I had the privilege of being stationed aboard the USS Carl Vinson, from 84 through 87. I was in Fuel Division, and worked on the flight, and hanger decks, fueling, and de-fueling aircraft, or operating the fueling stations. Even after 4 years, I never became tired of watching these aircraft. At night, I could recognize all the aircraft by lights, and by sound, when they were on final approach. My love was definitely the F-14. I can't even articulate the awe I have for them. I would bet that most people don't understand how big an F-14 is. It weighs 22 tones, and it is bigger than a bus. Watching them perform combat maneuvers, it is hard to imagine the power, and strength required to throw something that large around the sky in that manner. It is also amazing how dependable these aircraft were. I watched a documentary, on the F-14 which centered around the de-commissioning of the last in service F-14. At that time, I hadn't even heard that this was occurring. I had a very difficult time watching that show, and there was definitely some eye wiping going on. Thanks for bringing this freeware aircraft to my attention.
I came across Dinos stunning work last year... paused a couple of months in lack of a PC on which to run FSX... - now, started all over again on a proper machine. A quarter of a century in flight simming, I finally invested in REX and AS16 this week, added Javier Fernandez´ awesome CVNs, AICarrier, vLSO, AIBTC and a proper 5m mesh (for France only and VFR textures still to come)... - long story short: it's been until now that I saw your footage: an acurate and absolutely nice review! And you are right: Dino has deserved any donation one might make (given that Lockheed Martin is gonna sell their RL Raptors cheaper than expected, they're likely to cut cost somewhere else... I can imagine it's gonna be on the VR side...) -but, but, but...and if I may say it that way: Just as much credit goes to you for your dedication and promotion of foreign work - the love and effort others put in their products - commercial or not - reflect in your testimonials. Thank you and keep up the good work! Cheers, Pat :)
THANKS - it is so rare these days to hear English spoken so clearly that as a hearing impaired person I can understand and enjoy such wonderful presentations. Your explanations of the beauty of the graphics made enhanced my status as a newbie! The explanation and demonstration of the cockpit latching were astounding. Glad to read that the "impossible" stall experience was indeed realistic rather than a programming fault. Inspired but daunted!
I've had this for years. It's gorgeous. Wonderful skins available for Her too. He does wonderful work ! In My opinion one of the top 10 free downloads available.
BTW, I now have Aerosoft's F-14X and will be doing a review and video. It will be nice to be able to compare the two models. All I will say is that the Aerosoft F-14A model is very fond of compressor stalls if handled incorrectly.
Ben D. Thanks for your help. I would go so far as to say I do Dino a disservice with my remarks about stalling his F14! I was intrigued by my observations in the flight test portion of my review so went to look at some of the aerodynamics in relation to high AoA characteristics of swept wing and in particular the F-14. The critical part appears to be related to 2 key areas. The first is the definition of a stall. Sounds simple because during PPL, CPL, ATPL studies and training, they go through the critical angle and the change of lift and drag profiles, with the key observation being the separation of airflow from the aerofoil beyond the critical angle and particularly the pattern of airflow separation leading to a 'stalled' wing. The subject matter includes the airflow separation pattern of fixed swept wings with the rather undesirable characteristic of the tips stalling first producing an un-commanded increase in nose up pitch forces. However..... This document www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=21&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CFEQFjAKOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aviation.org.uk%2Fdocs%2Fflighttest.navair.navy.milunrestricted-FTM108%2Fc3.pdf&ei=S0CDVJOdLcX_ULqihNAP&usg=AFQjCNH_R15QltliMZ0ZSK3d0mz0FTyZXQ&sig2=U7yCtVYyUylO-IwaJWHOGw&bvm=bv.80642063,d.d24 details the criteria for assessing the stalling limitations from a test pilot's view point. The criteria include, loss of lift, high drag, un-commanded aircraft motions, undesirable flying qualities (eg. control reversal) and control effectiveness. It is apparent from a test pilot's perspective, that stalling characteristics will typically include at least 1 limiting factor, but not necessarily all of the characteristics. Indeed the stall speed is most commonly defined as the minimum steady speed at which the aircraft is controllable and is most commonly experienced as a wallowing with high rate of descent (with or without adequate control) or an un-commanded wing drop, in both cases with a subsequent low airspeed and high rate of descent. However, the documents acknowledges that the stall limitations may