F-18 can't cacht the cats
-
Hello,
I downloaded 4.33 U1 and is almost impossible to engage any F-18 in either catapults in any carrier. One in ten attempts.
I have read several posts and meet all of the procedures (flaps half, flaps full, nws off, nws on, slow approach to the cat), but I can’t make the aircraft engages the catapult.
Sometimes (few) they engage… sometimes (many) not.
I don’t know what to do. I don’t know if it’s a bug, or my computer, or graphics, but I’m very tired of this problem. Also happen with version 4.33.regards
-
We’ve seen it happen, but not with that kind of frequency …. unless the TE, campaign or connection is FUBAR.
Focus on the Vinson and the Enterprise. Those have the upgraded models.
Have you asked the tower to taxi? (T5) It not, try that.
If so, have you gotten clearance to take off? If not, wait for that, then try.
-
…did you put the launch bar down?
Your TO check should include: flaps half, launch bar down, NWS off, wings spread (and locked).
-
…did you put the launch bar down?
Your TO check should include: flaps half, launch bar down, NWS off, wings spread (and locked).
Most of which …. perhaps all of which … is not required for the cat to catch you ‘in tension’ in BMS.
-
Most of which …. perhaps all of which … is not required for the cat to catch you ‘in tension’ in BMS.
…bummer. One more reason for me to stick to the Viper.
-
Most of which …. perhaps all of which … is not required for the cat to catch you ‘in tension’ in BMS.
In actual fact the only thing in RL that ensures the cat catches the jet is the launch bar (not modeled in the public version). All the others (Wings, NWS, flaps) are Navy procedures.
-
In actual fact the only thing in RL that ensures the cat catches the jet is the launch bar (not modeled in the public version). All the others (Wings, NWS, flaps) are Navy procedures.
Understood. My point was that Stevie, as he tends to do, provided advice on RL procedure, but the OP asked about a ‘technical problem/glitch’ in BMS and that the RL requirements/expectations have nothing to do with the BMS ‘glitch’ and hence provide nothing useful to the solving the OP’s problem.
If/when additional modeling occurs to make BMS carrier ops more like RL, we can consider additional possible causes to user ‘glitches’ at that time.
-
I have not experienced this problem. I can’t remember if I request taxi or not, but I taxi really slow to the cat. I can say one time I had time lapse on, and taxi “super fast” to the cat and the cat caught me.
-
…bummer. One more reason for me to stick to the Viper.
Hmm… from what you are saying it looks like you haven’t even tried F/A-18C.
-
With some degree of success I’ve been able to hit the key for “Sim-Catapult Release” and it would “reset” the cat, Shift+k by default I believe. Mind you I haven’t been able to duly repeat this but it’s worth a try. It also serves to disengage you from the CAT if need be.
-
Hmm… from what you are saying it looks like you haven’t even tried F/A-18C.
You are 100% correct…and I don’t intend to until/unless it becomes as good/hi-fidelity as the BMS Viper. For reasons that fall outside of BMS.
-
Unless NASA have published wind tunnel data for it a la TP 1538, I wouldnt hold my breath.
In fact even then I think I wouldnt hold my breath, but I might at least acknowledge it as a future possibility. Like how one day people might be able to walk on mars without pressure suits. No guarantee Ill live to see it, but it might happen.
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
-
Actually, it would take more than that. A lot more. For any modern fly by wire jet…control theory and application have advanced considerably since the design of the F-16, and with modern computer modelling wind tunnels don’t really have much to do with how the surfaces are moved to put he jet where it needs to be in the sky. And even that depends on the control approach taken by the designer - there are many. Very many. Which allow the most modern jets to do some really crazy things…but as far as a C flight model goes, the single best one out there in a desktop sim is still the old Hornet 3.0 one.
I’d settle for decent hifi avionics and systems models - like we have with the BMS Viper…but I’m not holding out much hope for that either. The BMS Viper is simply THE best there is that is available for us.
