Using "throttle for GS and stick for AOA" when landing

I don't understand. There's a video of a real hornet pilot modulating his real hornet's airspeed/AOA with his throttle on final approach to a real carrier and you state that my assessment is incorrect. You state that turbulence causes the VV to move around and the AOA bracket height represents a 2 knot variance. But, you make no mention of what the real hornet pilot is actually doing in the video.

 

Like I said, this is inarguable. Just watch the video. You are not arguing with me, you are arguing with that real hornet pilot flying the real carrier operations in the video. That real hornet pilot seems to be pretty experienced too.

This is why I asked you to read previous thread comments. It's not the pilot that's doing anything wrong, it's you're interpretation of what he's doing.

The rhino video just posted is a good example as well, while you can't see his hand the entire time you can hear the engine and see the ball. You can see the biggest movements are quick when the ball is high as he keeps the engine spooled on the come down, however stops it from going low and brings it a little high again and continues to bring it down at the ramp to on. My entire point isn't he's doing it wrong, but as far as examples for new guys (especially in simulators), smooth is good.

A little high start, too much power on the come on in the middle to a little high in close to the little fly through down at the ramp. Watch the ball (or glide slope on the DDI) and notice what he's doing with the power, and what happens to the glide slope. Power comes on, the settle is stop and he moves back up on the glideslope if he adds too much. Power comes too low he starts to settle.

Before dismissing what others have to say on the topic try to understand what they're saying, especially if you don't have any experience in the first place.

This is why I asked you to read previous thread comments. It's not the pilot that's doing anything wrong, it's you're interpretation of what he's doing.

 

 

 

A little high start, too much power on the come on in the middle to a little high in close to the little fly through down at the ramp. Watch the ball (or glide slope on the DDI) and notice what he's doing with the power, and what happens to the glide slope. Power comes on, the settle is stop and he moves back up on the glideslope if he adds too much. Power comes too low he starts to settle.

 

Before dismissing what others have to say on the topic try to understand what they're saying, especially if you don't have any experience in the first place.

I just posted a comment on the video asking the pilot himself. Let's see what he says.

I just posted a comment on the video asking the pilot himself. Let's see what he says.

I'll save you the time. He's going to say he's trimmed up on speed and using the throttle to control the ball, just like every other naval aviator in history. Just do some research on carrier aviation and it will verify what I am saying since you're hell bent on not believing me, or anyone else in the thread.

This is so my favorite thread! I need more popcorn. So I was in the Navy and I can tell exactly who know what they’re talking about and who doesn’t as it pertains to naval ops. I was not a pilot but I worked on Hornets for 7 years so I know the jargon. Just trust the Pilots, Neo and ttaylor, they know what they’re talking about.

Completely agree Dooley. "As the Flight Sim Turns" My favorite soap opera.

Isn’t new NAVY landing system called “magic carpet”?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Isn’t new NAVY landing system called “magic carpet”?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's the name the nerds in the test community came up with. Pilots call it PLM or precision landing modes

That's the name the nerds in the test community came up with. Pilots call it PLM or precision landing modes

When I read about it, it was referred as such in article. So I sell for what I buy :)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When I read about it, it was referred as such in article. So I sell for what I buy :)

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/magic-carpet-will-make-landing-on-a-carrier-so-much-eas-1793618342 PLM is referenced in the article. Pilot to pilot its referred to as PLM.

This whole discussion seems an awful lot of mountain-ing out of a mole hill, overcooking a really simple point that finally clicked with me when I was learning tailwheel with a crusty old flight instructor outside of Houston in a Piper Cub, flying on a ~900 foot grass strip.

 

No matter the airplane, when landing, you control your airspeed with the nose (AOA controls airspeed), and as he taught "Power to the runway", ergo your throttle controls the angle of your slope on descent (your groundspeed as this thread titles it), ergo where you end up hitting the pavement.