be set based on the operational performance requirements or the aircraft. Hence a Tomcat may have a very good tolerance at maintaining control effectiveness down to a very low speed, but may be considered stalled operationally based on an undesirable rate of descent combined with excessively high induced/form drag for example. This document does highlight that the maximum co-efficient of lift of an F18 is approximately 30-35 degrees, a marked difference to a more conventional aircraft. The second factor relates to 'blended bodies'. Current and last generation fighter aircraft don't conform to the normal bolt some wings to the side of the fuselage philosophy of the majority of aircraft. When you look at the flat fuselage of the F14 or the LERX (leading edge root extensions) of aircraft such as the F18, SU27 and Mig 29, it becomes apparent that the fuselage is an inherent part of the lift and manoeuvrability equation. I would however suspect that that angle is not indicative of high AoA control and manoeuvring but potentially just of a coefficient of lift profile of the airflow from the upper wing surfaces. Indeed, the F14 fuselage contributes 40 to 60% of a Tomcat's total lift. Furthermore, the huge deflection available to fighter elevons affords an enormous potential for maintaining dynamic control of an aircraft where the airflow has completely separated from the 'normal' flying surfaces of the wings. It would be worth considering that at high angles of attack, the elevons appear to be functioning in undisturbed airflow. And therein lies the key for me..... I was looking for the 'classic' stall characteristics in an aircraft which does not conform to the 'normal' fuselage and wing plan-form. I should have expected a deviation from the norm, but was shocked by the extent of that deviation. As your video highlights, adequate control can be achieved at airspeeds as low as 35 kts, but as I say, the stall limitation may be defined for other aerodynamic reasons. It should be added, that at such high angles of attack, the drag present can become a limiting factor such that whilst being able to fly at ridiculous pitch angle may be nice, the impact on airspeed and rate of descent may be of such penalty as to be dangerous despite control being retained. I for one would not like a rate of descent of 6-7000 fpm just to land on at 35-40 kts!!!! The infamous Cobra manoeuver demonstrated by the Su27 and Mig 29 both show the ability to go far beyond the normal wing profile for high angle of attack controllability. In reading a copy of the genuine flight manual, it describes a clean stall as full aft stick with rates of descent in excess of 9000 fpm! whilst still retaining manoeuvring control. It further goes on to highlight that the AoA will then generally stabilise at 35-45 units nose up AoA (much as can be seen in my video) and that satisfactory directional control can be maintained although there may be some less desirable behaviour demonstrated in wing rock. Thanks for your help :-)
Not a problem! It certainly gives the impression that the F14 must certainly be quite a benign handling aircraft! The stall/departure characteristics of some more modern unstable aircraft can certainly be quite interesting as well. I believe the F16 if miss-handled at very slow speed can end up with AoA well beyond its 25 degree limit which results in a violent departure ending in a free fall with around 50-60 deg AoA either upright or inverted. In this situation the stabilators do not have enough control authority to bring the AoA down to where the aircraft can be controlled by the flight control system. In this case the pilot presses the MPO (Manual Pitch Override) switch which gives him all the available stabilator movement, much more than would be used for normal flying. With this he has to rock the aircraft back and forth through the 50-60 deg AoA range until he can accrue enough pitch rate to bring the AoA down enough to unstall the aircraft. As you would imagine this whole process takes time and a fair chunk of altitude. And this can happen both upright or inverted... I can't imagine hanging in the straps, upside down, plummeting towards the earth and having to rock the aircraft back and forth to get it flying again. Scary Stuff This video shows a pretty realistic representation of what I described above as simulated by the excellent Falcon BMS ua-cam.com/video/k7UO3x_hkFE/v-deo.html
