Kazunori Ito's CF 101 Voodoo

[kilnerstew]

Hi folks,

I'm a big fan of Mr Ito's planes and fly a fair few.Unfortunately, I can't land the Voodoo without dancing around on the nosewheel as it seems impossible to flare before landing . It just won't float down nicely onto the tarmac and is easy to overshoot.:mad:

There are over 7500 downloads of this plane from the library, so I'm wondering if anybody else struggles to bring it down - or do I need to revisit Flying School.:confused:

regards......Stuart U.K.

[thindog]

I dont know the plane as I have yet to download it but it sounds like your air file is corrupted somehow. get the freeware air152up find some tutorials on this program there are some in the flightsim downloads, and have a ball you can do some nifty tweaking and make aircraft do some unbeleavable things like a supersonic Sopwith Camel:D Been there done that:cool:

[napamule2]

Stuart,
Makes you wonder how those other 7500 downloads can fly/land that thing, doesn't it? (You start getting paranoid, too-'Is it me, or is it my system?'). I guess they must know how to tweak the cfg and air file, is all I can figure. But they don't tell anyone (can you imagine getting 5,000 email requests for 'fix'?) out of need for sefl preservation?

I am here 'visiting' as I haven't had 2k2 for a year now (got new/bigger hard drives). But I can say that most 2k2 a/c can be installed in FS2004 and should work. That being said, I can then recommend you download a FS2004 version of F101 and use THOSE cfg/air file combo files (only change the name of files to match what you have). Should work. If nothing else just copy/paste the CONTANT POINTS section of cfg over to 2k2 cfg. Try it.

Kaz Ito's dynamics have improved a bunch since those 'early days' and he is up there with the best modelers with his FDE's. Cheers.
CB
Napamule

[kilnerstew]

Thanks guys,

After going through a couple of sets of tyres, I can now manage to land the Voodoo fairly well- but only by using the air brake just before touch down.

I doubt whether the real-world plane did that, because the chute deploys on activation:confused:

As far as I am aware, he only produced one FS2002 / Fs2004 model, so switching .cfg files is not an option.

I agree with you Napamule, Mr Ito's later offerings perform much better in the air.

The man is a painting genius - he has done a couple of British WW2 planes [Whirlwind and Beaufighter ] which are a joy to look at on the tarmac- never mind firing the engines up:)

I will have a play with the air file edit facility you mentioned Thindog- I can only imagine what a Sopwith Camel would look like at Mach 2 - I bet the pilot's scarf flaps about a bit:eek:

Regards........Stuart

[napamule2]

stuart,
Of the 7000 plus people that downloaded that plane, only a few do not know how to land it due to not using up pitch trim to hold your nose up so as to land on main wheels. To do this you need to set up attitude 2 mi out, with lots of up pitch trim, then giving throttle so as to maintain speed, which may even require you to use 1 less notch of flaps. It's a balancing act. And you can 'tap' the spoiler (quick on/off) to help reduce speed on approach. The flare is almost 'built in' with use of lots of pitch trim, so you don't need to struggle with that part as much. Then, when it lands, remove the (excessive) up pitch trim (while you do your roll out) so that the nose wheel will come down at around 60 kts. Might not even need the chute. Hey you do what you have to do to 'get it done'. Just takes a little practice. Pretend you are doing a carrier landing. Helps with mind set concerning 'flare'. Might not need it?
CB
Napamule

[kilnerstew]

''stuart,
Of the 7000 plus people that downloaded that plane, only a few do not know how to land it due to not using up pitch trim ''

Really ??

[napamule2]

Kilnerstew,
Yes, really. What are you going to use to keep the nose up? ELEVATORS? That is what I mean. You can't effectively control a mil jet with elevators on approach. The same goes for landing on a carrier by using elevators on approach. Won't work. But a picture perfect approach and landing IS VERY possible by use of up pitch trim to control AofA (while still flying 'level'). Physics. Dynamics. Tools. Practice. Cheers.
CB
Napamule

[kilnerstew]

napamule,

I appreciate what you are saying - it's just the way that you put it.

I bow to your superior flying skills.:o

[napamule2]

Kilnerstew.
So your (too) are a 'word-ologist'? My English is not THAT bad is it? So what was it that you did not 'approve' of? I didn't use slang or cuss words. Just plain English.

I wanted to be sure the reader did not miss the 'USE UP PITCH TRIM ON APPROACH' point. How else can one put it? Or like they say: 'What Part Of 'USE UP PITCH TRIM' do you not understand? My skills are irrelevant.
CB
Napamule
PS: I now have FS2002 installed (for 4 days now) and will install and tweak the Vodoo as tweaks CAN help make it behave for landings. I just installed the King Air 350 and the Concorde as a start. I have the Jaguar 120 and the FS98 Hummer 2 (MMC) (as I like vehicles) and am enjoying the 65 FPS (Locked at 65). FS9 can wait.