-
A computer modelled wind tunnel is still a wind tunnel. Still expensive to build too, by the amount of cycles you need.
If the BMS team think it better to improve the viper avionics instead of adding hornet stuff, I for one would be happy with that. Theres still lots of room for improvement as a cockpit simulator.
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
-
Actually, it would take more than that. A lot more. For any modern fly by wire jet…control theory and application have advanced considerably since the design of the F-16, and with modern computer modelling wind tunnels don’t really have much to do with how the surfaces are moved to put he jet where it needs to be in the sky. And even that depends on the control approach taken by the designer - there are many. Very many. Which allow the most modern jets to do some really crazy things…but as far as a C flight model goes, the single best one out there in a desktop sim is still the old Hornet 3.0 one.
I’d settle for decent hifi avionics and systems models - like we have with the BMS Viper…but I’m not holding out much hope for that either. The BMS Viper is simply THE best there is that is available for us.
the f18 flcs while a little more complex than the f16 is using same principles and is not very different.
as far as fm is concerned bms 4.33 U1 is lihgtyears more advanced than hornet 3.0.
next iteration will be probably the most accurate f18 flcs ever created for a public sim.
as far as avionics and systems are concerned… this is a long road indeed
-
the f18 flcs while a little more complex than the f16 is using same principles and is not very different.
as far as fm is concerned bms 4.33 U1 is lihgtyears more advanced than hornet 3.0.
next iteration will be probably the most accurate f18 flcs ever created for a public sim.
as far as avionics and systems are concerned… this is a long road indeed
You make the assumption that the F/A-18 FLCS uses the same principles/approach as the F-16…it does not, and that’s one of the problems/challenges in developing a decent flight model for it.
-
This post is deleted! -
You make the assumption that the F/A-18 FLCS uses the same principles/approach as the F-16…it does not, and that’s one of the problems/challenges in developing a decent flight model for it.
okay are you aware that i have the real flcs f18 logical diagramm under the eye when i am writing this post ? i am not making assumptions, i just read it.
you misunderstand me.
F16 is a Glimiter with a G/AOA limitzr in cruise gain and a pitch rate blended aoa in LG gain.
indee F18 is 100% different since there is no concept of cruise / LG gain but everything based on TEF switch.
thz flcs is a complex Glimiter coupled with a AOA limiter at the higher aoa range. In Tef half or full this is a pure AOA command flcs with aoa trim. (i explain it in a simple way i know but average reader should be able to follow)
it is also quite different behavior for roll control and yaw control
BUT, what i am saying is that the basic bricks of the flcs are similar, the way those bricks are imbricated make the flcs a complete different beast.
for instance both flcs have aoa and accel feedback branches like any flcs in the world.
so what i was saying is that i have been able to rewrite the flcs to match the f18.
the difference is that in BMS the f16 flcs is 100% the real one, the f18 is a “simplified” model since i considered the very very fzw people would see the différence between a simplified (but still complex believe me lol) and the real.
now in 4.33 the flcs of the f18 is quite accurate in TEF auto… far more accurate than any other f18 sim out there.the TEF half /full flcs is not implemented in 4.33 (this is still the f16 pitch rate blended aoa which is plain wrong), but trust me it will come ;), with autothotle, aoa trim, Take off trim, toe in toe out, etc etc etc…
please trust BMS because i find your lack of faith disturbing
-
You make the assumption that the F/A-18 FLCS uses the same principles/approach as the F-16…it does not, and that’s one of the problems/challenges in developing a decent flight model for it.
Please stop disturbing these guys who give the best of themselves to provide us this beautiful sim.
We are nobody to judge them in that way. Let’s them to work, if you are not happy with such FM on the hornet try to find something better, what I am sure it is impossible.
My confidence in guys like Mav-jp is abosulte, it is demonstrated during long time ago, if Mav-jp says it flies like that, then it is how it flies…that’s all.
Thanks Mav-jp keep pushing!!! Escuadron111 is supporting you
-
All bow to the flight model guru. :bowd: