Carrier Landings / Takeoffs

[Mattace64]

Thanks to sound advise of others on here, I am using AI Carriers 2, for carrier landings and takeoffs...

Although, the only plane I have really been able to land with is the T-45.  When I attempt to land with the F-18, it seems that I might be landing too fast, because there is intense "recoil" when the cable catches, and my nose ends up hitting the deck. My speed is only about 120 knots though...  I'm also thinking that the cable force on the .cfg is set to high, does anyone know about this?

Also, no luck with arming or triggering the catapult... little help?  I am using the shift+I and shift+space buttons

[Sgt-Tai]

How fast are you hitting the deck with the F-18? and is the carrier moving? and where are you hitting the deck? As in which cable. I normally go aat a non moving carrier at around 100 knts, moving 120 knts and 2nd cable and I always get a perfect landing.

[Papafox]

The Acceleration F-18 is not particularly realistic in that any effort to flare and remove shock from the nosewheel results in a crash. I finally got good landings after flying the plane onto the deck and touching down in an approach attitude.

I agree that the T-45C is a much easier jet to land in MSFS X. Too bad the F-18 is modeled for carrier landings as it is. It's such a gorgeous jet otherwise.

[specter177]

The Acceleration F-18 is not particularly realistic in that any effort to flare and remove shock from the nosewheel results in a crash. I finally got good landings after flying the plane onto the deck and touching down in an approach attitude.

That's how it's supposed to be. It's a "controlled crash," not a landing in the same sense as a landing on land.

[Brando14100]

Don't forget to give full throttle when you hit the deck.

8-)

[Perriwen]

The Iris F-14 is also pretty good with the carrier landings.

Don't forget to give full throttle when you hit the deck.

Actually, Capt. Dale Snodgrass himself advised against doing that in FSX when he wrote the Top Gun missions, since the FSX dynamics will give the plane too much power.

[mfitch]

For the catapult launch you need cntrl-u first. This extends the launch bar before engaging with cntrl-i.

[Mattace64]

Ok, I did get a good landing at about 100 knots, but it is tough to maintain stable flight at that speed.  Landing with a moving carrier is a bit easier, because you can go 120 or so...

And I did get the catapult working...

[ESzczesniak]

Hmm...some interesting comments here.

First of all, the Hornet should behave poorly with any attempt to flare.  You absolutely do not flare in a carrier landing and indeed fly her into the deck in an approach attitude.

Are you guys really fly approaches at 100 kts?  I find to maintain correct AOA and stay on glideslope, the appropriate speed is 130-150 kts depending on your weight.  This is in-line with the real world Hornet.

Perhaps if you're flying at 100 kts, you AOA is too high at touchdown and that brings to nose down very hard (since it's that much higher).

I certainly do agree though, the are some squirly characteristics.  First, the Hornet is structurally rated to touchdowns up to 1500 fpm, but you crash at anything over 1000 fpm.  Carrier landings typically happen in the 800 fpm range, so if you're just a bit firm you crash in the simulator, but not in real life.  

The landing gear are also very "springy" and if you hit just with a little bit of bank or a touch of center line, this can roll you in to the deck and cause you to crash.

Finally, it seems as if the Hornet behaves as if she's a quarter of her weight.  With 25 kts of wind over the deck, if you move the controls for a check while on the cat, the wings will start to bank.  Over the ramp she is very sensitive to roll and ground effect modeling throws off AOA a fair amount.  The Hornet is an agile fighter, but banking with 25 kts of wind over the wings is not realistic.

With some practice though, the Hornet calms down nicely and is I think the best default aircraft ever modeled in the simulator.  I do still want my VRS Rhino though!