Carrier landings

[+littlesmoke 64]

now we need a herc with a tail-hook!

[+comrpnt 16]

now we need a herc with a tail-hook!

You may want to try adding the following to the C-130 _data.ini file...it worked for the A-3B I used in VMFA-531 Mission Pack 1 :-)

 

// In the Fuselage section add a new SystemName reference...where XXX is the next number is sequence...

 

[Fuselage]...

SystemName[XXX]=Tailhook

 

// And also add the following Tailhook section, usually near the end of the _DATA.INI file.

 

[Tailhook]

SystemType=ARRESTER_HOOK

MaxDeflection=60.0

Retractable=TRUE

DeployTime=2.0

ModelNodeName=tailhook

HookArmLength=2.16

AttachmentPosition=0.0,-5.59,-0.79

 

Regards, comrpnt.

[FastCargo 412]

a few other "interesting" carrier ops -

 

 

one of these is actually real......

 

Yep, didn't even need a tailhook...

 

FastCargo

[Wrench 9,650]

That would be the U-2.

 

I'm surprised the X-Wing's off the deck....I guess that pilot forgot about his repulsor lifts; coulda just hovered over the deck and landed like a helo!!!

 

Wrench

kevin stein

[+Brainless 1]

a few other "interesting" carrier ops -

 

 

one of these is actually real......

 

The bottom pic on the right looks like one of my early carrier landings. Bit like Wrench's early ones.

[+Typhoid 231]

You may want to try adding the following to the C-130 _data.ini file...it worked for the A-3B I used in VMFA-531 Mission Pack 1 :-)

 

// In the Fuselage section add a new SystemName reference...where XXX is the next number is sequence...

 

[Fuselage]...

SystemName[XXX]=Tailhook

 

// And also add the following Tailhook section, usually near the end of the _DATA.INI file.

 

[Tailhook]

SystemType=ARRESTER_HOOK

MaxDeflection=60.0

Retractable=TRUE

DeployTime=2.0

ModelNodeName=tailhook

HookArmLength=2.16

AttachmentPosition=0.0,-5.59,-0.79

 

Regards, comrpnt.

 

no tailhook for the C-130. You have to land it like a MAN. Reverse props while still airborne!!

 

:yes:

[MigBuster 2,876]

no tailhook for the C-130. You have to land it like a MAN. Reverse props while still airborne!!

 

:yes:

 

Someones posted a vid doing that http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showt...=26416&st=0

 

Theres also one of Nicky landing like a Girl

[+Brainless 1]

 

I expect you thought that when I got to this point I was a bit worried. Well I was a bit 'cos I seemed to be a bit high so had to go round.

[Czech6 15]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4015390308129405896

[csevers 0]

I always land manually, but I find I need to turn the cockpit off in order to actually see the deck when I am at the correct attitude and speed. I keep it on until I roll out on final and then switch it off when I lose sight.

[+Julhelm 266]

Trapping the Victor:

 

[Stick 773]

Any way of having airplanes parked on the deck?That ought to make the landings a little more hairy! I use Digital Overload for Red swarm in WOE So Im yes I might just be advertising my ignorance!

[+Viggen 588]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

 

[+kreelin 2]

Now better.... A C130A landing on "tiny" French carrier Clemenceau. This is completely irrelevant but so fun to try..

 

http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=3-mMzEM45i4

[Gr.Viper 131]

Anyone tried landing Stafighter on deck?

[+Jug 99]

Love deck landing. Especially the Passionate Pachyderm, the RA5C. I never let the computer land it, no matter what condition I'm coming back in from "up north." Don't fly the A-6 much, usually the Phantom or Crusader, my two favorites, or the A-4 Scooter. Waiting for the new release of the Mirage Factory's new A-7, which looks to be just as good as their Gunfighter. Real men don't use asphalt.

 

Heck

 

 

Then again, real men don't need anyone to tell them how to be real men! You are or your are not.

[+Jug 99]

What about this one.... Fully manual carrier landing

 

 

http://www.dailymotion.com/_kreelin_/video/7880825

 

Wow! That is impressive.

[+Brainless 1]

What no comments/jokes/exclamations on my last post. I'm flying a Lancacster here guys.

[+Jug 99]

a few other "interesting" carrier ops -

 

 

one of these is actually real......

 

The only real picture here is the U-2, which was fully carrier qualified. Had a tailhook that could be installed, the flaps could be adjusted to go 40 degrees down (normal max is 30 degrees), and the wingtips folded to get down the ship's elevator. It was so easy with an approach speed of 70 mph that the carrier normally would have to slow down. With a good sea breeze, you could literally hover over the deck and fly to the space they wanted you to park. After landing the carrier had to slow to just headway until the U-2 was stored as it has a tendency to fly off of the deck unless clamped down securely. NAS Lemoore had a carrier deck painted on its landing strip and we used to fly down to practice there from Beale AFB, CA. No offense to the tailhook types, but there really wasn't much to it. Have to admit that I never tried it in a Rhino at night and in a bad sea state (except in this sim). My hat is off to those who have done so.

[+Viggen 588]

Jug, where you qualified for landing the U-2 on carriers?

[+Typhoid 231]

The only real picture here is the U-2, which was fully carrier qualified. Had a tailhook that could be installed, the flaps could be adjusted to go 40 degrees down (normal max is 30 degrees), and the wingtips folded to get down the ship's elevator. It was so easy with an approach speed of 70 mph that the carrier normally would have to slow down. With a good sea breeze, you could literally hover over the deck and fly to the space they wanted you to park. After landing the carrier had to slow to just headway until the U-2 was stored as it has a tendency to fly off of the deck unless clamped down securely. NAS Lemoore had a carrier deck painted on its landing strip and we used to fly down to practice there from Beale AFB, CA. No offense to the tailhook types, but there really wasn't much to it. Have to admit that I never tried it in a Rhino at night and in a bad sea state (except in this sim). My hat is off to those who have done so.

 

that doesn't quite sound exactly right in several points. Where did you get that info?

 

some of it is correct and there were a few ops, but the handling that you mention is a bit far fetched.

 

http://www.afa.org/magazine/feb2001/0201spyplane.asp

Edited March 18, 2008 by Typhoid

[csevers 0]

that doesn't quite sound exactly right in several points. Where did you get that info?

 

some of it is correct and there were a few ops, but the handling that you mention is a bit far fetched.

 

http://www.afa.org/magazine/feb2001/0201spyplane.asp

 

You might want to read this interview with Jug and then think again about whether or not his comments are accurate.

[+Spectre_USA 7]

Also, it is fairly evident from what he typed as to where he got the info, himself, and other U2 pilots that lived it with him...

[+Typhoid 231]

Also, it is fairly evident from what he typed as to where he got the info, himself, and other U2 pilots that lived it with him...

 

that is what it sounds like, but his description of ship handling and deck spotting is waaaaaaay off.

 

 

so I am thinking that perhaps he is quoting someone else? who was engaged in a bit of a sea-story on a few minor points?

Edited March 19, 2008 by Typhoid

[JediMaster 451]

I'm guessing you're taking his "fly to the point you want to park" literally. I doubt he was being precise. It's probably more a comment on the slow approach speed compared to land ops, nothing more.

As for the slowing down of the carrier, I don't see anything unusual about that. U-2 ops were not common, but the exception, and I'm sure special adjustments were made for them.