Carrier training

[Fly Navy]

I know I am. It's all in good fun.

Yes we did, and the boat did too. But we only had two of them, so if they had recently changed the runways, we were on the old lens (made you feel like a rockstar until you went back to the new lens ). Same thing with Orange Grove, they had to constantly move it to the active runway.

I have no idea up here. I won't be in the plane for a loooong while. But the thing that sucks up here is because of noise abatement, we have to fly a 1000' pattern and the break is at 1500'. So much for training like you fight. Our OLF has even a higher pattern altitude. We gotta go to El Centro to fly a 600' pattern.

We have one IFLOLS at the field here, right now it's on 1L since the winter winds tend to shift to the north. Used to be on 19L. Our OLF has an IFLOLS on 31, never landed on 13 so I can't comment there. I got so used to flying it though,t hat when I go to the old lense, I'm sucking it hard core lol.

 

[A4sForever]

Actually, we asked these very questions. .......As far as I know (which is probably wrong) the roll angle of the lens at the field was 0. However, at the boat .... .......The only difference between field and carrier ops ......Yes, you would feel high and tight at the 90 at the boat (I never did...... ..... this could be finessed depending on the ship's speed (faster it's steaming, sooner you turn, and vice versa).

All the numbers worked though: 600' abeam, 450' at the 90, 375-325' at the 45 (usually 340-350 worked the best for me at the boat).

Any other questions Mr. LSO

To set the record straight for those who don't know: Flying the ship and the field are about as much alike as a hangnail is to a double amputation. Day or night. And as you've never seen the blunt end @ night, get ready. Great fun .....

Yeah, the "roll angle" was a trick question. You do know what it is, right ???

But ... "Mr. LSO" ... ??? Please --- I'm not an LSO anymore --- and I'm sure you know that. I only have @ 500 traps and have waved/observed tens of thousands of passes. I know some of the EA6 LSO's at Whidbey ... I'll give 'em a "heads up" that a real FRP "pro" is aboard. They will appreciate that --- it makes their job so much easier, especially at night. It's all in good fun.

Listen to yourself (above posts). You're amazingly cocky for someone who is a blinky-eyed FRP. Humility for one so inexperienced is always a good thing. I have seen hundreds of guys at the ship(s) --- but I have seldom, if ever, heard a guy with .... what ... 10 traps (?) , all day arrestments, that had the program wired like you seem to do. I don't "think" I'm "RAG"ing (pun intended) ... but like I said ... listen to yourself. But it's all in good fun.

Confidence is always good --- when tempered with a knowledge of one's own limitations. In your case, I hope you're REALLY good ... because with your "I've got it wired" attitude --- you'd better be --- for your sake.

More from the "Good fun" department: a small question, Punk .... how'd you ever pick the "callsign" of .... "Punk", anyway ??? I'm not going to guess .... .... you did say this was .... all in "good fun", yes ???

 

[Punk]

Cocky?!? Hey, I was just trying to explain what I was taught to see if it jived with what you taught back in the day. It did seem that your post inferred that things were done differently back in the day. That is all.

Did anywhere I say I go out and fly all OK passes? I thought I was just explaining how it worked and even asked for other more experienced people to jump in. So if I understand the system, I got it "wired"? Isn't it safe practice to understand how everything works before you go out and try it? And hell, plenty of times in my post I said "I don't quite remember, but I think" hoping someone would jump in and correct me if I'm wrong. But instead you'd rather once again prove your dominance, fine. You're salty, you've been there, done that, so instead of breaking my balls, help out, k?

So help me out A4, did the whole "Mr. LSO" comment throw you off? I was busting your balls for fun, it obviously worked.

And no, Punk is not my callsign. But its not that hard to figure out.


PS: roll angle - (if I remember correctly, so help out if I'm wrong , is the angle the lens is tilted in or out so that everyone is seeing a centered ball at the correct spot since every aircraft has a different eye-to-hook point distance)

 

[beau]

I know I am. It's all in good fun.

Yes we did, and the boat did too. But we only had two of them, so if they had recently changed the runways, we were on the old lens (made you feel like a rockstar until you went back to the new lens ). Same thing with Orange Grove, they had to constantly move it to the active runway.

I have no idea up here. I won't be in the plane for a loooong while. But the thing that sucks up here is because of noise abatement, we have to fly a 1000' pattern and the break is at 1500'. So much for training like you fight. Our OLF has even a higher pattern altitude. We gotta go to El Centro to fly a 600' pattern.

yikes! sounds like the Navy lost another battle of the homeowners....how old is that restriction? Oak Harbor must be growing closer and closer to NAS!

 

[Punk]

yikes! sounds like the Navy lost another battle of the homeowners....how old is that restriction? Oak Harbor must be growing closer and closer to NAS!

I honestly don't know, but if you've ever heard a Prowler, it really doesn't matter. We could be in the stratosphere and still rattle windows.

Oak Harbor is exploding. VQ-2 from Rota just moved here and housing is close to nonexistent. The rest is excruciatingly expensive. That is why I'm renting.

 

[squeeze]

I honestly don't know, but if you've ever heard a Prowler, it really doesn't matter. We could be in the stratosphere and still rattle windows.

Ya... you're ugly and you go slow, but hey, at least you're annoying as hell doing it.

God I hate those things.

 

[Punk]

Ya... you're ugly and you go slow, but hey, at least you're annoying as hell doing it.

God I hate those things.

faster than you down low

not a problem, you don't want us, have fun going against the bad guy defenses without us

 

[kmac]

Alright so here's the math challenge for you smart people out there. We know (trust me on this one A4s) that the "numbers" are the same at the field and the ship. So, how can this be? The deck is ~60' high. How does a 450 at the 90 and a 325-375 at the 45 really equate between the ship and the field?

