F-14 landing characteristics on land bases behaviour problem/issue on the current FM.

[Chaogen]

The Iranians DO fly F-14B?! Where did they get them? ;)

 

Right? I mean if we want to get technical, this thread should have stopped there. Semi-related to another hot thread, since they also use the insta-killer TF-30s there should be no Cats left by now.

 

On a more serious note, ignoring the Onspeed and inducing a flare which will undoubtedly arrest the decent, and make the Cat balloon, can be managed with DLC to get you that smooth nose high landing and a bit of roll out. Btw, OP, your video didn't really show aerobraking. Only the first clip form 3:11 had marginal aerobraking but the nose was on its way down before it cut to the next clip. I would not call 5 seconds aerobraking. The rest didn't show roll out at all.

 

Besides that why would you. Landing at Echo bay is fun. And you get to sit and watch Hornets and Vipers dart the end of the runway while you refuel. Better than proving I can aerobrake. If I want to do that I'll get in a 16.

[Quid]

The other thing here is the Iranian Tomcats are probably lighter than our current B model, possibly by a decent margin. Lighter plane should mean easier to hold the nose right?

 

This is true. The Standard Aircraft Characteristics for the Tomcat in 1977 put its weight at 39,037 pounds gross weight; the Iranian F-14s might have been slightly lighter or right about there. The F-14B is 43,600 pounds gross weight, so more than 4500 pounds heavier.

 

Can DCS F-14 model do it or not? and no I am not talking of the US SOP format as the users are Naval pilots.

 

Based on last night's experiments, I think the answer is absolutely yes if you chunk time into learning that approach.

 

Yes, it can, you can't because your sink rate is probably too high [...] But yes, you can keep the nose off if you're competent in the aircraft. So.....get practicing!

 

This!

[jojyrocks]

This is true. The Standard Aircraft Characteristics for the Tomcat in 1977 put its weight at 39,037 pounds gross weight; the Iranian F-14s might have been slightly lighter or right about there. The F-14B is 43,600 pounds gross weight, so more than 4500 pounds heavier.

 

 

 

Based on last night's experiments, I think the answer is absolutely yes if you chunk time into learning that approach.

 

 

 

This!

 

 

So you have managed it with the FULL FLAPS down, SPOILERS and SPEED BRAKES deployed, clean load, fuel weight around 20-40 percent, yes?

 

 

Wish I could see the clip...

[Lt_Jaeger]

Cut it out, please.

 

Repeating, over and over again the suspected parameters is tiring. Even if airbreaking is not possible with the heatblur marvel, I wouldn't care less. My goal is to, someday, manage the landing consistently adhering to the SOP. If somebody figures that belly landing wouldn't be so demanding on the hook..... be my guest and train it for yourself.

 

Just 2c from a noob

 

Gesendet von meinem LYA-L29 mit Tapatalk

[Airhunter]

Despite your passively agressive tone I went ahead and tried it myself, after about 5-6 landings I pretty much got it down and could do exactly just that. If you knew anything about aerodynamics and jet aircraft you'd be able to do this as well. Rough parameters were around 150kts over the treshhold, don't cut power completely until the mains touch as the engines are mounted below the CG and induce a pretty significant negative pitch moment. Here are two videos of replayed tracks showing exactly that (I had several better ones but the DCS track system corrupted so often that I just stuck with those two instead of hoping the next one doesn't break and replay properly).

 

The first one actually shows a bounce and the huge tailstrike risk doing this (I did have a tailstrike on my very first attempt).

 

 

 

The only "issue" I see here is the pretty high ground friction from the mains, causing you to slow down pretty rapidly and making the nose settle below 100kts (as compared to say the Su-27, Mig-29 or F/A-18 etc.) I hope this can be adjusted some time in the future so the landing distances still remain realistic and you are able to taxi in idle power without stopping on a dime. Seems to work in the Viggen.

[TLTeo]

Wasn't friction artificially high because otherwise interaction with the carrier deck becomes messy?

[Airhunter]

Wasn't friction artificially high because otherwise interaction with the carrier deck becomes messy?

