PDA

View Full Version : 3 500lbs plus 100% fuel



DRB_Hookech0
12-30-2004, 11:47 PM
ok....was experimenting with taking off a MOVING carrier with bombs and full tanks. I did make it work. Now...I do have the carrier hualing booty (56 kph). I know it will work at this speed so I can then back it off as needed.

Ok, specifics:
Map: Coral Sea
F4u-1D
3 500lb bombs
100% fuel
Rads closed
120% mix
16 clicks right rudder
10 clicks nose low

At Chocks away:
80% throttle
as soon as you start moving, get the tail up
go wep (110% throttle)
drop full flaps

As soon as you get aleiron control, roll right wing level (or close) and let it angle for the right corner of the deck, you will be on 1 wheel. Pick up the gear as soon as you fall off the cliff, and hold slight nose up....just feel it. She will fly.....about 6 feet off the water, then she will climb.

I have a track if anyone wants it.

DRB_Hookech0
12-30-2004, 11:47 PM
ok....was experimenting with taking off a MOVING carrier with bombs and full tanks. I did make it work. Now...I do have the carrier hualing booty (56 kph). I know it will work at this speed so I can then back it off as needed.

Ok, specifics:
Map: Coral Sea
F4u-1D
3 500lb bombs
100% fuel
Rads closed
120% mix
16 clicks right rudder
10 clicks nose low

At Chocks away:
80% throttle
as soon as you start moving, get the tail up
go wep (110% throttle)
drop full flaps

As soon as you get aleiron control, roll right wing level (or close) and let it angle for the right corner of the deck, you will be on 1 wheel. Pick up the gear as soon as you fall off the cliff, and hold slight nose up....just feel it. She will fly.....about 6 feet off the water, then she will climb.

I have a track if anyone wants it.

Loki-PF
12-30-2004, 11:51 PM
HE77 YEa I wanna see that!

please PM me and I'll give ya my addy

DRB_Hookech0
12-30-2004, 11:54 PM
PM sent

mortoma
12-31-2004, 08:43 AM
I've heard of doing silly stuff to get airborne from carriers but that takes the cake. And another thing, you didn't mention which carrier. Makes a huge difference. I could get off a longer American carrier with a loadout like you described without doing anything special at all.

DRB_Hookech0
12-31-2004, 09:27 AM
Gee Mort, Thats the same proceedure that a carrier Navy pilot used to get his "Hawg" in the air.....the same proceedure he used on the SB2U-1, the Navys 1st mono-plane dive bomber, off the Lex in 1939.

The take off is from the spawn in spot (1st row) on the Essex. If your such a Sh** Hot pilot....then provide a track so we can all go "OOOOh and AHHHH" at your briliance. Just because you suck....doesnt mean you have to drag the rest of us down to your level

reisen52
12-31-2004, 01:14 PM
>>>>Gee Mort, Thats the same proceedure that a carrier Navy pilot used to get his "Hawg" in the air.....the same proceedure he used on the SB2U-1, the Navys 1st mono-plane dive bomber, off the Lex in 1939.<<<<

Can you document this?

Zeke

DRB_Hookech0
12-31-2004, 01:22 PM
Would you like the page number?

Jolly Rogers by Tom Blackburn, Co of VF-17

Pages 82, 83, and 84

No soup for you! Next!

ICDP
12-31-2004, 01:51 PM
Great stuff Hookech0, every day now posts like yours pop saying "I am able to take-off using a loaded Corsair, all it took was some practice". I am not saying harder = more realisitc but it cartainly is an improvement in 3.03 according to official USN data. In 3.02b I was able to take off from a moving Illustrious at 56kph with 3x1000lb bombs, 100% fuel and full ammo. That is a gross weight of 15039 lbs, with a take-off distance of 495 feet. 3,03b is better in this regards but I still feel the ground acceleration should be very slighty increased.

reisen52
12-31-2004, 01:56 PM
Do you know if he was sober at the time? It sounds a lot like Pappy's claim he was a Flying Tiger Ace http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

Seems like the Navy wasted a whole bunch of ink, gas & film telling its pilots to go with 6 degrees right trim, 6 degrees down right aileron, 6 degrees nose up elevator, 30 degrees of flap, cowl flaps open, inter-cooler closed, oil cooler open as needed, full power & hold down tail to prevent a prop strike for a carrier takeoff.

Dropping the flaps on the roll with that big prop & taking off on one wheel, you have to be kidding me, but hey its not a job its an adventure http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

It would be real interesting to plot the flaps closed to open extension time vs. the time down the flight deck don't you think?

To document this you should be providing USN data or USN takeoff films not a claim out of some guys book.

Zeke

DRB_Hookech0
12-31-2004, 03:07 PM
JHC...what the F do you want? I read it...said WTH and gave it a try....gee it worked. I love a**hats like you that can do nothing but tear down what other people do becaue it does not fit in your little perfect world.