Ben D Lol, I think benign is a relative phrase :-). I'm not sure I fancy a 35-45 degree nose up descent at 9000 fpm. Handling notes show it takes up to 5000' to recover. Of course none of this considers accelerated stalls, or the F-14's bad reputation for compressor stalls with the early engines. In fact in my video, I state "I'm not sure I should do this", and I then sideslip the aircraft to increase the rate of descent for approach. Having read up a bit more on the specifics of the engines, it seems that significant disturbance of airflow to the engines, particularly from ill disciplined use of the rudders causes very nasty compressor stalls. Indeed the 'flat spin' of Top Gun fame is often a consequence (I suspect due to the significant and sudden differential thrust) which makes the usual benign controlled wallow of a stall a much better deal, assuming you are not approaching the carrier round down. I'm quite sure that the only real advantage of the stall behaviour was that it was slightly lower down the list of things likely to kill the unwary pilot. Indeed, even the most delightful of aircraft of the Bae Hawk can bite. I was fortunate enough to be with an instructor when we tried to enter a spin to the left, Despite all the correct inputs, the aircraft decided it knew better, pitched nose up, rolled to the right and entered a nose down spin to the right. He was an experienced test pilot whose response was 'oh that's interesting'. My response was 'what the.....'. In terms of control authority, or lack of in conjunction with pitch power couple from podded engines, this is a good read from a 737 which very nearly crashed after achieving the admirable nose attitude of 44 degrees nose up and 82 knots whilst on approach. It nicely demonstrated the huge differential between the aerodynamic effects of the stabiliser vs the elevator. Not bad from a civilian airliner. www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/formal_reports/3_2009_g_thof.cfm You'll be glad to know I've added an annotation to the video correcting my remarks and praising Dino Cattaneo's correct application of the handling dynamics for the F-14. And his model is awesome to fly anyway :-)
flightsim481 " I'm not sure I fancy a 35-45 degree nose up descent at 9000 fpm." Me neither! But its hugely preferable to a sudden tip stall in a low and slow situation ;) Where abouts did you fly the hawk? My brother was an instructor on the Hawk at Valley (208 Sqn) for quite a number of years until he moved up to bigger, better and reheat equipped things.
Ben D I was Royal Navy helicopter aircrew for 5 years before losing my medical. I spent 6 months with the School of Aviation Medicine at Farnborough in the 90's flying around in their hawks with 2 utterly incredible guys. 1 spec aircrew test pilot and 1 US Flight Surgeon. Qualified doctor and a fast jet pilot at the same time! Indeed, my first ever flying instructor was an ex-wing commander, OC of the Jaguar OCU. Low and slow tip stall, not good and don't fancy that either. Just messing around with the Aerosoft F-14X now and it seems to compressor stall incredibly easily. So far a difficult and sensitive aircraft to fly. PS. If you want to see crazy aerodynamics in action, look at helicopters!
flightsim481 Sad to hear that you lost your medical! I suffered from asthma from age 5 to around 12 where I grew out of it, with that plastered all over my doctors records the chance of me following my father and brother into the RAF were pretty much zilch unfortunately:(. Still, I've got some seat time in some fantastic aircraft thanks to both of them so I really can't complain! I have a video of my fathers Bulldog display he did this year hosted on my channel if you fancy taking a look.
Another very nice video from your channel. I really appreciate your expertise and attention to detail when making these videos -- it really gives me an insight and interest into aircraft types I may otherwise overlook.
Great video as always - informative and entertaining. Really enjoying the channel. With regards to the strange autogen placement - I've experienced this myself and potentially you can solve the problem by checking that you have the correct regions applied in your P3D installation of FTX Configurator. The settings are not entirely intuitive - for example if you are flying in Europe you need to select 'FTX Global' - the Europe scenery should only be applied when you are flying in a more local scenery region you have purchased eg. FTX England. The FTX manuals probably explain this better than I have!
I don't have the FTX Europe land class package, only Global, England, Scotland and Wales. The configurator seems to disable FTX Global when I select local regions, which may explain why I get that strange effect with the autogen. Lol. I suspect it is because I have local areas set in FTX but I was flying out of Innsbruck which is not one of the local areas I have. Thanks for the comments re: the video. Much appreciated.
One of my friends at my volunteer job was one of the first female US Navy fighter pilots. She flew Tomcats in the early 1990s, before being switched to Hornets.
Hi Will. And what does she say about the stall caracteristics of the F14D? Could the caracteristics that are shown in the video are like the real thing? It would be the sh1t to hear something about this beast from a real F14 pilot!
Quick question, Sorry, I know it's a 2 year old video, but I'm wondering if it's possible to change the paints on the F-14 Tomcat, let's say that you do'n't particularly want the VF-2 Bounty Hunters aircraft. How easy is it to go about changing the texture renders to a different squadron's colors? Wonder if you might be able to do a video on that? I'm extremely impressed by Dino's work and am looking forward to grabbing it when I do get FSX on Steam.