 

Probably originally, we'll see if this can be adjusted with the releae of the Forrestal class carriers.

[Airhunter]

On a different note - THIS - is how you are supposed to land a Tomcat ashore.

 

[jojyrocks]

Despite your passively agressive tone I went ahead and tried it myself, after about 5-6 landings I pretty much got it down and could do exactly just that. If you knew anything about aerodynamics and jet aircraft you'd be able to do this as well. Rough parameters were around 150kts over the treshhold, don't cut power completely until the mains touch as the engines are mounted below the CG and induce a pretty significant negative pitch moment. Here are two videos of replayed tracks showing exactly that (I had several better ones but the DCS track system corrupted so often that I just stuck with those two instead of hoping the next one doesn't break and replay properly).

 

The first one actually shows a bounce and the huge tailstrike risk doing this (I did have a tailstrike on my very first attempt).

 

 

 

The only "issue" I see here is the pretty high ground friction from the mains, causing you to slow down pretty rapidly and making the nose settle below 100kts (as compared to say the Su-27, Mig-29 or F/A-18 etc.) I hope this can be adjusted some time in the future so the landing distances still remain realistic and you are able to taxi in idle power without stopping on a dime. Seems to work in the Viggen.

 

 

 

 

Passive aggressive...?

 

 

I do apologize if I had sounded aggressive.

 

 

 

I just wanted to see if it was me that's not getting right and the problem was on my end.

 

 

 

The only difference I see here compared to the video I posted of the Iranians doing it is that they have the spoilers deployed when the rear mains touch itself and they have the nose up (especially the first aircraft). But in your landing case, I see a delay of approx of 2 seconds around when YOUR spoilers get deployed and that's only seen after your NOSE GEAR touches the ground.

 

 

With the spoilers off, you can hold the nose up like the Iranians did.

 

 

I suppose its only minute differences, or there are some aerodynamic plus weight difference between F-14A and the B version. Yes, I do realize the A uses a different engine. Perhaps, some tweaking could be done...

 

 

I appreciate your test attempt and posting of that video.:D

[Airhunter]

Passive aggressive...?

 

 

I do apologize if I had sounded aggressive.

 

 

 

I just wanted to see if it was me that's not getting right and the problem was on my end.

 

 

 

The only difference I see here compared to the video I posted of the Iranians doing it is that they have the spoilers deployed when the rear mains touch itself and they have the nose up (especially the first aircraft). But in your landing case, I see a delay of approx of 2 seconds around when YOUR spoilers get deployed and that's only seen after your NOSE GEAR touches the ground.

 

 

With the spoilers off, you can hold the nose up like the Iranians did.

 

 

I suppose its only minute differences, or there are some aerodynamic plus weight difference between F-14A and the B version. Yes, I do realize the A uses a different engine. Perhaps, some tweaking could be done...

 

 

I appreciate your test attempt and posting of that video.:D

 

Yeah, it's because I didnt pull the power to idle after touchdown. I did have some landings where I did and the spoilers came up straight away but the tracks for those corrupted hence why there's no video. It is doable if you are in the right mindset for it and REALLY watch your pitch, but there is really no added benefit of this prodecure in DCS. Again, the main "issue" is the rather high wheel friction.

 

Not really sure but the A should have less idle thrust and maybe even a slightly different CG, other than that landings should be pretty identical.

[jojyrocks]

On a different note - THIS - is how you are supposed to land a Tomcat ashore.

 

 

 

Yes, that is the RECOMMENDED Method.

 

 

 

(SOME) of those landings look rough, like slamdunk. I get the landing gear is tough for carrier ops, but...I mean, the runway is long and its not the carrier, so could have given those landing gear some love. That kinda landing is easy...:smilewink:

 

 

 

There are also NATOPS recommending NOT to aerobrake the Legacy Hornet as in, NOT recommended. But we see, LAND based air forces for those nations that use them for their Air force and not the Navy. We see them aerobraking, I do believe I've posted a vid here in this thread showing Finnish pilots Legacy Hornets doing just that.