Nice how you assume he was drunk at the time. I guess the writings of a 30+ plus naval aviator dont count for anything. Did ford or GM personally instruct you on how to operate your car (assuming your old enough to drive...which I'm doubting right now)? Have you come up with ANYTHING to say that this approch is not correct or that it was not used? I'm not giving out specfic engine specs or airspeeds at liftoff...just the way I read how HE did it. Lo and behold it worked.

You got other data...great post it up. If it contrdicts what I posted then I'll eat crow but until then STFU unless you are going to help out. JHC people like you pi** me off

Fliger747
12-31-2004, 03:08 PM
The general philosophy was to "Keep it simple stupid". First of all, Cowl flaps HAVE to be open (2/3 was used) on takoff in the F4U to keep from quickly cooking the engine. Second of all one would never depend on application of flaps in the takeoff run, a malfunction or slow pump would put you in the drink for sure. The tail was kept on deck till the rudder became effective to prevent a SWING. ADI or "water injection" actually leaned the fuel mixture closer to the stoichemetric ratio for better POWER.

Flying (real) Supercubs and 185's out of short Alaskan "situations" I have used the 'pop the flaps' technique on ski's and floats, but those are instant acting mechanical contrivances, and unique situations. Not applicable to carrier operations.

reisen52
12-31-2004, 03:49 PM
Hi 747,

Agree with your comments.

DRB_Hookech0

>>>You got other data...great post it up.<<<

I did; the settings & numbers posted are right out of the F4U Pilots Manual.


Additionally takeoff runs listed below show that it would be very difficult to start any further forward then the island witout JATO.

http://www.avhistory.org/bear257Images/f4lo.jpg

Thing is flying a plane is a shade different then driving a car so the guys who wish to live past their first attempted takeoff do read the pilots notes.

You might not be happy with that but your gaming the game to make up for a bad flight model does not make you the great pilot you seem to wish you were. It just outlines the deficiencies in the flight model.

Likewise calling people names does not do anything for your credibility; quite the contrary. I am sure Irish is really happy to have you representing his squadron. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Would be real interesting seeing the face of a brand new ensign with minimum hours arriving at VF-17 & being told by Blackburn that he will be taking off on one wheel raising the tail & dropping the non-instant acting flaps during his launch so that he could successfully take off, give me a break http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Zeke

DRB_Hookech0
12-31-2004, 04:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ICDP:
Great stuff Hookech0, every day now posts like yours pop saying "I am able to take-off using a loaded Corsair, all it took was some practice". I am not saying harder = more realisitc but it cartainly is an improvement in 3.03 according to official USN data. In 3.02b I was able to take off from a moving Illustrious at 56kph with 3x1000lb bombs, 100% fuel and full ammo. That is a gross weight of 15039 lbs, with a take-off distance of 495 feet. 3,03b is better in this regards but I still feel the ground acceleration should be very slighty increased. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes...I'm reading the same data you are I think. I dont fly as a Brit much so I have no clue about their "bird farms" other thah they were smaller. At the end of January I'm planing a trip out east...might drop by the Naval Archives and see what I can dig up

DRB_Hookech0
12-31-2004, 04:18 PM
Zeke, I have that same chart, just in a different configuration. How does that dispute anything?

Flinger, I know you fly the Big Boeing (sorry cant call it big bird...thats what they call #8000 and #9000) But when I described the problem to my Dad, who is a several 1000 hour B52H IP, his first reponse was get the tail up as soon as you can, also what flaps was I starting with...he suggested none to start. So, I believe I'm (thru the words of Blackburn) on to something.

The right wing thing was to 1st negate the heavy left wing condition at low speed/high AOA and to begin the right hand clearing turn off the pointy end of the boat. He stated that this is how he did and some but not all his "tyros" copied him.

To be honest...I am not even sure the 1a and 1d model Hawgs were even hualing bombs off carriers. Can anyone confirm this? I know the Marines until late were all land based and the early navy "hawg" drivers were also land based in te 1a's. Who got the initial 1d's? Also when did the the -4's come out and were they the ones hualing bombs off the decks?

sinlanchon
12-31-2004, 04:33 PM
You can take-off with 1 2000lbs and 2 1000lbs bombs and 100% fuel from the Lexington at full speed (30mph or 56kph):

specifications
Map: Coral Sea
F4U-1d
1 2000lbs bomb and 2 1000lbs bombs
100% fuel
Rads close
120% mix
Flaps @ combat setting
110 % throttle
chocks away
Lift tail asap
gear up asap

But the trick is you can do this only in
thunder weather because of the wind component
you gain(30mph carrier speed plus 20mph of wind)
50mph of advantage.

sinlanchon

DRB_Hookech0
12-31-2004, 04:40 PM
And I thought my takeoff was hairy....Yikes!

reisen52
12-31-2004, 05:20 PM
There is no place in the notes that says drop the flaps on the takeoff run, raise the tail & takeoff on one wheel.

I really don't think they forgot to mention it especially when they outline emergency power requirements for the shortest possiable takeoff.

The other info I posted about carrier takeoff is in the pilots notes which I have no intention of scanning on New Years Eve, but I will check in later to see if you posted any official document on SOP for one wheel takeoffs.