[kilnerstew]

napamule ,

If you are a lot younger than I, and I suspect you are, a few words of advice, get that chip off your shoulder [ what do you mean by not another one ?].

This thread started off with a simple question about the flight dynamics of a particular aircraft in MSFS.On your own admission, you have not installed that particular aircraft, so your comments can only relate to flight dynamics on a general level.

You then come in with your advice, which although useful, is phrased in a patronising [ only a few of the 7,000 downloads etc ] and aggressive manner [ capitals are shouts ].If I want treating like that I can go on to youtube

Treat people with respect [ even on internet forums ] and it will be reciprocated.

Look up 'patronising' and 'reciprocated' if you don't know what they mean.

Don't bother replying to this thread because you have caused me to completely lose interest in it , and this forum.


Stuart.

[napamule2]

Ok, Stuart, I messed up. I apologize and don't go away mad. Hear me out. I mis-read you. I thought I had someone that refused to believe what I was saying (ie: 'Really?') as being THE answer. Many times I give a tip and it's regarded as being 'too simple' to be true. But in this case it was not the 'answer' anyway, as the dynamics are really messed up. No aircraft shouldn't do what it did when one extends flaps. The tip 'use elevator trim to keep the nose up' applies to aircraft that flys fairly well. This one didn't. So that alone did not make 'the difference'. Major surgery was the only thing that would fix it. So I did surgery.

I installed it yesterday and worked on the cfg and air file (all night long). Both were off. It flys good now and lands at 120 to 135 depending on flaps, throttle, etc. With plenty of up pitch trim I had it landing at 100 kts, just to demo my 'skills' (hehe). Made Fraps videos.

I could upload here, in case there are others interested in this model (F-101 'B', the 2 place model). It is a very good looking, I must say. Did not have it in my hangar. I do a lot of GA and Bush pilot type flying.

For the last month was working on the Concorde (got it going M4.25). Then (due to stupid FSX 'simconnect' problems) I decided to wipe everything and re-install everything (XP Sp2, and FS2002 so far). I'll re-install FS9 soon. I don't care for FSX anymore (not after 2 years of tweaking everyday to get 20 FPS-forget it-at least untill I get a new PC).

I am retired now, and this is my hobby (been flying and working on cfg/air files since FS98, but now I do it full time, 24/7-ha). I will be 70 next May. And yeah, I can be a grouch sometimes. But I don't hate anyone. I'm just that way (old geezer type-hehe). Cheers.
CB
Napamule

[napamule2]

But for anyone else interested, I just uploaded new cfg and air file for Kaz Ito's F-101B model here at FSCom library (and nowhere else). The zip should show up tomorrow (Sat Mar 6). These files will fix the 'nose dip' and 'soaring' of a/c on extension of flaps. Will now land 'normal' at 110 to 130 kts (depending on your 'skill level' (hehe). Added FD, so 3rd party panels can work in AP mode, so you can shoot the ILS on approach (works down to 200 ft, then switch AP off. This is 'adequate' for this type of aircraft, I do believe). Does Mach 2. Aerobatics? Of course.

I think I 'lost' Stuart (hehe). My-o-my. Some people are so sensitive. Yet they ignore their own shortcomings (post was 'Really?'). I am sorry, but there is two sides to every story. You be the judge. I am just a 'mechanic' anyway. Not a 'Captain' or anything such as that. But I bet I can out fly you (hehe). Especially after I get done 'working' on the FDEs. Hope you like the results. Cheers.
CB
Napamule

[ED_4]

Landing this thing is doable. I have managed to do it. Oh and that's not using Napamule's updated air and cfg files. And this is in FS2002 (I just recently resurrected my FS2002 from the shelf), not my FS9 install.

The only thing you have to watch out for is the high speed landing. Full flaps, and around 170 or so knots. If you come in too slow, your sink rate will be too high, so you'd have to come in fairly fast for this aircraft. And with that, touching down on a runway is a matter of having enough runway. If you touch down on a fairly short runway, lookout. If the runway you're touching down is short and somewhere around 8000 feet or less, you'll really need to touch down as close to the numbers as possible.