Nice Video... I'm not so sure that the stall characteristics you showed are all that unrealistic. High wing loading aircraft like fast jets don't stall at slow speeds any way similar to *normal* aircraft. The high decent rate nose-high angle is in no way unusual for this kind of situation. The wing is obviously completely stalled in this situation but the all moving stabs would still offer limited control and the twin fins would maintain some directional stability. Most modern jets (except F-16 and other dynamically unstable aircraft) don't depart into a spin like a conventional aircraft, indeed AoAs excess of 70 degrees are possible with the F18 (as an example) and still retain nose authority... Just my 2 cents.
FYI...the reason the Tomcat has elevons is because you can't have ailerons on the wing when the wing overlaps the elevators. Tomcat has spoilers on the wings, like the A-6, which has a good rate of role.......after a few seconds. The F-14 used them to make her role rate just silly.
Yes, you are quite right re: the overlapping wings (although to the best of my knowledge, they don't actually overlap in flight), but I strongly suspect there may be additional design considerations, such as wing twist at the tip due to the short wing chord (a common problem in airliners), weight on the wings and the question of effectiveness of ailerons if the wings were swept. The spoilers are officially considered to be a secondary control surface for roll. In fact, I suspect they may be inhibited past a certain sweep angle. Many aircraft use differential spoilers on wing surfaces because not only do they provde roll control, they also help reduce adverse yaw. What's interesting is that some non-swing wing aircraft use elevons (differential stabilisers) as part of a roll control package. The best example being the F-18. The caveat is that having never done the formal F-14 ground school or flight training, I can only go off the published F-14 systems and handling notes published in NAVAIR 01-F14AAD-1, albeit for the D model ;-)
Nice. Thanks for the lesson!! The A-6 also had spoiler but no elevons. I am not sure about the F-111. I know it had spoilers, not sure about the elevon function. Without looking first I am trying to recall if the wings overlap the elevators on the Aardvark.
I'm guessing you may have flown her, or the Seaking. You should really try the DCS Huey sometime if you havn't already. The Huey has an excellent flight model.
Hmm unfortunately even after following the installation instructions, this aircraft just crashes FSX when I try to select it from the aircraft screen. Anyone come across this and know how to fix?
Can't remember them all. they are on the prepar3d website. They include F22, T6 Texan, a submarine, Mooney bravo, Beechcraft Baron B58, Lockheed Constellation, P38, A36 Bonanza, F35 and Extra I think. Completely different from FSX. No 737, CRJ, 172, Dakota and a few others missing. Check their website.
I had the privilege of being stationed aboard the USS Carl Vinson, from 84 through 87. I was in Fuel Division, and worked on the flight, and hanger decks, fueling, and de-fueling aircraft, or operating the fueling stations. Even after 4 years, I never became tired of watching these aircraft. At night, I could recognize all the aircraft by lights, and by sound, when they were on final approach.
My love was definitely the F-14. I can't even articulate the awe I have for them. I would bet that most people don't understand how big an F-14 is. It weighs 22 tones, and it is bigger than a bus. Watching them perform combat maneuvers, it is hard to imagine the power, and strength required to throw something that large around the sky in that manner. It is also amazing how dependable these aircraft were.
I watched a documentary, on the F-14 which centered around the de-commissioning of the last in service F-14. At that time, I hadn't even heard that this was occurring. I had a very difficult time watching that show, and there was definitely some eye wiping going on.
Thanks for bringing this freeware aircraft to my attention.
I wish I could have seen them flying whilst still in service. Magnificent raw power.
I came across Dinos stunning work last year... paused a couple of months in lack of a PC on which to run FSX... - now, started all over again on a proper machine. A quarter of a century in flight simming, I finally invested in REX and AS16 this week, added Javier Fernandez´ awesome CVNs, AICarrier, vLSO, AIBTC and a proper 5m mesh (for France only and VFR textures still to come)... - long story short: it's been until now that I saw your footage: an acurate and absolutely nice review!
