Nasty Manazir F-14 Tomcat Shit Hot Break - can F-18’s do this?

An 2014 article I found by a F-14A carrier pilot, describes (recently retired Rear Admiral) “Nasty” Manazir F-14 Tomcat ‘shit hot brake’ and I wonder if this can be done with a F-18 on the CV Stennis (is this even allowed still? then for historic accuracy :) )

Picture “ .. When you hit the fleet and get to the Boat during the day, it’s a completely VFR, no comm (generally) environment.

The fast movers marshal overhead at 2,000 feet in twos and fours, gathering from all directions on squadron mates, or like aircraft.

The rest of the planes stack overhead every thousand feet, with the slowest at the top – the mighty and much-loved E-2 Hawkeye.

The lower planes hawk the deck, trying to set themselves up to “break the deck” .. ”

The point of this all is, the first one who ‘breaks the deck’, the pilot who drops down into the landing pattern around the CV from the flock of flying metal, this circling stack of planes circling above,

the one who ‘breaks the deck’ gets LSO’s special treatment, or rather gets leeway in LSO’s landing scoring, as this pilot is the first to be at the turn-in to final, and, to keep the momentum going of receiving all the aircraft with ‘everyone’ watching, is to perform a fast ‘shit hot break’ into a very short final.

Nasty Manazir F-15 does/did it like this

- ‘approach the Boat with 600 knots and 600 feet’

after ‘breaking the deck’ while flying hard this will be reference to intercepting the landing pattern, the counter clockwise circle pattern around the mothership that starts behind the CV at the starboard side and ends in final

- ‘bring his section of F-14s in 30 degrees inside the wake so that he would have more than 180 degrees to slow down’

coming in and setting up his Tomcat with an extra 30 degrees additional CW heading, relative to the boat hull’s stern,

thus Nasty Manazir F-15 Tomcat is approaching the boat not from behind at the starboard side as supposed to the official pattern, but is coming in 30 degrees at the left at port side

- ‘hit the intersection of ship and wake and snap, knife edge over the platform’

when reaching the stern of the CV, Nasty ‘snap banks’ his Tomcat to port side left with 600kts over the deck, doing a fly bye/fly over, where the LSOs are positioned now somewhat excited

- ‘would hit the abeam a little fast and wide, but nailing 600ft’

The author seems to be fast-forwarding here, this appears to indicate Nasty’s Tomcat is going too fast to fly any pattern,

Nasty (and his crew) is simply throttling through a circle that started with the ‘snap bank’ over the stern of the boat, steadfast sticking to 600ft altitude, and now has passed through a 210 degrees banking turn, which is 180 plus the 30 degrees he had hit the stern with, and is now positioned ‘abeam’ somewhere around a mile and a mile and a half out on port side, at a right angle to the boat’s centreline at the stern

This ‘abeam’ by the way is the position from where normally a pilot calculates where to start his final break and checking his already ‘on speed’, his altitude and his landing configuration with gear and flaps down,

but in this case, Nasty apparently just throttles straight through the ‘abeam’ position to enter into his ‘shit hot break’ here on, in one go

- ‘give the nose one more emphatic reef, slowing down enough to spread the wings and drop the gear’

slowing down his Tomcat by pitching for setting up his Tomcat landing configuration when approaching the halfway point, 90 degrees from the deck and halfway through his shit hot break

- ‘With 90 to go the flaps would be fully deployed and Nasty would be on profile, though still about 20 knots fast’

relative to the ‘official’ break pattern, he is 20kts fast on the numbers, but actually you have to be fast when on one wing or you might sink like a brick, Nasty being a ‘prudent’ fella I’d say

- ‘would roll into the groove a little high and fast, and work it down with such patience and precision that it was a joy to watch’

which means he doesn’t deviate an iota, with perfect control stays bang on the numbers when intercepting his VFR visual final by fusing with the groove coming in onto the deck

- ‘ .. After the inevitable 3-wire, I would turn to the writer with a big smirk and say what I always did, “High fast start, little high fast in the middle. OK pass.”

this is regarding the trapping of the high score no.3 wire

By the way for instance A.E. W.’s CASE1 demonstration (and Wag’s) on Youtube show what intercepting the final similarly means in DCS.

The article also shows the Tomcat NOTAPS official landing procedure, for all the pilots in the stack that feel somewhat lukewarm about being the one to perform the ‘shit hot break’.

Anyone care to try this?

https://fightersweep.com/837/the-ultimate-carrier-break/

<img id="hzDownscaled" style="position: absolute; top: -10000px;">

Yep perfectly doable - here's one from a Super Hornet:

Yep perfectly doable - here's one from a Super Hornet:

 

Compared to the article about Nasty Manazir's and his Tomcat,

this F-18 comes in approaching the stern from a tad starboard, not from 30 degrees port side, banking hard above the stern but this makes him only cross the last part of the deck, which seems that will make his 350 turn more behind the boat, so I would have a guess at it that he wasn’t doing 600kts coming in, but I can’t see on my screen, and this doesn't look like 6000kts? (that or a F-18 can tighter turn from 600kts).

Compared to the article about Nasty Manazir's and his Tomcat,

this F-18 comes in approaching the stern from a tad starboard, not from 30 degrees port side, banking hard above the stern but this makes him only cross the last part of the deck, which seems that will make his 350 turn more behind the boat, so I would have a guess at it that he wasn’t doing 600kts coming in, but I can’t see on my screen, and this doesn't look like 6000kts? (that or a F-18 can tighter turn from 600kts).

It's a SHB though the numbers are slightly different - I'm not sure you can get a Hornet to 600kts on the deck without using the afterburner. This one's at 480kts & 500ft according to the video description.

Found one

(I search 'F-18 600kts', ...... pffffff )

2008, this one does indeed do the “Nasty” Manazir 'incoming at the stern 30 degrees port bearing', his max DME seems to show 1.4 going around, incoming he slams his throttle to reach 600 at the stern I'd say

(as in, if he can do it we can do it)

I don't see why it wouldn't be possible in a Hornet. Have you tried it? I've personally done breaks up to 550 knots online and yes some were inside the wake.

If I get a chance today I'll try 600 and post it

Watching that video (and others) I really feel the sense of speed is much clearer than in DCS. There's times when I'm flying low level and look at the boat, trees etc and think it doesn't look at all like I'm doing 600knots.

I don't think it's an accurate representation in DCS. Even if it is, it doesn't at all seem like it.

Watching that video (and others) I really feel the sense of speed is much clearer than in DCS. There's times when I'm flying low level and look at the boat, trees etc and think it doesn't look at all like I'm doing 600knots.

 

I don't think it's an accurate representation in DCS. Even if it is, it doesn't at all seem like it.

I know exactly what you mean. Especially low level the sense of speed is lacking in DCS.

I can confirm this is possible in DCS with the F/A-18C. Just pulled it off first attempt! It's a little dodgy going into final and I did end up a little high and fast (sounds like the OG pilot did too) but nothing you can't nurse down to a 3-wire trap!

Cheers!

Watching that video (and others) I really feel the sense of speed is much clearer than in DCS. There's times when I'm flying low level and look at the boat, trees etc and think it doesn't look at all like I'm doing 600knots.

 

I don't think it's an accurate representation in DCS. Even if it is, it doesn't at all seem like it.

Its difficult to compare, the first video for example is a camera shooting from behind, hence the sense of speed is much higher. If you watch a similar video of a driver in a car from behind his back, you will also get a sense of speed higher that if it were a first person view (Basically the feeling of speed you get when you drive).

In any case, if you try DCS with VR, you will see that the sense of speed is much much enhanced. I was so amazed the first flight i took with my oculus rift, it makes low flying through the mountains incredibly fun.

Actually, after this was up I found some posts from July2018 here on DCS F-18 that do the 600kts SHB, but these posts get buried through time.

Watching that video (and others) I really feel the sense of speed is much clearer than in DCS. There's times when I'm flying low level and look at the boat, trees etc and think it doesn't look at all like I'm doing 600knots.

 

I don't think it's an accurate representation in DCS. Even if it is, it doesn't at all seem like it.

its because you don't have peripherical vision...

look how fast it looks at 600kts on my widescreen...

its because you don't have peripherical vision...

 

look how fast it looks at 600kts on my widescreen...

 

To be honest i do not think the screen has anything to do, i cannot read your altitude, but i can say by the look of it, you're way lower than than 600 ft, and, close to the land/buildings, which gives you a fast moving eye references, the videos shows a 600 ft, over sea only which is flat, no objets, nothing to judge your speed from, you have as much feeling of speed over sea that 30 000 ft high with no static references. That's my own opinion though. In otehr words, the lowest you are to the ground and the more static objet you get, the faster you seem to bemoving, versus higher and sea which has no details/objets, but only waves.

Plus, especially for Caucasus, speed perception at low level is mainly bugged by the Speedtrees being roughly 100% too large compared to their graphics (branches, leaves, textures) and to surrounding objects (buildings, vehicles, powerlines).

To be honest i do not think the screen has anything to do, i cannot read your altitude, but i can say by the look of it, you're way lower than than 600 ft, and, close to the land/buildings, which gives you a fast moving eye references, the videos shows a 600 ft, over sea only which is flat, no objets, nothing to judge your speed from, you have as much feeling of speed over sea that 30 000 ft high with no static references. That's my own opinion though. In otehr words, the lowest you are to the ground and the more static objet you get, the faster you seem to bemoving, versus higher and sea which has no details/objets, but only waves.

I think you are wrong. it has all to do with field of view. My bad for not understanding you wanted to see an exact comparison.

Here is a quick reproduction attempt of the Sierra Hotel break (600kts, 600ft ASL - but I made it too wide especially the second part) pictured in the video, with an angle as close as possible to said video, on my wide screen. In reality, the real video is taken with an even wider angle, but that was the max that DCS allowed me.

As you can see the speed perception is quite similar.

Don't you agree ?

I think you are wrong. it has all to do with field of view. My bad for not understanding you wanted to see an exact comparison.

 

Here is a quick reproduction attempt of the Sierra Hotel break (600kts, 600ft ASL - but I made it too wide especially the second part) pictured in the video, with an angle as close as possible to said video, on my wide screen. In reality, the real video is taken with an even wider angle, but that was the max that DCS allowed me.

 

As you can see the speed perception is quite similar.

 

 

Don't you agree ?

If you'Re going the same speed in both videos, just open your first one in one web browser window, then open the other in anotehr window, put them aside, start them both, and look at them yourself, the one closer to the ground and over land have the illusion of going faster? I take reference going through inside the front canopy FoV on both cases which is the fastest things seems to be going closest to your eyes.

Also what i meant is, yep FoV might has advantage, but the further away from you things are, the slowest it feels they go, do a flyby 4 ft away from a jet mid air, then do a pass same speed, 1 nm away from it, difference will be the distance from the objet but both goes the same speed, just further away, same ocurs if you take a rope, attach a bucket at the end then spin it fast, you'll see the bucket seems to be going faster than the rope just at the end of your thumb.

I don't get your point. I am not comparing my two videos/ I was talking about the sens of speed in D.C.S

At equal fov it isn't all that bad.

Simply compare my second video to the real break video on the first page of this thread. The sense of speed isn't that much different. Clearly the lower you go, the more sense of speed you get/ but in my second video I sdopted the same speed and altitude as the real video to compare them

To be honest i do not think the screen has anything to do

Yeah, it does. That is EXACTLY what causes it. There is no magic rendering method that changes the fact your FoV is grossly restricted on most monitors.

It's really simple:

If objects are to scale

If speed is to scale

By DEFINITION it is 100% accurate

What's the variable? You looking through a tiny window 20-30'' in diameter, and the 'world' shrunk down to fit on it. Use a wider FoV, or multiple monitors, or an ultrawide and you alleviate that issue. Use a HMD and you eliminate it altogether. That's not an 'opinion' sort of thing. It's like math, 2+2, it's just the way it is. There is no workaround or rendering trick to change how it works. You have to widen your FoV.

Ivgdtd99S-M?t=430

Compare the sense of speed in the first video with the one that starts at 07:15 (the t=430 time tag isn't working), and then go back to the first video and put some spare app windows over the youtube clip to cover the screen so you only see the part around the HUD, Then you'll see that it is entirely FOV related.

Ivgdtd99S-M?t=430

Compare the sense of speed in the first video with the one that starts at 07:15 (the t=430 time tag isn't working), and then go back to the first video and put some spare app windows over the youtube clip to cover the screen so you only see the part around the HUD, Then you'll see that it is entirely FOV related.

The music in this video absolutely needs to be in some COMPLETE SUCK hall of fame.

That was garbage.

I think you are wrong. it has all to do with field of view. My bad for not understanding you wanted to see an exact comparison.

 

Here is a quick reproduction attempt of the Sierra Hotel break (600kts, 600ft ASL - but I made it too wide especially the second part) pictured in the video, with an angle as close as possible to said video, on my wide screen. In reality, the real video is taken with an even wider angle, but that was the max that DCS allowed me.

 

As you can see the speed perception is quite similar.

 

 

Don't you agree ?

Good lord what size is your monitor?