The f-14 has some incredibly strong engines and they're relatively close to the ground so afterburner will damage the runway/deck if it's active. Plus they tend to go into burner one after the other (usually left then right).
Another reason why you shouldn't take off in burner is the engine placement. Since they're far apart laterally on the aircraft, an engine failure on takeoff in burner could send the aircraft into a spin which would be impossible to recover from at low altitude
@@alexl7989 this is the actual reason. Well said. An additional reason for the limit on the carrier launch is that it will actually push the cat shuttle and since that attach point is so far forward it actually decreases longitudinal stability.
@@zzodr I know its a VERY late reply... buuuut even though that is correct, it does have the limiter, that's mainly to stop a spin in flight. If a engine went out while in burner on a cat it would only take a millisecond of asymmetrical thrust throw the plane off the cat. I've seen it ;) Plus this pilot even talks about it: at 56;20... th-cam.com/video/Cgq4xjXN4-8/w-d-xo.html So yeah, Pring you are correct.
You actually need speedbrakes all out on the approach, so the engines run at higher RPM which makes them more responsive. That's even more important on carrier landings
The takeoff and landings in this plane are smooth. As long as you don't pull crazy high G maneuvers with your wings out or get critically damaged, she will bring you back.
I think natops states always speed brake while landing, higher engine revs = better responsibility. And you should use the dlc to lower or raise the plane instead of throttle.
Maybe if the f14 is using the TF 30, but this in DCS is model B so she has the F110 which are more powerful, so maybe that statement would not apply at all
Hey Reapers! Love the vids. So, I just saw a documentary talking about afterburners on carriers at night and visibility issues it creates. Apparently part of F14 design was no after burners on launch, at least in part, for this reason.
I tried doing the landing tutorials for the F-14. Every time I go by the book, I end up losing stability on the turn, end up damn near inverted and had to eject more than I like to admit. But every time I just Leroy Jenkins my way down onto the runway, I land without a problem.
When taking off the carrier at night or on an airfield it is basically a beacon with the afterburner on. They takeoff without the afterburner for stealth and to not be noticed.
Flaps did not retract (fully) immediately during takeoff because automatic maneuver flaps engaged after moving flaps control handle fully forward (retracting manually extended flaps). Maneuver flaps can be retracted by moving DLC thumbwheel forward with landing gear up (DLC disengaged). But, they also will retract automatically before reaching dangerous speed, so I usually leave them be, they are just trying to help.
I heard that they didn't use the afterburner during takeoff because if one of the engines failed then it would yaw to the side and would not be controlable. The yaw is because the engines are quite far apart and thus will create more of a torque moment if the engines are producing different amounts of thrust. I don't know why it is ok for the mig-29 and su-27 can takeoff with afterburner because I would have thought that they would have the same potential problem.
I don't know either, so I don't know if I should even be replying, but I can think of three possibilities. 1. The Tomcat could have more of an issue to keep both burners on at takeoff and the risk of something going wrong is just too great. 2. The russians could simply be less concerned with potential risks. 3. The americans could have been overly cautious and it just became part of the procedure.
The other part of the equation is flight control effectiveness. The rudders in this case. Could be that the 29/27 have more effective rudders and hence have lower Vmca with full power.
Hello reapers,I'm from iran.I saw in our official footage posted from airforce about f 14's ,They're some times taking off with full military afterburners
Thanks for the great tutorial! Can you help with something? From a cold start I can't make the VV path marker appear, even after switching on ILS system and switching to Landing mode.
Thank you very much for your very informative vids! I have one and only request! Could you please speak slowly for people like me whose english is not their native language? Best regards
@@grimreapers tbh, just dont, its arbitrary. Each manufacturer used his own scale for AOA 'units'. just know it needs to be 15 in the tomcat. tbh, I prefer using the AOA indexer instead of the E bracket when trimming on downwind, since it has no delay and if you are on 15 units of AOA, you're bang on the E bracket anyhow.