And you are right: Dino has deserved any donation one might make (given that Lockheed Martin is gonna sell their RL Raptors cheaper than expected, they're likely to cut cost somewhere else... I can imagine it's gonna be on the VR side...) -but, but, but...and if I may say it that way:
Just as much credit goes to you for your dedication and promotion of foreign work - the love and effort others put in their products - commercial or not - reflect in your testimonials.
Thank you and keep up the good work!
Cheers, Pat :)
THANKS - it is so rare these days to hear English spoken so clearly that as a hearing impaired person I can understand and enjoy such wonderful presentations. Your explanations of the beauty of the graphics made enhanced my status as a newbie! The explanation and demonstration of the cockpit latching were astounding. Glad to read that the "impossible" stall experience was indeed realistic rather than a programming fault. Inspired but daunted!
Great to know that you enjoyed it :-) As I say it is a remarkable piece of aircraft design, great to fly and the video was a joy to make.
I've had this for years. It's gorgeous. Wonderful skins available for Her too. He does wonderful work ! In My opinion one of the top 10 free downloads available.
+dieselrotor Yep, definitely agree :-)
BTW, I now have Aerosoft's F-14X and will be doing a review and video. It will be nice to be able to compare the two models. All I will say is that the Aerosoft F-14A model is very fond of compressor stalls if handled incorrectly.
Ben D.
Thanks for your help. I would go so far as to say I do Dino a disservice with my remarks about stalling his F14! I was intrigued by my observations in the flight test portion of my review so went to look at some of the aerodynamics in relation to high AoA characteristics of swept wing and in particular the F-14.
The critical part appears to be related to 2 key areas.
The first is the definition of a stall. Sounds simple because during PPL, CPL, ATPL studies and training, they go through the critical angle and the change of lift and drag profiles, with the key observation being the separation of airflow from the aerofoil beyond the critical angle and particularly the pattern of airflow separation leading to a 'stalled' wing. The subject matter includes the airflow separation pattern of fixed swept wings with the rather undesirable characteristic of the tips stalling first producing an un-commanded increase in nose up pitch forces. However.....
This document www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=21&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CFEQFjAKOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aviation.org.uk%2Fdocs%2Fflighttest.navair.navy.milunrestricted-FTM108%2Fc3.pdf&ei=S0CDVJOdLcX_ULqihNAP&usg=AFQjCNH_R15QltliMZ0ZSK3d0mz0FTyZXQ&sig2=U7yCtVYyUylO-IwaJWHOGw&bvm=bv.80642063,d.d24 details the criteria for assessing the stalling limitations from a test pilot's view point. The criteria include, loss of lift, high drag, un-commanded aircraft motions, undesirable flying qualities (eg. control reversal) and control effectiveness. It is apparent from a test pilot's perspective, that stalling characteristics will typically include at least 1 limiting factor, but not necessarily all of the characteristics. Indeed the stall speed is most commonly defined as the minimum steady speed at which the aircraft is controllable and is most commonly experienced as a wallowing with high rate of descent (with or without adequate control) or an un-commanded wing drop, in both cases with a subsequent low airspeed and high rate of descent. However, the documents acknowledges that the stall limitations may be set based on the operational performance requirements or the aircraft. Hence a Tomcat may have a very good tolerance at maintaining control effectiveness down to a very low speed, but may be considered stalled operationally based on an undesirable rate of descent combined with excessively high induced/form drag for example. This document does highlight that the maximum co-efficient of lift of an F18 is approximately 30-35 degrees, a marked difference to a more conventional aircraft.
The second factor relates to 'blended bodies'. Current and last generation fighter aircraft don't conform to the normal bolt some wings to the side of the fuselage philosophy of the majority of aircraft. When you look at the flat fuselage of the F14 or the LERX (leading edge root extensions) of aircraft such as the F18, SU27 and Mig 29, it becomes apparent that the fuselage is an inherent part of the lift and manoeuvrability equation. I would however suspect that that angle is not indicative of high AoA control and manoeuvring but potentially just of a coefficient of lift profile of the airflow from the upper wing surfaces. Indeed, the F14 fuselage contributes 40 to 60% of a Tomcat's total lift. Furthermore, the huge deflection available to fighter elevons affords an enormous potential for maintaining dynamic control of an aircraft where the airflow has completely separated from the 'normal' flying surfaces of the wings. It would be worth considering that at high angles of attack, the elevons appear to be functioning in undisturbed airflow. And therein lies the key for me.....