 

No matter what you're flying, this applies, and its that simple, thats it and thats all, no sense arguing about it :)

The function of setting 8.1 AOA is two fold, an appropriate airspeed and setting the hook appropriately to catch a wire. Something that is commonly referred to is hook to ramp clearance and I'm sure this factors in as well.

The function of setting 8.1 AOA is two fold, an appropriate airspeed and setting the hook appropriately to catch a wire. Something that is commonly referred to is hook to ramp clearance and I'm sure this factors in as well.

Hook to ramp refers to the distance from the tip of the hook to aft section of the carrier runway.

Safety requirements say it should be no less than 10 feet. If hook to ramp distance is less than 10 feet there is a large risk of inadvertent engagement. Say if the ship heaves, for example. Hook to ramp distance is primarily a function of the distance from the hook touchdown to the ramp.

Hook to ramp distance can be adjusted by changing the basic angle of meatball. Lets look an actual carrier recovery bulletin used by LSO's.

CV 62 Independence stands out. The first thing to note about her is, that she can't recover aircraft using a 3 degree glide slope because the hook to ramp distance is less than 10 feet. This is because the three wire is located to close to the ramp. Since it’s based on right triangles, we can mathematically prove it.

CV 62 Hook touchdown point = 185 feet forward of the ramp

Tan of 3.0 = Hook to Ramp clearance /185 (Hook Touchdown distance from ramp.)

Hook to ramp = 9.69

Thus you can never safely land aircraft via a 3 degree glide slope on the Independence.

To use a 3 degree glide slope on any carrier the hook touchdown point needs to be at least 191 feet forward of the ramp. As

Tan 3 = 10.009/191.

The Saratoga and the Forrestal are even worse, their touchdown point is only 178 feet from the stern.

The main concern with AOA on the approach is Hook to Eye Distance. Hook to Eye, is the distance from the pilots head to end of the arrestor hook. If we didn’t take this distance into account the hook would always land short of the target wire. Hook to Eye varies with each aircraft. Again lets look at a a real Aircraft Recovery Bulletin.

As we can see all aircraft have different hook to eye distances. Thus the meatball has to be adjusted for various aircraft types. In order to ensure each aircraft's tail hook lands half way between the 2 and 3 wire, on 4 wire boats.

The meatball’s angle is the basic angle + adjustment for hook to eye. So if hook to ramp clearance calls for a 3.5 degree glide slope, The meatball will set to angle of 3.5 and then moved up 16.70 feet if we’re recovering Hornets. So our actual glide slope is greater than 3.5.

What happens when your AOA is off is that hook to eye changes. Thus it compounds any flight path errors and leads to the hook either catching to soon or later.

Great info! thanx :)

I just posted a comment on the video asking the pilot himself. Let's see what he says.

"neofightr" was an RL Naval F-18 aviator, he explains it very clearly: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3200175&postcount=36.

You can't argue that everybody in this thread, an RL F-18 aviator & the whole Navy Aviation procedures are wrong! & you're right? :doh:

"neofightr" was an RL Naval F-18 aviator, he explains it very clearly: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3200175&postcount=36.

You can't argue that everybody in this thread, an RL F-18 aviator & the whole Navy Aviation procedures are wrong! & you're right? :doh:

Exactly CoBlue, I posted that at the start of the thread page 2:cry:

There is also this video;)

Then there's...

As I said in my original post .... no deck landings for us, no requirement for accurate precise hook to deck angles etc etc etc .... hell we even had the audacity to flare the aircraft .... and just like every aircraft in our inventory we flew it the same way in terms of control down final.

 

The guys landing on the boat have a very special technique for a very special circumstance.... and a very special skill set that aviators everywhere respect and admire.

We have the F18's, we don't land on a boat, so we don't have to use this "very special skill" that can possibly save some wear on the jet? Instead of the controlled crash, same as shown in Wags video, the US F18 pilots would need to keep this technique up for the transition back out to the boat, so I guess it would always be used for standard practice?