Viggen has a great symbol in it's hud that's actually still used in the Gripen aircraft today: The Speed is indicated by the "fin" on the vector symbol. The fin is attached to the "fuselage" of the vector if speed is correct during approach. If speed is too high, the fin is high. If you're too slow, the fin is below or in the fuselage.. Very simple and easy to use. F14 is very very capable, but it really lacks the simplicity of the Viggen
No afterburners! Wy? several reasons.first in carriers the fuel is very valuable and there is no need to WASTE it.unless is full loaded no wind on deck.second, full AB can be viewed from miles away and in some carriers de deflection barrierson the catapult are not strong enough to withsand the full power of the F14B/D.In ground runways the full burner will cause damage to the runway during rotation.
In my DCS experience, holding DLC full aft + ground effect gives enough lift to almost arrest the descent and absolutely butter the bread on landing in the Tomcat. I am not 100% sure, but i assume you would run the risk of a tailstrike on landing if you flared.
I don't think so, something in between, nor too smooth neither too hard. But not sure either. But I've heard from a former Iranian pilot, Col. Hamzei, that in his trainings, after his service on F-5, he was taking care of landing a Tomcat as smoothly as possible, but his instructor had told him "You don't need to do such a consideration at all, it's designed for carrier landing"!
Excellent !By the way, the latest Fighter Pilot Podcast has an interview with both a former F14 Pilot and RIO which you may wish to check out - th-cam.com/video/VSwLSEQjxfg/w-d-xo.html. The pilot also confirmed that they were not allowed to use AB on takeoff from either land or carrier in the F14B (or F14D) due to the strain this would put on the gear..... The two GE F110-400 engines were just too powerful. The F14A had the older, less powerful, less reliable TF-30 engines (so did the F-111) and they used AB all the time on takeoff from land or Carrier.
I like your videos, but I find in this one you speak way too fast; it´s tricky to follow you being a non English native speaker. Thank you and hope you are doing well.
As for the Tomcat not using afterburners on takeoff comments... check these out: th-cam.com/video/DxuMK2dIDJE/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/JNrck2VLai4/w-d-xo.html
The f-14 has some incredibly strong engines and they're relatively close to the ground so afterburner will damage the runway/deck if it's active. Plus they tend to go into burner one after the other (usually left then right).
Another reason why you shouldn't take off in burner is the engine placement. Since they're far apart laterally on the aircraft, an engine failure on takeoff in burner could send the aircraft into a spin which would be impossible to recover from at low altitude
@@alexl7989 this is the actual reason. Well said. An additional reason for the limit on the carrier launch is that it will actually push the cat shuttle and since that attach point is so far forward it actually decreases longitudinal stability.
All F14As took off with burner on carriers, cuz the engines weren't strong enough, the later models could take off with sub burner
Afterburners on takeoff also jam flaps
If you have a flame out and lose and engine on launch if in AB you will be unable to compensate / correct for the thrust loss
Yes but there is a guarded ASYM LIMITER switch to auto lower the burner on the operative engine in case of engine failure.
@@zzodr I know its a VERY late reply... buuuut even though that is correct, it does have the limiter, that's mainly to stop a spin in flight. If a engine went out while in burner on a cat it would only take a millisecond of asymmetrical thrust throw the plane off the cat. I've seen it ;) Plus this pilot even talks about it: at 56;20... th-cam.com/video/Cgq4xjXN4-8/w-d-xo.html
So yeah, Pring you are correct.
You actually need speedbrakes all out on the approach, so the engines run at higher RPM which makes them more responsive. That's even more important on carrier landings
affirm will redo later with brakes
I liked how you clarified that you weren't saying that we had to stay under 50 knots when taxiing :D (Thanks for the video).
The takeoff and landings in this plane are smooth. As long as you don't pull crazy high G maneuvers with your wings out or get critically damaged, she will bring you back.
that´s real cool. i like your tutorials. best regards
Thanks cap im still practicing to land my f15 before i buy the f14
It's an amazing plane! If you need somebody to fly with, I'm in (｡•̀ᴗ-)✧
I to can be your wingman
I think natops states always speed brake while landing, higher engine revs = better responsibility.