 

 

 

In DCS its impossible to aerobrake with Full flaps on the legacy hornet.

 

 

 

So if the Runway is long, I do believe its good to go easy on the landing gear, and that is why Iranians "grease" land them, and also the Fins doing those on their Hornets.

Edited August 4, 2020 by jojyrocks

[shagrat]

So you have managed it with the FULL FLAPS down, SPOILERS and SPEED BRAKES deployed, clean load, fuel weight around 20-40 percent, yes?

 

 

Wish I could see the clip...

Ok. I'll be more direct: You point out that you have seen a YouTube clip showing an Iranian F-14 A(!) doing some 5 sec aerobrake. Then you tell everyone "there must be something wrong" because YOU can't do it in the simulated F-14B(!) which is a different airplane! Heavier, different engine, other changes... so what is the point here? That the F-14B handles different than the F-14A? :dunno:

[Nealius]

Tire friction in DCS is simply too high. The Viper should be able to taxi at idle, yet can't. The amount of RPM needed to initiate taxi in unladen aircraft in general feels rather high. Certain modules like the F-5 and MiG-21, as already mentioned, are extremely difficult to aerobrake and the nose wants to slam down on the runway even with the smoothest, greasiest landing possible. Other modules like the Mirage and Viper seem to have a very narrow window of aerobraking while real-world videos suggest aerobraking is still possible at much lower speeds than what we can achieve in DCS.

 

And that was answered two full pages ago.....so.....why are we still discussing this?

[jojyrocks]

Tire friction in DCS is simply too high. The Viper should be able to taxi at idle, yet can't. The amount of RPM needed to initiate taxi in unladen aircraft in general feels rather high. Certain modules like the F-5 and MiG-21, as already mentioned, are extremely difficult to aerobrake and the nose wants to slam down on the runway even with the smoothest, greasiest landing possible. Other modules like the Mirage and Viper seem to have a very narrow window of aerobraking while real-world videos suggest aerobraking is still possible at much lower speeds than what we can achieve in DCS.

 

And that was answered two full pages ago.....so.....why are we still discussing this?

 

 

 

 

Why are we discussing this...? Oh,that...

 

 

Maybe the flight modeling or the Landing characteristics/behaviour could be adjusted in accordance with the DCS modeled high friction surfaces. Will the surfaces be adjusted in future? coz I don't see they'll be doing that.

 

 

Of all the planes that is difficult to aerobrake for ME is the F-18 Hornet legacy with FULL FLAPS, For the Mig 21 (Its doable, but out of 10, I'd only get 2 landing to aerobrake. And before you all say F-18 is not supposed to aerobrake, I do see Finnish pilots doing it, I did post a vid in this thread. They do it with load too.

 

 

 

The F-14 with full flaps, spoiler and SB deployed...Its pretty hard.

 

 

 

You can hold the aerobraking WITHOUT the spoiler for sometime (Does the spoiler activate only with engine idled?)

 

 

 

 

 

 

The only exception is the FC3 Mig 29. You cant even feel much, if the tires made contact with the surface when landing, feels floaty, aerobraking there seems to have no effect on speed bleed. Its mandatory to deploy Brake chute.

Edited August 5, 2020 by jojyrocks

[Nealius]

Why are we discussing this...? Oh,that...

 

 

Maybe the flight modeling or the Landing characteristics/behaviour could be adjusted in accordance with the DCS modeled high friction surfaces. Will the surfaces be adjusted in future? coz I don't see they'll be doing that.

 

HB themselves have said that on any adjustments on their end result in either way too much friction or way too little. It's an ED issue, so take it to the General discussion/Bugs forum. It's not an issue unique to the Tomcat.

[Airhunter]

HB themselves have said that on any adjustments on their end result in either way too much friction or way too little. It's an ED issue, so take it to the General discussion/Bugs forum. It's not an issue unique to the Tomcat.