 

[squeeze]

Alright so here's the math challenge for you smart people out there. We know (trust me on this one A4s) that the "numbers" are the same at the field and the ship. So, how can this be? The deck is ~60' high. How does a 450 at the 90 and a 325-375 at the 45 really equate between the ship and the field?

Because the airfield isn't moving away from you.

 

[A4sForever]

Cocky?!? Hey, ...... so instead of breaking my balls, help out, k?

So help me out A4, did the whole "Mr. LSO" comment throw you off? I was busting your balls for fun, it obviously worked.

Sooooooo ......... "busting (seniors') "balls" is what does it for you ??? Try it with your CO/XO sometime, just for fun ...... and while you're at it --- you might as well tell the LSO after a brief .... "any more questions, Mr. LSO". They'll like that as well.

It just brings up a point that I see over and over on AW --- a general lack of respect moving "up" the food chain. Kidding is kidding, satire is satire, humor and good-natured ribbing is always appreciated. But "busting balls"??? I guess it was different when being gentlemen was put at a premium. I thought I was good when I was an Ensign and JG (and I was), but I knew when to go zip-lip and say "whatever you say, Sir". Not too much percentage in "busting balls"; expecially when you are a ..... JO or .... a "Punk"(?)

Had you done that Back-in-etc., etc. ... you would have spent a lot of time on the beach det. I still go with "cocky" --- and I have no problem with that --- I like guys with self-confidence, but there's got to be something to back it up with .... other than finishing the TRACOM. It's usually based on performance and reputation, not smoke. Like I said, lets hope you're good.

And the "field" is not the same as the ship --- numbers or otherwise. Show me a field, absent one dedicated to an FCLP pattern , that has a 600 AGL pattern @ the 180 and I'll eat it. Absent that --- you're correcting (artificially at the field) off an extremely high 180 position ..... not to mention crosswinds at the field, and no pitching decks, and relative wind down the angle (or not), and no field pucker factor .... I can't say there's much the "same" about the field and the ship. Sorry ......

 

[kmac]

A4s,
Whereas I agree that the ship is nothing like the field when it comes to winds, pitching deck, etc., I am saying that the same "correct" approach turn from a 600' AGL will get you to the same start (creasting ball) at the field or the ship. I'm leaving it up as a math challenge for those to see why. We're not comparing anything else but the FCLP pattern and the ship pattern in regard to altitudes at the same relative position.

 

[Brett327]

I honestly don't know, but if you've ever heard a Prowler, it really doesn't matter. We could be in the stratosphere and still rattle windows.

Oak Harbor is exploding. VQ-2 from Rota just moved here and housing is close to nonexistent. The rest is excruciatingly expensive. That is why I'm renting.

Actually, the pattern/break altitude at Whidbey has very little to do with noise abatement and in general, 800 ft breaks at Navy fields are the exception and not the rule.

Brett

 

[A4sForever]

A4s,
Whereas I agree that the ship is nothing like the field when it comes to winds, pitching deck, etc., I am saying that the same "correct" approach turn from a 600' AGL will get you to the same start (creasting ball) at the field or the ship. I'm leaving it up as a math challenge for those to see why. We're not comparing anything else but the FCLP pattern and the ship pattern in regard to altitudes at the same relative position.

Of course ... and I hate it when people "major on the minors" (i.e., nit-pick) .... but that's not what was said earlier in the thread. "The field is/was the same as the ship" or words to that effect. Patently, obviously, not true ..... some on here don't know the difference.

I agree with you in this post completely .... now does that scare you, or what ????

 

[Punk]

No, I said you fly the same numbers at the field as you do at the ship, which is mostly true EXCEPT for the turn at the 180 since you have to take the head wind into count, and that only concerns when to turn to get a proper groove length. Go ahead and reread my first post. Our LSO's made sure we understood that so not to "game it" at the field. 600' on the RADALT at the field, same as the boat. I'm really not making this up. This is what is taught and what is flown.

Trust me, I'll be the first to completely agree with you that the ship is nothing like it is at the field. I enjoyed the boat alot more because there was no x-winds, no thermals, pretty much smooth air. Throw some crappy weather and some pitching decks or night, and I'll revise that statement . I can think of 4 fields off the top of my head where the 180 was 600' AGL (6--' MSL whatever depending on your field elevation): Kingsville, Orange Grove, Meridian, Whitehouse. Everytime we flew a 600' AGL 180 off the RADALT. I know the old crusty sim instructors told us we were wrong to be flying the pattern off the RADALT and not the baro, but that's what the IP's in the jet are teaching, that's what the LSO's teach and expect, so that's what we do.

A4's, I meant ZERO disrespect by the "anymore quetions, Mr. LSO" comment. I'm not trying to pick a fight with you. If you want to take my posts as cocky, so be it, I obviously can't change your mind. Anything further, you are welcome to discuss it with me in a PM.

 

[Fly Navy]

Everytime we flew a 600' AGL 180 off the RADALT. I know the old crusty sim instructors told us we were wrong to be flying the pattern off the RADALT and not the baro, but that's what the IP's in the jet are teaching, that's what the LSO's teach and expect, so that's what we do.

We fly off BARO here. You have to, especially off 19L. If you flew off the RADALT, you'd be all sorts of fvcked up.

Our LSOs never say fly off the RADALT. They told us (and I'll agree to it based purely on my EE education) that the RADALT is innaccurate over water because of the way radio/radar waves propagate off of water.