This was IvanK's Aus F18 fighter pilot, first post to recap.

Its 35 years since I flew and instructed in the Hornet (only on runways though but in the RAAF the methodology taught and used was Pitch controls Flight path power controls AOA. So use the stick to put the velocity vector on the aimpoint and power to center the AOA bracket. Worked just fine. The USN exchange officers who had been indoctrinated in the reverse method used either one..... of course in reality its a blend of both.

 

Also with Flaps full and gear down there was no auto trim. You manually trimmed to On Speed AOA. (FA18A/B)

"Pitch controls Flight path power controls AOA" You can flare when landing on Shore Based runways if you want :P

Not only is our landing strip moving, but it's also much smaller than your average runway. Pictured is a runway from a hornet base. Outlined is the carrier box (same dimensions as the boat) with the landing area boxed inside it.

 

There's also different methodologies getting mix up here for different types of training, you guys are specifically talking about.

Landing on the boat, which would make it the correct Methodology for the topic and title, the Title should also state that perhaps?

The OP is specifically referencing the "NATOPS manual" in the first post, so....

 

If you are using the stick and throttle to maintain glideslope you are doing it wrong, period regardless of platform. The stick is used for alignment to centerline and maintaining a constant AOA. That is what the pilots are doing in the videos when moving the stick, they are trying to keep that green donut lit and rock steady on the AOA indicator while using the throttle to maintain glideslope by keeping the meatball lined up with the datum lights. That's how it works, period.

Also the LSOs can see deviations before the pilots and calls for corrections over the radio: "power" you are low, "right for line up" LSO's don's say pull up, pull up.

It's power, power, power... :) I.E low and off GS

Remember that Carrier Based landings requires the (exact AOA) when landing for hookup, so this AOA will be held by the pilot when coming down the GS.

EDIT: Should also add that the ATC "autothrottle" procedure "Methodology" is completely different, as stated...

Shore-Based-Procedures

Flared minimum descent:)

.

Thanks David OC, looks like I should gather all the useful info you guys posted to OP.

It would also be great if the F18 pilots here could talk more about their different training experience.

Quote

"Naval aviation revolves around flying at the boat. It is imperative that the procedures used at the boat become second nature, that they become ingrained in muscle memory. To this effect, all shore based VFR approaches will be flown in exactly the same manner as would be at the carrier, with a few minor exceptions:"

Link to source

Like I said in my last post, it's to keep the training up for landing on the boat, it's why they are so passionate about how this is trained and executed for the boat.

.

Shore-Based-Procedures

 

 

Flared minimum descent:)

That is just mentioning if you do one, not that you will do one every time. Pretty difficult to flare and land with a center ball.

It would also be great if the F18 pilots here could talk more about their different training experience.

 

Quote

 

"Naval aviation revolves around flying at the boat. It is imperative that the procedures used at the boat become second nature, that they become ingrained in muscle memory. To this effect, all shore based VFR approaches will be flown in exactly the same manner as would be at the carrier, with a few minor exceptions:"

Link to source

 

Like I said in my last post, it's to keep the training up for landing on the boat, it's why they are so passionate about how this is trained and executed for the boat.

 

.

What about it? It's basically the same, you fly at home like you fly at the boat. The pattern is the same (minus the approach to the angled deck), and you fly the ball to touchdown.

Just generally trying to help others get up to speed here and in the Groove :D, in the techniques and Methodology for "Naval Aviators"

Many are mixing in general aviation techniques, take the good intentions of the 2nd post in this very thread, it was referencing this article.

I'm pointing out that the OP is referencing "NATOPS manual" in the first post, that is a very specific training and Methodology for landing the F18 on the carrier correctly "safely, constantly"

Also how F18 pilots generally do not use the Auto throttle technique, as it is totally opposite to what you have even been preaching about here right? But it is still a technique that can be used to land the jet on a carrier.