I was looking for the 'classic' stall characteristics in an aircraft which does not conform to the 'normal' fuselage and wing plan-form. I should have expected a deviation from the norm, but was shocked by the extent of that deviation. As your video highlights, adequate control can be achieved at airspeeds as low as 35 kts, but as I say, the stall limitation may be defined for other aerodynamic reasons. It should be added, that at such high angles of attack, the drag present can become a limiting factor such that whilst being able to fly at ridiculous pitch angle may be nice, the impact on airspeed and rate of descent may be of such penalty as to be dangerous despite control being retained. I for one would not like a rate of descent of 6-7000 fpm just to land on at 35-40 kts!!!! The infamous Cobra manoeuver demonstrated by the Su27 and Mig 29 both show the ability to go far beyond the normal wing profile for high angle of attack controllability.
In reading a copy of the genuine flight manual, it describes a clean stall as full aft stick with rates of descent in excess of 9000 fpm! whilst still retaining manoeuvring control. It further goes on to highlight that the AoA will then generally stabilise at 35-45 units nose up AoA (much as can be seen in my video) and that satisfactory directional control can be maintained although there may be some less desirable behaviour demonstrated in wing rock.
Thanks for your help :-)
Not a problem! It certainly gives the impression that the F14 must certainly be quite a benign handling aircraft!
The stall/departure characteristics of some more modern unstable aircraft can certainly be quite interesting as well. I believe the F16 if miss-handled at very slow speed can end up with AoA well beyond its 25 degree limit which results in a violent departure ending in a free fall with around 50-60 deg AoA either upright or inverted. In this situation the stabilators do not have enough control authority to bring the AoA down to where the aircraft can be controlled by the flight control system. In this case the pilot presses the MPO (Manual Pitch Override) switch which gives him all the available stabilator movement, much more than would be used for normal flying. With this he has to rock the aircraft back and forth through the 50-60 deg AoA range until he can accrue enough pitch rate to bring the AoA down enough to unstall the aircraft. As you would imagine this whole process takes time and a fair chunk of altitude. And this can happen both upright or inverted... I can't imagine hanging in the straps, upside down, plummeting towards the earth and having to rock the aircraft back and forth to get it flying again. Scary Stuff
This video shows a pretty realistic representation of what I described above as simulated by the excellent Falcon BMS
ua-cam.com/video/k7UO3x_hkFE/v-deo.html
Ben D Lol, I think benign is a relative phrase :-). I'm not sure I fancy a 35-45 degree nose up descent at 9000 fpm. Handling notes show it takes up to 5000' to recover. Of course none of this considers accelerated stalls, or the F-14's bad reputation for compressor stalls with the early engines. In fact in my video, I state "I'm not sure I should do this", and I then sideslip the aircraft to increase the rate of descent for approach. Having read up a bit more on the specifics of the engines, it seems that significant disturbance of airflow to the engines, particularly from ill disciplined use of the rudders causes very nasty compressor stalls. Indeed the 'flat spin' of Top Gun fame is often a consequence (I suspect due to the significant and sudden differential thrust) which makes the usual benign controlled wallow of a stall a much better deal, assuming you are not approaching the carrier round down. I'm quite sure that the only real advantage of the stall behaviour was that it was slightly lower down the list of things likely to kill the unwary pilot.
Indeed, even the most delightful of aircraft of the Bae Hawk can bite. I was fortunate enough to be with an instructor when we tried to enter a spin to the left, Despite all the correct inputs, the aircraft decided it knew better, pitched nose up, rolled to the right and entered a nose down spin to the right. He was an experienced test pilot whose response was 'oh that's interesting'. My response was 'what the.....'.
In terms of control authority, or lack of in conjunction with pitch power couple from podded engines, this is a good read from a 737 which very nearly crashed after achieving the admirable nose attitude of 44 degrees nose up and 82 knots whilst on approach. It nicely demonstrated the huge differential between the aerodynamic effects of the stabiliser vs the elevator. Not bad from a civilian airliner. www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/formal_reports/3_2009_g_thof.cfm
You'll be glad to know I've added an annotation to the video correcting my remarks and praising Dino Cattaneo's correct application of the handling dynamics for the F-14. And his model is awesome to fly anyway :-)
flightsim481 " I'm not sure I fancy a 35-45 degree nose up descent at 9000 fpm." Me neither! But its hugely preferable to a sudden tip stall in a low and slow situation ;)
Where abouts did you fly the hawk? My brother was an instructor on the Hawk at Valley (208 Sqn) for quite a number of years until he moved up to bigger, better and reheat equipped things.