I tested this out on the North Island runway in San Diego. And I almost ended up in the bay. :eek: Good thing it's got plenty strong brakes. LOL

[napamule2]

Ed,
With the new FDE's it's even more doable. Aproach is at 160 kts, 1 mile out at 140 kts, over the threshold at 130 and TD at 125 Kts, nose wheel down at 90 kts, then add rev-thrust, and spoiler (chute) and you should only use 3800 ft of a 4800 ft runway. You only need 2 of flaps. And on doing an ILS approach (to 200 ft) it now handles like an aircraft (and not like a helium filled rocket with no brakes, like before). Try my mods. You might like them. But you have to be 'clever' enough (and not an 'ANTI-SPOILER' purist) to use the tools you have (see below). Even I can muff the landing if I don't do what is 'required'.

Here is excerpt from ReadMe:

''Press of '/' (spoiler/chute) ON (for 2 seconds) and then OFF, will act as air brake to slow a/c, Repeated ON/OFF will give you step down speeds on approach. (The chute doesn't deploy until 4 second).

Will do Mach 2+ (1600 kts). Bad fuel milage, so keep eye on your fuel quantity. Very sensitive controls, but smooth and 'solid' feel (IMHO).''

CB
Napamule

[ED_4]

Ed,
With the new FDE's it's even more doable. Aproach is at 160 kts, 1 mile out at 140 kts, over the threshold at 130 and TD at 125 Kts, nose wheel down at 90 kts, then add rev-thrust, and spoiler (chute) and you should only use 3800 ft of a 4800 ft runway. You only need 2 of flaps. And on doing an ILS approach (to 200 ft) it now handles like an aircraft (and not like a helium filled rocket with no brakes, like before). Try my mods. You might like them. But you have to be 'clever' enough (and not an 'ANTI-SPOILER' purist) to use the tools you have (see below). Even I can muff the landing if I don't do what is 'required'.

Here is excerpt from ReadMe:

''Press of '/' (spoiler/chute) ON (for 2 seconds) and then OFF, will act as air brake to slow a/c, Repeated ON/OFF will give you step down speeds on approach. (The chute doesn't deploy until 4 second).

Will do Mach 2+ (1600 kts). Bad fuel milage, so keep eye on your fuel quantity. Very sensitive controls, but smooth and 'solid' feel (IMHO).''

CB
Napamule

Reverse thrust? Oh, you're making this plane too easy. I don't think that real one had any reversers. :p

[napamule2]

Ed,
The reversers are mainly for 'show' and 'entertainment' purposes (which I assume is intention of Sim). The chute (spoiler) does most of the work anyway. So, DO NOT USE REVERSERS (and, in your case, that's a DIRECT ORDER).

What is difficult is to land that a/c and then make it stop when you want it to. Don't want to 'struggle'? Then use my FDE's and enjoy the F101. Or not. Your choice.

Then start a slant, intended to show your scorn for the bird (and/or me). What is it that you want, anyway? Someone to agree with you? About what? I thought this was about the F-101 Voodoo. I guess not. (Now argue some more).

Here is 'proof'. One minute video of landing only at YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpfJ0e2Fj0s . Piece of cake.

CB
Napamule

[tatest]

354th TFW where I was stationed was mostly F-100s, but we occasionally had RF-101s come down from Seymour-Johnson.

Both aircraft had speed brakes and drogues. The drogues are deployed only after touchdown, the speed brakes were for use in flight. They also had tail hooks and our runways had cables and nets, in case the drogue failed, to catch aircraft before they got off the reservation and onto the beach.

Both aircraft landed very fast, under power, because spool-up from idle was very long in the event of a go-around. I know the F-100 was using speed brakes on final, to fine tune the balance of thrust and drag. I have no reason to expect that the F-101 did not, this was pretty standard in the era.

The model flight dynamics probably doesn't model use of the speed brakes. Very few early jet fighter simulation models are as difficult to land as the real birds were, on the runways of the time. Since the advent of heavy civil jet transports, most of the major airfields have gotten longer runways than what 50s and 60s fighter bases had (longer even than most B-52 runways) so you will have more room in the simulator to get stopped.

[napamule2]

tatest,
Your model (any model) can have air brakes (or 'spoiler'). In this model the '/' key is the spoiler key and it is emplemented to deploy the chute. You can then dial in how much drag the chute has (is actually called spoiler) in the cfg (Geometry section) and the air file (called spoiler_drag). You can add as little or as much as you need.

Modelers will often put in minimum drag (equivalent to 2 notches of flaps) for birds like these (to make it 'real'). Trouble is you can't be landing at 160 kts and not have something to help you stop. The spoiler is the answer. You can add so much drag (like =16000) that it will slam the pilot into the windscreen-STOPS ON A DIME. Not real. The usual value is 800 to 1000 (which is plenty).