They also train the same way when at a shore base to keep this technique fresh, the base from what I've read also have I/FLOLS installed, and the ball is flown during normal VFR approaches to the field.

What many need to remember is the F18 is a Ferrari of the sky, with almost zero spool time and "plenty......" of power, this enables the F18 and you to easily hold AOA all the way down the GS for landing on the boat just using the throttle for adjustment, there is no need at all to pitch for speed etc.

It's all good ttaylor0024, I'm just pointing out that this thread topic is specifically how US Naval Aviators" are trained, not necessarily the Methodology of how Australia, Canada, Finland, Spain, Switzerland etc, are trained to fly and land the F18 on land based runways, as IvanK has pointed out here.

It's all good, we all here like to learn about this from the pro's:thumbup:

.

Just generally trying to help others get up to speed here and in the Groove :D, in the techniques and Methodology for "Naval Aviators"

 

Many are mixing in general aviation techniques, take the good intentions of the 2nd post in this very thread, it was referencing this article.

 

I'm pointing out that the OP is referencing "NATOPS manual" in the first post, that is a very specific training and Methodology for landing the F18 on the carrier correctly "safely, constantly"

 

Also how F18 pilots generally do not use the Auto throttle technique, as it is totally opposite to what you have even been preaching about here right? But it is still a technique that can be used to land the jet on a carrier.

 

They also train the same way when at a shore base to keep this technique fresh, the base from what I've read also have I/FLOLS installed, and the ball is flown during normal VFR approaches to the field.

 

What many need to remember is the F18 is a Ferrari of the sky, with almost zero spool time and "plenty......" of power, this enables the F18 and you to easily hold AOA all the way down the GS for landing on the boat just using the throttle for adjustment, there is no need at all to pitch for speed etc.

 

It's all good ttaylor0024, I'm just pointing out that this thread topic is specifically how US Naval Aviators" are trained, not necessarily the Methodology of how Australia, Canada, Finland, Spain, Switzerland etc, are trained to fly and land the F18 on land based runways, as IvanK has pointed out here.

 

 

It's all good, we all here like to learn about this from the pro's:thumbup:

 

 

.

Yeah I'm not trying to sound like a dick or anything, just tone is hard to translate over words on forums.

Yes there are different ways to land the hornet, however seeing as most (if not all) will be attempting carrier landings in the bird, may as well have them learn the correct way from the start. Over the course of 100 years of trial and error now a very good system has been constructed through mishaps along the way, which is the reason we practice ball flying so much. It's not easy in the beginning but it's imperative we learn it a certain way and keep current so it's something we don't have to worry (as much) about at the end of a long day, because in the end, while the navy pilot does take off and land from the boat, the real mission is putting warheads on foreheads carrying out the mission, navigation/takeoff/landing is all expected and a secondary part of the job.

I'm looking forward to the hornet and do want to learn and train the right way for the carrier, I believe most here do as well, it's going to be loads of fun and frustration learning and doing laps around the boat, Cannot wait!!

Here is a great carrier pattern video and write up by neofightr, giving feedback/corrections about the video, I'm very interested to learn how to do this pattern correctly for carrier operations.

Also looking forward to the differences in landing with the F14 on the carrier, this will be even more difficult to do correctly apparently, as the engines take long to spool up etc.

It will also be great when Heatblur Simulations / ED get the boat to be alive, as seen in these early WIP shots of the crew.

F-14 Pilot Testing Session

the real mission is putting warheads on foreheads carrying out the mission, navigation/takeoff/landing is all expected and a secondary part of the job.

That part we are all experts at here, nothing like overloading the A10 with Maverick's or CBU's and trying to take out a tank company by ourselves, including all the anti air :D

.

Hey Everyone,

I stand corrected. A gnarly and highly capable F/A-18 Hornet pilot, from the carrier break video on page 17 of this thread, responded to my question on his video that this is how he lands his Hornet on the carrier:

"Throttle for angle of descent. Stick for airspeed."