Ben D I was Royal Navy helicopter aircrew for 5 years before losing my medical. I spent 6 months with the School of Aviation Medicine at Farnborough in the 90's flying around in their hawks with 2 utterly incredible guys. 1 spec aircrew test pilot and 1 US Flight Surgeon. Qualified doctor and a fast jet pilot at the same time! Indeed, my first ever flying instructor was an ex-wing commander, OC of the Jaguar OCU.
Low and slow tip stall, not good and don't fancy that either. Just messing around with the Aerosoft F-14X now and it seems to compressor stall incredibly easily. So far a difficult and sensitive aircraft to fly.
PS. If you want to see crazy aerodynamics in action, look at helicopters!
flightsim481 Sad to hear that you lost your medical! I suffered from asthma from age 5 to around 12 where I grew out of it, with that plastered all over my doctors records the chance of me following my father and brother into the RAF were pretty much zilch unfortunately:(. Still, I've got some seat time in some fantastic aircraft thanks to both of them so I really can't complain! I have a video of my fathers Bulldog display he did this year hosted on my channel if you fancy taking a look.
Another very nice video from your channel. I really appreciate your expertise and attention to detail when making these videos -- it really gives me an insight and interest into aircraft types I may otherwise overlook.
Glad you enjoyed it. :-)
Great video as always - informative and entertaining. Really enjoying the channel.
With regards to the strange autogen placement - I've experienced this myself and potentially you can solve the problem by checking that you have the correct regions applied in your P3D installation of FTX Configurator. The settings are not entirely intuitive - for example if you are flying in Europe you need to select 'FTX Global' - the Europe scenery should only be applied when you are flying in a more local scenery region you have purchased eg. FTX England. The FTX manuals probably explain this better than I have!
I don't have the FTX Europe land class package, only Global, England, Scotland and Wales. The configurator seems to disable FTX Global when I select local regions, which may explain why I get that strange effect with the autogen. Lol. I suspect it is because I have local areas set in FTX but I was flying out of Innsbruck which is not one of the local areas I have.
Thanks for the comments re: the video. Much appreciated.
Very nice Scenery and the freeware F-14 Top.!! Thumbs Up and greetings from Switzerland
Likewise greetings to Switzerland :-)
One of my friends at my volunteer job was one of the first female US Navy fighter pilots. She flew Tomcats in the early 1990s, before being switched to Hornets.
Hi Will. And what does she say about the stall caracteristics of the F14D? Could the caracteristics that are shown in the video are like the real thing? It would be the sh1t to hear something about this beast from a real F14 pilot!
If you think Dino's F-14 is a Hot Rod now, go into the payload options and get rid of all of the drop tanks and weapons :D
Quick question, Sorry, I know it's a 2 year old video, but I'm wondering if it's possible to change the paints on the F-14 Tomcat, let's say that you do'n't particularly want the VF-2 Bounty Hunters aircraft. How easy is it to go about changing the texture renders to a different squadron's colors? Wonder if you might be able to do a video on that? I'm extremely impressed by Dino's work and am looking forward to grabbing it when I do get FSX on Steam.
What the hell, was this Grim Reapers earliest channel?!!
This is one of my all time favourite add-ons for fsx, would you consider doing a video on tacpack as its something I'd be interested in.
It is an awesome add on but unfortunately I don't have tacpack. Sorry.
I Love These Reviews!
George Day Thanks :-)
Nice Video... I'm not so sure that the stall characteristics you showed are all that unrealistic. High wing loading aircraft like fast jets don't stall at slow speeds any way similar to *normal* aircraft. The high decent rate nose-high angle is in no way unusual for this kind of situation. The wing is obviously completely stalled in this situation but the all moving stabs would still offer limited control and the twin fins would maintain some directional stability. Most modern jets (except F-16 and other dynamically unstable aircraft) don't depart into a spin like a conventional aircraft, indeed AoAs excess of 70 degrees are possible with the F18 (as an example) and still retain nose authority... Just my 2 cents.