And you should use the dlc to lower or raise the plane instead of throttle.
agree to both
Maybe if the f14 is using the TF 30, but this in DCS is model B so she has the F110 which are more powerful, so maybe that statement would not apply at all
Thanks ! This was very useful ! (My first landings with the tomcat weren't very successful...)
Hey Reapers! Love the vids. So, I just saw a documentary talking about afterburners on carriers at night and visibility issues it creates. Apparently part of F14 design was no after burners on launch, at least in part, for this reason.
True. But, the A's engines were too weak so they had to use afterburner to take off from the carrier. The B and D models could take off without it.
I tried doing the landing tutorials for the F-14. Every time I go by the book, I end up losing stability on the turn, end up damn near inverted and had to eject more than I like to admit. But every time I just Leroy Jenkins my way down onto the runway, I land without a problem.
When taking off the carrier at night or on an airfield it is basically a beacon with the afterburner on. They takeoff without the afterburner for stealth and to not be noticed.
Flaps did not retract (fully) immediately during takeoff because automatic maneuver flaps engaged after moving flaps control handle fully forward (retracting manually extended flaps). Maneuver flaps can be retracted by moving DLC thumbwheel forward with landing gear up (DLC disengaged). But, they also will retract automatically before reaching dangerous speed, so I usually leave them be, they are just trying to help.
I keep spinning her once on the airfield. Touchdown is soft, but slowing down to a halt just does not happen until I go all Tokyo Drift >
I heard that they didn't use the afterburner during takeoff because if one of the engines failed then it would yaw to the side and would not be controlable. The yaw is because the engines are quite far apart and thus will create more of a torque moment if the engines are producing different amounts of thrust. I don't know why it is ok for the mig-29 and su-27 can takeoff with afterburner because I would have thought that they would have the same potential problem.
I don't know either, so I don't know if I should even be replying, but I can think of three possibilities.
1. The Tomcat could have more of an issue to keep both burners on at takeoff and the risk of something going wrong is just too great.
2. The russians could simply be less concerned with potential risks.
3. The americans could have been overly cautious and it just became part of the procedure.
The F-14 A version had numerous engine issues, and airframes were lost (as well as pilots) so the Navy decided to be cautious.
The other part of the equation is flight control effectiveness. The rudders in this case. Could be that the 29/27 have more effective rudders and hence have lower Vmca with full power.
Off the flight deck with afterburner the power was thought to have the potential to rip the gear off behind the takeoff sling shot pre launch 🚀
Hello the only reason I can see for not using burner for takeoff is it would over stress the gear and on a carrier it would snap the hold back tool.
Hello reapers,I'm from iran.I saw in our official footage posted from airforce about f 14's ,They're some times taking off with full military afterburners
Yes, I think we do it as we have A-versions in Iran. B and next models may not need full AB.
Thanks for the great tutorial! Can you help with something? From a cold start I can't make the VV path marker appear, even after switching on ILS system and switching to Landing mode.
This one has the GE engines with silver nozzle covers and not the P&W with black nozzle, right?
Thank you very much for your very informative vids! I have one and only request! Could you please speak slowly for people like me whose english is not their native language?
Best regards
I didn't notice if you mentioned it, but did you use DLC upon landing?
Are you gonna do a tutorial on how to launch the Aim-54s from the RIO Station?
eventually
Isn't the manual saying that speed brake should be used for the whole baseleg, downwind and final?
yes, I will re-make this vid in a couple for weeks.
Hook bypass switch should be at FILED so that yellow circle won’t flash when hook is up.
rgr noted
The afterburner will cause issues on takeoff because it will make the plane go too fast and it can cause issues to the runway
Thanks for the vid but I you didn't mention DLC. Is the DLC only for carrier landings?
I'm not sure TBH?
Is here not a "standard" TO trim setting? I would guess that if you try to take off with the landing trim (forgetting to reset) you will mess it up.