The initial F4U-1's did not have bomb racks but a number were fitted in the field as a local modification (VMF-222 & VT-17)in early 1944.

Additionally the first 1549 F4U-1's built did not have engines with water injection systems which might have been a problem for heavy takeoffs

The first F4U-1 running change was at plane number 759 which replaced the birdcage with the bubble canopy & this is generally consider to be the first "A" model.

The first version to have factory fitted bomb racks & also had the -8W water injection engine was the F4U-1D.

When they got the longer oleos for the main gear the US Navy finally accepted the F4U for shipboard operations in April 1944.

Its something to look into but the 1D was available about the same time the Navy put the Corsair onto its carriers & it has the longer oleos.

Zeke

DRB_Hookech0
12-31-2004, 06:08 PM
In the Book, when CV-17 and AG-17 got back from their shake down cruse, VF-17 received a number of -1a's. And again from the book VF-17 started getting the field upgrade kits for water injection when they returned from their R&R between their 2 combat tours.

Zeke, just because it is not in some BuAirs document doesnt mean it didnt happen. We have a different opinion of what to believe took place. Test data and company data is one thing (important none the less) and personal accounts are another. Both are realitive, and as such both have merit.

I just makes me go balistic when people discount what is written in a book as false or imagined. In my tests I was at 2700 rpm and 54 inches (or there about as the sim is not exact with the gages) I did go WEP/110% in the last 1/3 of the roll....maybe I should have left it at the above setting....I'll have to try it. Personally I think the current 3.03 FM is pretty close per the data I have and have read here and there.

I guess we have different views between clinical testing and real world accounts. Being as both of us (I'm assuming this) were not there nor have we flown a "Hawg" that we will have to agree to disagree.

Mort had it comming over several postings here and other places. Being mocked when I'm trying to help sent me over the edge. Irish has backed me over stuff way worse than this. WTH did you expect my response to be after your reply?

Hope you have a safe and happy NYE.

mortoma
12-31-2004, 11:19 PM
Why did you reply with such hostility to my post?? It was only the last part of the take off roll where you said something about getting up on one wheel that I found strange. I simply had never heard of any pilot doing something like that. You don't have to react in such a bad tone when my reply was not in a bad tone. And I have no idea why you took it that way. Of the two of us, I'd have to say your attitude seems the lowest and most disgusting. I certainly didn't deserve a retort like that. A tad easily riled you are. Are you one of those types that shoots someone out on the highway if they don't use their turn signal or something?? Calm down dude.

Atomic_Marten
01-01-2005, 11:54 AM
mortoma I was asking myself that question also. Doesn't matter..

And BTW guys can someone of you that can make succesfull take-offs with significant loadouts provide a track please? (Like TAGERT love to say http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif)

Loki-PF
01-01-2005, 12:41 PM
Folks,

Everyone take a deep breath.... The flight model *has* changed in 3.03. No one was sure *how* exactly until recently.

It looks now as if in addition to whatever changes they made to climb charecteristics they have also changed acceleration such that it seems to only affect US radial engine planes.

Here is the link with the proof Link (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=26310365&m=8211010852)

Reisen is saying he thinks the FM is screwed, Hookech0 is saying he found a way to take off with a usable payload in the *new* FM. You guys aren't neccesarily disagreeing....

These are trying times to be an allied pilot, "be sure" but lets stick together and hope for better!

Loki out

Atomic_Marten
01-01-2005, 02:08 PM
I have tried to take off from Lexington in F4U-1D several times, with 3x500lbs on Chichi Jima map, but no luck for me. AI manage to take off, tho http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

DRB_Hookech0
01-01-2005, 03:50 PM
Mr. Atom....hehe that sounded funny to me.

In the orignial post I said I had a track. PM with your email and I'll send it to you. I dont have the ability to host it at this time.

badaboom.1
01-01-2005, 04:15 PM
ATOMIC,How many knots is the carrier doing?[I'm sure you know this]It makes a huge diference!

Atomic_Marten
01-01-2005, 04:23 PM
In the moment when my gears leave deck, Corsair is at 150-153kph. About carrier speed, I have leave it on default (I believe it is 31kph --in the FMB in the object properties box-- but I'm unsure; anyhow I did not change anything in carrier setup in FMB I have just lay the waypoints).

Atomic_Marten
01-01-2005, 04:27 PM
DRB_Hookech0 check your PMs http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

badaboom.1
01-01-2005, 04:41 PM
ATOMIC,After downloading patch 3.03 I had to change all my missions that I had preveiously built for the F4U,You need to speed up the carrier[I put mine on 50kts],If you try the default single missions for carrier take offs for the F4U I think you'll find they don't work at the set carrier speed!after installing new patch,At least they didn't for me. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Atomic_Marten
01-01-2005, 04:46 PM
But AI F4U-1D take off (with 3x500lbs, 100% fuel, and carrier on def.sett. speed), with extreme problems tho, but he manage to take off. That is what gives me headache.. I understand that AI has different physic law to obbey than human controlled craft, but still..