't know why they just now realized this and accepted it...

Great! Should have been implemented from the very beginning, because it's already in use by the A-10C.

Seriously, LITENING was asked about countless times since the Hornet was first announced.

Always no no no.

Makes me think ATFLIR and the new infrared rendering development are not going well at all. LITENING is clearly plan B, hopefully a relatively painless plug and play for the dev team.

The F/A-18 isn't used by US Navy only. Other users, such as Switzerland, have no aircraft carriers (at least I've never seen one on Lake Constance). Why should they smash their Hornets to the ground at high sinking rates, just because the plane was designed for carrier landings? You can also make material-friendly landings by flaring - the taxpayer will be grateful. :smilewink:

You're making the mistake of thinking that "smashing" the plane into the ground is a bad thing for the Hornet... That sounds awkward to repeat but you don't gently caress it onto the runway or flight deck. NOT what it's designed for!

As already suggested, sounds like they're identified a few "areas of opportunity" with the ATFLIR development.

Personally, I'm fine with the Litening, makes a very sensible stand in.

You're making the mistake of thinking that "smashing" the plane into the ground is a bad thing for the Hornet... That sounds awkward to repeat but you don't gently caress it onto the runway or flight deck. NOT what it's designed for!

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=225497 post #4: "... Otherwise, it's a great jet to flare. I flared all the time as an adversary pilot that didn't go to the boat. Easiest airplane to land smoothly I've ever flown".

But you're right. It's not what it's designed for.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=225497 post #4: "... Otherwise, it's a great jet to flare. I flared all the time as an adversary pilot that didn't go to the boat. Easiest airplane to land smoothly I've ever flown".

 

But you're right. It's not what it's designed for.

He is right.:thumbup:

Great news! Lase targets ourselves. :)