I'ev not found any TO trim anywhere. weird
2° up, 0, 0.
The hud update rate reminds me of flight sims from 30 years ago.
Just a guess be asymmetrical thrust, and fuel usage. I know its rarely an issue in DCS but the amount of fuel burned on takeoff is not insignificant.
just as a sidenote: the AOA indexer shows units, not degrees. so 15 units of AOA ;)
Oh really? I just can;t my head around this AoA units thing...
@@grimreapers tbh, just dont, its arbitrary. Each manufacturer used his own scale for AOA 'units'. just know it needs to be 15 in the tomcat. tbh, I prefer using the AOA indexer instead of the E bracket when trimming on downwind, since it has no delay and if you are on 15 units of AOA, you're bang on the E bracket anyhow.
Why isn't the airspeed indicated on the HUD ? I feel like this simple addition would make my life 10 times easier in any situation
agree. It just wasn;t the done thing in 1971
Viggen has a great symbol in it's hud that's actually still used in the Gripen aircraft today: The Speed is indicated by the "fin" on the vector symbol. The fin is attached to the "fuselage" of the vector if speed is correct during approach. If speed is too high, the fin is high. If you're too slow, the fin is below or in the fuselage.. Very simple and easy to use.
F14 is very very capable, but it really lacks the simplicity of the Viggen
No afterburners! Wy? several reasons.first in carriers the fuel is very valuable and there is no need to WASTE it.unless is full loaded no wind on deck.second, full AB can be viewed from miles away and in some carriers de deflection barrierson the catapult are not strong enough to withsand the full power of the F14B/D.In ground runways the full burner will cause damage to the runway during rotation.
IRL the F-14 always used full flaps for takeoff
Not true. Flap setting was briefed beforehand but most often was maneuvering flaps for TO.
Flying a aircraft, anti skid is needed to stop the aircraft it is not for a slick runway
what is the button for nose wheel steering?
Would the Iranians flare on landing to preserve their airframes? I mean, naval planes can land with high descent rates, but is it ideal?
In my DCS experience, holding DLC full aft + ground effect gives enough lift to almost arrest the descent and absolutely butter the bread on landing in the Tomcat.
I am not 100% sure, but i assume you would run the risk of a tailstrike on landing if you flared.
I don't think so, something in between, nor too smooth neither too hard. But not sure either.
But I've heard from a former Iranian pilot, Col. Hamzei, that in his trainings, after his service on F-5, he was taking care of landing a Tomcat as smoothly as possible, but his instructor had told him "You don't need to do such a consideration at all, it's designed for carrier landing"!
How do I change the sweep angle after take off?
Which map is this?
Excellent !By the way, the latest Fighter Pilot Podcast has an interview with both a former F14 Pilot and RIO which you may wish to check out - th-cam.com/video/VSwLSEQjxfg/w-d-xo.html. The pilot also confirmed that they were not allowed to use AB on takeoff from either land or carrier in the F14B (or F14D) due to the strain this would put on the gear..... The two GE F110-400 engines were just too powerful. The F14A had the older, less powerful, less reliable TF-30 engines (so did the F-111) and they used AB all the time on takeoff from land or Carrier.
Interesting, thanks a bunch!
The limitation was due to thrust asymmetry. I was also told that that the GEs would damage the JBD on the carrier in full AB.
I like your videos, but I find in this one you speak way too fast; it´s tricky to follow you being a non English native speaker.
Thank you and hope you are doing well.
As a native english speaker he's still talking way to fucking fast. It's irritating.
As for the Tomcat not using afterburners on takeoff comments... check these out:
th-cam.com/video/DxuMK2dIDJE/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/JNrck2VLai4/w-d-xo.html
The A model was permitted to use afterburners for takeoff.
It's not a game Cap.....It's a Sim.....there's a difference.
Here's a video of an F14 taking off with afterburners, in case anyone needs precedent… th-cam.com/video/JNrck2VLai4/w-d-xo.html
Is there a way to switch this to English? lol