I think we can put this thread to rest now finally! Sorry for the contention and argumentation that I caused and I will make sure to practice doing this the correct way from now on.

Thank you!

Hey Everyone,

 

I stand corrected. A gnarly and highly capable F/A-18 Hornet pilot, from the carrier break video on page 17 of this thread, responded to my question on his video that this is how he lands his Hornet on the carrier:

 

"Throttle for angle of descent. Stick for airspeed."

 

I think we can put this thread to rest now finally! Sorry for the contention and argumentation that I caused and I will make sure to practice doing this the correct way from now on.

 

Thank you!

There's no argument here xgibbousx, everyone's learning:thumbup:

These guy's here are trying to help us learn the correct way for carrier operations.

This is incorrect tho for carrier operations as discussed xgibbousx, Well the last part if you want to get technical "Stick for airspeed" No need to worry about that in the "powerhouse" F18. See F18 high alpha pass...;)

Note: Possibly correct terminology: See at bottom (on speed) AOA conclusion, possible reason for some confusion here.

All the naval aviators here are preaching this methodology below for naval aviation, this is practiced even when a shore, flying from land based airports to keep the technique fresh for the boat.

 

If you are using the stick and throttle to maintain glideslope you are doing it wrong, period regardless of platform. The stick is used for alignment to centerline and maintaining a constant AOA. That is what the pilots are doing in the videos when moving the stick, they are trying to keep that green donut lit and rock steady on the AOA indicator while using the throttle to maintain glideslope by keeping the meatball lined up with the datum lights. That's how it works, period.

Here's why:

Hook to ramp angle is very important when landing, this is the main reason I see the aircraft is flown this specific way above, you cannot quickly keep adjusting the "angle of the aircraft" or more to the point, you don't want to be changing this angle to deck and try and recover the exact angle "last second" when landing. As neofightr and others have has said before this leads to hook slaps, bolters etc. In other words the angle is wrong for the hook to pickup the cable correctly as designed.

The whole idea with the recovery patterns, as show in Wags video is to come out in the groove ready to fly the ball and land. very very close to on speed, on AOA, on glide slope (No huge flight corrections).

Once into the groove you call the ball (15-18 seconds to touchdown). You Keep "Hold" the Exact AOA and use the throttles to keep the ball in the center all the way down to landing.

Pitch to hold" constant AOA"

Roll to align with carrier, offset to right "crotch" runway is 10 deg to the left and moving at 30 kts.

Power to hold GS (Glide slope) this is following the (Ball), the orange circle in the picture below, keep this in the center using the throttles.

Hope this helps.

Here is a picture of a field IFLOLS for practicing this aircraft patten and landing method when land based.

Light showing low here.

The Landing Signal Officer (LSO) would be on the radio calling Power, Power, Power to get you back on the glide slope, you don't change the pitch AOA to get back on GS. just use the throttle. You hold this profile and basically control cash into the runway, no flaring, this is what the F18 landing gear was redesigned to take.:)

SIDE NOTE:

It is interesting as to why the same terminology is used here groove,

"controlling speed with the stick and rate of descent with the throttle" to me, this makes it more confusing?

Well the "controlling speed with the stick" part is.

If your holding the correct "AOA" airspeed is pegged with the optimum AOA, is this just a very strange way to say?

As seen in this image below. "On speed" = correct "AOA" would be a better way to say and explain this perhaps....

Perhaps one of the navy pilots here can explain why they are using this terminology?

So this terminology below.

"Throttle for angle of descent. Stick for airspeed" or "controlling speed with the stick and rate of descent with the throttle"

Are correct...

If you have been taught and fully understand how they should be interpreted, going off the AOA indexer for the F18.