Thank you!
FYI...the reason the Tomcat has elevons is because you can't have ailerons on the wing when the wing overlaps the elevators. Tomcat has spoilers on the wings, like the A-6, which has a good rate of role.......after a few seconds. The F-14 used them to make her role rate just silly.
Yes, you are quite right re: the overlapping wings (although to the best of my knowledge, they don't actually overlap in flight), but I strongly suspect there may be additional design considerations, such as wing twist at the tip due to the short wing chord (a common problem in airliners), weight on the wings and the question of effectiveness of ailerons if the wings were swept.
The spoilers are officially considered to be a secondary control surface for roll. In fact, I suspect they may be inhibited past a certain sweep angle.
Many aircraft use differential spoilers on wing surfaces because not only do they provde roll control, they also help reduce adverse yaw.
What's interesting is that some non-swing wing aircraft use elevons (differential stabilisers) as part of a roll control package. The best example being the F-18.
The caveat is that having never done the formal F-14 ground school or flight training, I can only go off the published F-14 systems and handling notes published in NAVAIR 01-F14AAD-1, albeit for the D model ;-)
Nice. Thanks for the lesson!! The A-6 also had spoiler but no elevons. I am not sure about the F-111. I know it had spoilers, not sure about the elevon function. Without looking first I am trying to recall if the wings overlap the elevators on the Aardvark.
This looks fantastic, thanks for the thorough review video.
No problem.
Hi, pls tell me what website should i use to download Dino cattaneo F-14 tomcat? i have been trying from other website i couldn't. Pls help
Are there any inorperable instruments? Like 'this is a freeware'?
Hi, I made this video a long time ago so sorry I can't recall but I think a lot of it was,
You need to check out Dino s-3 Viking
I have, and it's a lovely piece of work. I just don't have the time to work through his impressive hanger of add ons, more's the pity. :-)
Like your videos flightsim481, keep them coming. Have you ever tried DCS from Eagle Dynamics ?
Yes, currently waiting for the VEAO Bae Hawk to be released :-)
I have the key and have tested the beta version. She is nice, but will wait until ED implement her in the new year.
Cool. Wish I had the beta. Have pre-purchased it from ED anyway and really looking forwards to it. I have a soft spot for the Hawk.
I'm guessing you may have flown her, or the Seaking. You should really try the DCS Huey sometime if you havn't already. The Huey has an excellent flight model.
Matt Martin Yes, flown both the Hawk and the Seaking albeit under instruction.
can anyone show me how to successfully startup this bird from cold and dark? i cant seem to get the ddi's to turn on
how did you get the MFD's to show up?
peter glover Haven't flown it in a while, but I think the brightness dial at the bottom left of each screen turns them on.
ha! I downloaded the older model! Great video!
Thanks, much appreciated :-)
Yes out of service.....last operational flight was in October of 2006
Hmm unfortunately even after following the installation instructions, this aircraft just crashes FSX when I try to select it from the aircraft screen. Anyone come across this and know how to fix?
Sorry I have no idea why. If you are using FSX Steam, can I suggest posting on the Steam forums or alternatively the Avsim or Flightsim.com forums.
what planes comes with p3d? let me know thks
Can't remember them all. they are on the prepar3d website. They include F22, T6 Texan, a submarine, Mooney bravo, Beechcraft Baron B58, Lockheed Constellation, P38, A36 Bonanza, F35 and Extra I think. Completely different from FSX. No 737, CRJ, 172, Dakota and a few others missing.
Check their website.
And where can I download it?
indiafoxtecho.blogspot.com/2014/09/t-45c-goshawk-version-270-final-release.html although please note this is for FSX, not the more recent MSFS2020
@@flightsim481 I just have FSX
everytime when I select the f14 in the menu, FSX is chrashing......
too much thrust
Fucking Eh VF2! #BountyHunterVF2
can you give me the link?
indiafoxtecho.blogspot.no/search/label/Freeware
i have been there but whene i press download i come to a pdf file
strange, try this one drive.google.com/file/d/0B1VJtKJlye7FNHhneUxVdG9jODg/view
it is the same googe drive pdf thing
there should be a "download" arrow on top of that page