 

Tire friction in DCS is simply too high. The Viper should be able to taxi at idle, yet can't. The amount of RPM needed to initiate taxi in unladen aircraft in general feels rather high. Certain modules like the F-5 and MiG-21, as already mentioned, are extremely difficult to aerobrake and the nose wants to slam down on the runway even with the smoothest, greasiest landing possible. Other modules like the Mirage and Viper seem to have a very narrow window of aerobraking while real-world videos suggest aerobraking is still possible at much lower speeds than what we can achieve in DCS.

 

And that was answered two full pages ago.....so.....why are we still discussing this?

 

I disagree, the friction seems to be just fine on the 29, Su-27 and Viper or Hornet. You can taxi the Viper almost in idle with a fairly heavy a2a loadout and surely when empty. Same can be said for the 29. So there has to be something or some tricks ED are using on their modules. I would even say the friction on the Viper and Hornet is a bit too low for my liking.

[jojyrocks]

HB themselves have said that on any adjustments on their end result in either way too much friction or way too little. It's an ED issue, so take it to the General discussion/Bugs forum. It's not an issue unique to the Tomcat.

 

 

 

 

So as you say...the surface friction is an ED issue. But they have hinted its not going to be corrected coz its too much work and not on their priority plans.

 

 

 

And you did say, if any ADJUSTMENTS are to be made by Heatblur, the end result will be too much or too little friction, and that shows the adjustments CAN be made in accordance with the Surface friction issue that remains doubtful on whether it will be ever corrected or not. Correct me if I am wrong on this...

 

 

Also, there are some modules that do have different levels of adjustments. The F-18 as told by ED still has further improvements on FM to be made or fine tune it. Yes, this goes for the Mig 21 from other 3rd party developers that has suspensions issues and front tire wobble up and down and mid speeds at taxi ways ( wobble sideways) and "gummy" rear tires.

 

 

 

The FC3 Mig 29 shows VERY little friction effect. So much that even if your main gears make contact with the pavement, you wont "feel" it or the indication is not that noticeable like other modules.

Edited August 5, 2020 by jojyrocks

[fat creason]

This thread seems to have served its useful life and is becoming pointless circular discussion. We may take a look at some of the tire and landing gear stuff but it is a low priority. The FM in this part of the envelope is not going to change.

[jojyrocks]

This thread seems to have served its useful life and is becoming pointless circular discussion. We may take a look at some of the tire and landing gear stuff but it is a low priority. The FM in this part of the envelope is not going to change.

 

 

 

 

Alright.

 

 

Lock the thread...

[Nealius]

 

 

 

And you did say, if any ADJUSTMENTS are to be made by Heatblur, the end result will be too much or too little friction, and that shows the adjustments CAN be made in accordance with the Surface friction issue that remains doubtful on whether it will be ever corrected or not. Correct me if I am wrong on this...

.

 

Just because you can make corrections does not mean the code allows you to make those corrections work the way they should. This is not a simple black-and-white issue.

[Airhunter]

Actually stumbled upon this video which shows the exact same thing done by the NAVY. Timestamp is around 1:47

 

[jojyrocks]

Actually stumbled upon this video which shows the exact same thing done by the NAVY. Timestamp is around 1:47

 

 

 

 

 

Nice find!:D Looks like he wasn't following the SOP procedure...or since its a long runway, decided to go easy on the gears. That was a smooth landing from the pilot!

 

 

 

The spoilers open still with the nose pointed high up. SB deployed as well. Flaps fully down...ext tanks too

 

 

 

I wonder which version of F-14 was that...?

[DD_Fenrir]

I wonder which version of F-14 was that...?

 

VF-11 Red Rippers c. 2001? That'd be an F-14B.

[punk]

Nice find!:D Looks like he wasn't following the SOP procedure...

Or, you are just transferring your wishes upon someone flying at an air show who is putting on a show. It was not SOP to make the Cat bow to a crowd at the end, but it was done at every airshow I saw an F-14 at. Big difference between fleet day-to-day flying and an airshow demonstration flight. Please dude, drop it. You have received your answer and been shown you can do it if you learn to fly. Stop answering every post, I beg you. End of rant//

[DoorMouse]

You can absolutely do this in the game. I've done it loads of times, its just not as effective as say a F15 at it.