Throttle for angle of descent (GS)

Stick for airspeed (Using AOA indexer) = Correct "On Speed" and "AOA" for landing on carrier

So, even the article posted in the 2nd post is correct (Method 1, Pitch For Airspeed, Power For Glideslope) The big thing that is missing on GA aircraft is the connection between speed and AOA, using the AOA indexer. GA aircraft don't even have an AOA indexer as standard equipment, the F18 does and is a vital part to the F18, for the pilot to have correct angle to deck, when coming down the GS for landing.

Great example of keeping a steady on speed AOA (Field Carrier training)

Fresnel Lens Optical Landing System FLOLS demonstration

.

@David OC ...yes, that ''pitch/stick for airspeed'' was tripping me up as well. And as you stated, the misconception that you would control your airspeed via the stick comes probably from not completely understanding what the AoA indexer lights left of the HUD really indicate and are supposed to tell the pilot. At least i am still not entirely sure about it myself :)

So; i was not sure whether those changing indexer lights (donut) where indicating ''angle of attack'' or whether they were about the correct true airspeed that the aircraft should fly down the GS and eventually touch down at.

Now, if i am not mistaken: the AoA indexer lights really simply measure/indicate only AoA, but AoA is of course the COMBINATION of correct approach angle of the airfoils (as in degrees to the horizon) AND a specific true airspeed for a specific aircraft. Now, if i am not completely off in my physics here, AoA changes with different true airspeeds at the same angle of the airfoils in relation to the horizon and vice versa. If i keep that angle of the airfoils to the horizon rock steady but increase true airspeed, AoA decreases for instance. If i decrease true airspeed and start to descend the airflow comes not straight and level anymore, but comes from foward below thus inceasing AoA.

Thus i would actually conclude that neofighter is correct in stating that you pretty much use the stick for alignment and keeping the correct angle of your ''hook'' towards the flight deck/wires. And you would establish that correct angle early on and fly that till you touch down. GS control and true airspeed control would then soley happen via the throttle. Besides, it makes the apporach procedure somewhat easier i think, because you simply can put you main focus on one control input.

Now, if i am not mistaken: the AoA indexer lights really simply measure/indicate only AoA, but AoA is of course the COMBINATION of correct approach angle of the airfoils (as in degrees to the horizon) AND a specific true airspeed for a specific aircraft.

Just a small correction: that would be an angle of attitude. Angle of attack is entirely separate from the aircraft's attitude relative to the horizon; it's purely a measure of the angle between the aircraft (wing) and the relative wind.

(for instance, one could theoretically hold a constant AoA while doing a barrel roll).

Cheers to everyone in this thread! Lots of great discussion and information here! Thank you all.

:) I can't wait to try it out in the Hornet, though I have a feeling my carrier pattern will take a LOT of work to get right.

So; i was not sure whether those changing indexer lights (donut) where indicating ''angle of attack'' or whether they were about the correct true airspeed that the aircraft should fly down the GS and eventually touch down at.

We will ignore TAS here, it varies quite substantially depending on atmospheric conditions and altitude, etc. The only airspeed that really matters to the airframe itself is IAS, as that's what is read out and is the direct indicator of how many molecules of air the wing is seeing at that given instance of time. The doughnut is AOA.

Now, if i am not mistaken: the AoA indexer lights really simply measure/indicate only AoA, but AoA is of course the COMBINATION of correct approach angle of the airfoils (as in degrees to the horizon) AND a specific true airspeed for a specific aircraft. Now, if i am not completely off in my physics here, AoA changes with different true airspeeds at the same angle of the airfoils in relation to the horizon and vice versa. If i keep that angle of the airfoils to the horizon rock steady but increase true airspeed, AoA decreases for instance. If i decrease true airspeed and start to descend the airflow comes not straight and level anymore, but comes from foward below thus inceasing AoA.