Then there is the extension time. At 2 seconds it's a fast reaction. At 12 seconds it is very gradual. Pick which one you need. But get the 'spoiler_pitch' right too, or you'll nose dive and ruin your approach and you won't be able to use it while in the air. Tricks of the trade. I do dynamics every day. SOME modelers don't know any of this. Could care less. So you have to learn to edit cfg and air files or you have aircraft that flying a pancake or fly like a brick. Or will not slow/stop (that's bogus). All aircraft should be able to stop, don't you agree. The purists (I set them up with 'reverse'-they always bite) THINK they want 'Hard' for realism (ie: impossible dynamics). Heck, anybody can do that.

Tuning it all so it 'works' in sim is the hard part. They are so 'pure' about things, yet they don't give credit when someone does a good job of tweaking 'junk' dynamics. 'Makes it too easy'. Yet, these same ones think that landing it sidways and running off the side of runway onto the grass is 'OK' ('my realism is set to 'Hard'). Their 'HEAD' is set to hard and are 'Stuck On Stupid'.
CB
Napamule

[kilnerstew]

napamule,

There I was in the Library checking out if Mr Ito had produced yet another stunning piece of artwork. Second file I saw was your fix for the F101:confused:

You have done a great job on this, it lands beautifully now - thank you:)

I just hope most of the 7,000 pilots see it and use it.:D

By the way, I've got plenty of shortcomings, but I'm working on them. ;)

Stuart

[napamule2]

Stuart,
That's what life is about. I too am still learning (I'll be 70 next May). And these 'text only' forum 'relationships' are hard to handle due to not being able to 'read' the other person. But all is forgotten. I am VERY glad you like the F-101 now. It's a shame no one (like maybe me?) steped in sooner, where a bunch of people would have enjoyed flying this model.

I wasn't as involved into tweaking back then (2002). Was working. Now I work on dynamics all day long ('24/7'), and never seem get done. Too much trial-n-error testing. Too many 'messed up' planes and too little time. One at a time I might put a dent in the pile. Tweak tweak tweak (hehe).

I have been working on the Concorde, and last few days on several versions of the Tupolev 144. I may upload FDEs for them when I get done ('next tuesday'). Got them for FS2k2. FS9. and FSX. Phew! My brain hurts. But I watch tv, take naps, play FreeCell and FooBilliards (Google this one). Life is not all tweaking. Nice to have made your aquaintance. See ya around.
CB
Napamule
PS: If you get FooBilliard (v3.0) go to Task Mgr (ctrl+alt+delete) and stop the process that is left running after you exit (minor incoveniece).

[kilnerstew]

Napamule,

This is to let you and others interested know that your air file tweaks also work in Kazunori Ito's great looking F4 Phantom.

I just removed the existing air file and re-named your F101 file appropriately.Unfortunately, this bird is also a 'nosewheel dancer' in its original state and is reluctant to settle on the runway.:(

I know that the flight characteristics of the two aircraft would differ,but they were both supersonic twin engine military jets, so that's good enough for me.

Cheers :D

[napamule2]

Stuart,
Well that's the spirit. Good to hear it improved the performance. I believe in doing what ever it takes, so no problem. In fact I encourage such 'tweaking', by all means. I do it.

Back in 2007 I uploaded FDEs for that bird (see pic). I did the mods for a fellow simmer (named Jerry, aka: 'El Camino'). Jerry actually worked on the TA-4J when he was in the Navy. He also made prize winning (remote control) models of it. So you might like to try my FDEs for it, as it has 'super spoiler' for static carrier landing. Maybe also better balance? Your call. Enjoy.
CB
Napamule

[norms001]

Hi there,
Try upping your approach speed by increments until you get a bit more "bite" from your stabilator which will allow you to keep the nose up a little higher and allow better control on final approach. The Voodoo gets nose heavy at slower speeds. Use the stick to control the airspeed and the engine (throttle) to control up-and-down. You should be able to set up your approach attitude and hold it all the way to touchdown and use power to adjust altitude to touchdown. The key is to control your speed with the stick (elevator or stabilator) and control altitude with the throttle (power). The problem with a slower approach speed is the nose gets heavy because you are landing with full flaps deployed. This tends to hold the nose low on approach. Carrying a bit more speed will give your tail a bit more control of the attitude at touchdown. Hope this info works for you.

Hi folks,

I'm a big fan of Mr Ito's planes and fly a fair few.Unfortunately, I can't land the Voodoo without dancing around on the nosewheel as it seems impossible to flare before landing . It just won't float down nicely onto the tarmac and is easy to overshoot.:mad:

There are over 7500 downloads of this plane from the library, so I'm wondering if anybody else struggles to bring it down - or do I need to revisit Flying School.:confused:

regards......Stuart U.K.