AOA is explicitly the angle between the chord like and the relative wind, and has nothing to do with airspeed. I can be at 300kts at 15* AOA, or 20kts at 15* AOA. If you're flying level, the relative wind is essentially coming from the horizon level in front of you. While flying level, if you increase your airspeed and maintain level flight, AOA decreases as you have to pitch down in order to reduce the extra lift from increasing your IAS. Without pitching down (decreasing AOA) you will start a climb, as lift is a function of IAS (density and velocity combined) and the coefficient of lift, and the coefficient of lift is essentially for our discussion AOA.

Now lets dissect this into an approach configuration.

If you start a descent by pulling power while on-speed AOA WITHOUT decreasing your pitch angle (you'd actually have to continue to pull back on the stick), you will have a higher AOA (green slow chevron).

If you have the aircraft trimmed on-speed AOA and pull some power back and do not pull back on the stick, the aircraft will naturally want to keep the trimmed AOA and maintain on-speed (the hornet's FCS does this, and even non-FBW aircraft will want to stay at whatever AOA you have it trimmed for, even in a skyhawk).

If you start a level turn you will have to ADD power in order to maintain level flight while on-speed. This is because while turning your lift vector gets cut in two- the horizontal and vertical component. So only the vertical component will be counteracting your weight, so it would have to increase in order to maintain level flight, and doing so would require a power addition in order to increase your total lift vector enough to increase the vertical component enough to keep you level. This is why in a level turn, while on-speed your IAS will actually indicate HIGHER than when you're level.

So now let's look at your normal VFR landing pattern.

You will dirty up and stabilize on-speed, gear flaps out trimmed on the downwind. You do a quick mental calculation depending on your aircraft's weight at the time to get a rough IAS number which is used ONLY to verify your AOA is working correctly. If you're on speed and the IAS reads close to your predicted number, you're good to go and don't look at it anymore. At the 180 (not abeam) you will start your turn and start a gradual descent to meet your altitude targets. Usually about 200-300fpm is your initial rate of descent, increasing to gradually meet ~600 on final depending on the winds. During that initial descending turn you will have to add a touch of power to maintain that initial 200-300fpm because while descending, the turn takes too much of the vertical component of lift for you to pull power, or even maintain power for the descent. You will pull a little power to increase your ROD as you continue your turn, and rolling wings level in the groove you will have to pull power as that vertical component of lift becomes greater and greater during the wings level transition. This entire approach turn you will be flying on-speed, but your IAS will be changing.

Thus i would actually conclude that neofighter is correct in stating that you pretty much use the stick for alignment and keeping the correct angle of your ''hook'' towards the flight deck/wires. And you would establish that correct angle early on and fly that till you touch down. GS control and true airspeed control would then soley happen via the throttle. Besides, it makes the apporach procedure somewhat easier i think, because you simply can put you main focus on one control input.

On-speed is calculated for the optimum approach speed in relation to optimum hook point. The hook point is essentially making sure the main gear and hook touch at the same time in order to prevent hook skips or IFEs (in flight engagements, catching a wire without having the gear on deck, makes for a bad day). Again, we ignore IAS, TAS, GS, etc after we do our initial calculations to ensure AOA is working. I'll check GS briefly and calculate a rough VSI as well, but that's it. But again, I can't stress enough, avoid using anything but IAS when discussing approaches if you're trying to talk about the aircraft's airspeed, because any other speed (TAS, CAS, EAS, GS, etc) is not in relation to what the wing is seeing, and will only cause confusion.

Speaking of inflight engagements. One of the A-3's in my dad's squadron (stationed in Guam) got a late wave-off call and when they rotated, the hook accidentally caught a wire. The A-3 got slightly airborne and was slapped back down collapsing the landing gear in the process. They had to sit there for a while because you normally get out of the A-3 from the belly.

A couple months later, my Dad (the OIC of the squadron) told everyone they were going back out to the boat. The navigator that had been in the right seat of that incident said: "You can put on a desk if you want but I am never going back to the boat."