F-4 Sim Full Motion Ex-RAF now Civilian [Carrier Landings]
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
F-4 Sim Full Motion Ex-RAF now Civilian [Carrier Landings]
Cold War pilot for the day "You to can fly this ex-RAF F-4 Phantom simulator (the only one in the world with full motion) and experience the sensation of being a fighter pilot in the 1980s." Words: Eugenio Facci; Photos: Keith Wilson in PILOT Magazine Aug 2023
The following users liked this post:
Interesting. I worked on the F4K simulator at Leuchars, (it was formerly Navy property and based at Yeovil. Then, when the RAF got a tranch of F4Ks the sim was moved to Leuchars and served 43 squadron and the Ark Royal crews.
The F4K and two F4M sims were built by Redifon in the late 60's and had a computer system that consisted of two computers with magnetic core memory and a camera model visual with the image projected to a flat screen. Radar and control loading was all analogue. It was possible to operate from land and sea. Yeovil was simulated and from the Ark Royal.
The sim had a three axis motion which had a rather different geometry to this one.
The IOS also was rather different, it did have repeat instruments but no keyboards or monitors. Malfunctions and such were applied by pushbutton and the ownship position was shown through the movement of a pen mounted to an XY carriage.
It was a big machine and occupied a large, specially built building. The sims for the F4M were even larger as they had two camera model set ups. One for the runway and one for the ground attack training area.
Years later when I was in Wichita I got to see an F4 sim that the Air National Guard were using. (can't remember what mark) Singer-Link, I expect, had managed to fit the sim in its entirety into something the size of the trailer of an articulated truck.
The F4K and two F4M sims were built by Redifon in the late 60's and had a computer system that consisted of two computers with magnetic core memory and a camera model visual with the image projected to a flat screen. Radar and control loading was all analogue. It was possible to operate from land and sea. Yeovil was simulated and from the Ark Royal.
The sim had a three axis motion which had a rather different geometry to this one.
The IOS also was rather different, it did have repeat instruments but no keyboards or monitors. Malfunctions and such were applied by pushbutton and the ownship position was shown through the movement of a pen mounted to an XY carriage.
It was a big machine and occupied a large, specially built building. The sims for the F4M were even larger as they had two camera model set ups. One for the runway and one for the ground attack training area.
Years later when I was in Wichita I got to see an F4 sim that the Air National Guard were using. (can't remember what mark) Singer-Link, I expect, had managed to fit the sim in its entirety into something the size of the trailer of an articulated truck.
Sounds great fun. Fascinating to have a go without the fear factor!
The following users liked this post:
I flew an F4 simulator at MCAS Yuma many years ago. What sticks in my memory was the rudder pedal shaker as I approached stall speed. I didn't know it would do that. I was probably still in PPL airplane training but was glider rated. Nothing I had flown prepared me for how it would feel.
I wonder if I'd do any better now that I have many more hours and types in my log.
I wonder if I'd do any better now that I have many more hours and types in my log.
The following 3 users liked this post by Rockie_Rapier:
From very unreliable memory, the C130K simulator terrain at Lyneham in the early '70s looked like a massive snooker table with modellers' greenery and scenery under a network of camera rails for the crew visuals. I wonder if any of the pilots were confronted by monstrous house flies in the circuit. 
The full motion flight deck was impressive though, along with the T56 roar.
I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell how it really was.
The full motion flight deck was impressive though, along with the T56 roar.I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell how it really was.
A friend told me that in early simulation daze using the camera / terrain tech one landscape was modified to put the control tower on a hinge/spring mount because the camera kept hitting it with monotonous regularity when doing single engine overshoots.
He also said that they had one sim where the camera was stationary longitudinally but could move laterally and vertically while the terrain moved longitudinally towards the camera lens on a giant conveyor belt. I do not know if this was just experimental.
He also said that they had one sim where the camera was stationary longitudinally but could move laterally and vertically while the terrain moved longitudinally towards the camera lens on a giant conveyor belt. I do not know if this was just experimental.
I think this is the one I had a go in back in the late '90's. It was in a converted agricultural building near Knaresborough in N Yorks. I think it was called Yorkshire Flight Centre? They also had a 737 sim. Fantastic fun Olster.......and like you say, no fear factor. The instructor was ex Vulcans and was called Mike.....surname escapes me. He took it all very seriously.......which was fine. I remember one of my three "missions" was to bomb a power station. The graphics were a bit ropey but a fantastic experience.
The following users liked this post:
From very unreliable memory, the C130K simulator terrain at Lyneham in the early '70s looked like a massive snooker table with modellers' greenery and scenery under a network of camera rails for the crew visuals. I wonder if any of the pilots were confronted by monstrous house flies in the circuit. The full motion flight deck was impressive though, along with the T56 roar.
I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell how it really was.
The full motion flight deck was impressive though, along with the T56 roar.I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell how it really was.
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
I’ve also heard of toy spiders placed on the table, they appeared huge when the ‘aircraft’ approached.
Many years ago I worked in the flight simulation department at BAes Warton, although we’d gone all digital by then we still had the old map table, complete with gouges in the hills where pilots had ridge-clipped (and the camera lens had impacted) and a broken bridge which others had tried to fly under…
Many years ago I worked in the flight simulation department at BAes Warton, although we’d gone all digital by then we still had the old map table, complete with gouges in the hills where pilots had ridge-clipped (and the camera lens had impacted) and a broken bridge which others had tried to fly under…
Mopar
I think this is the one from Knaresborough. After years of phixing the things I had a spin in this sim last year. Managed to get down on the deck without getting my feet wet, then bombed a power station on the way back to base.
Tremendous phun.
I think this is the one from Knaresborough. After years of phixing the things I had a spin in this sim last year. Managed to get down on the deck without getting my feet wet, then bombed a power station on the way back to base.
Tremendous phun.
The following 3 users liked this post by Akrotiri bad boy:
Sim. visuals
Ken, I remember (in the distant past) when i was tasked with "flying" the then MRCA simulator visual system (at an un-named company works). For those days (mid 70's) it was pretty good until, at low level over a certain "part" of Germany, I came face to face with a real, live spider - moving! It was a "disturbing" experience and very large!! Happy days!
I think it must be Abb. "Mike" said I did well but he was probably being polite! He gave me a printout of my approach profile......judging by the wavy lines, in reality, I'm pretty sure I'd have been parking a pile of scrap metal on the apron! Indeed "Tremendous phun"! Might have to give it another go. Drifting somewhat, it reminds me of a surreal conversation I had on the flight deck of a 747 200 back in the early 2000's. Me and the 1st officer were having a conversation about flight sims. Imagine my surprise when the 1st officer asked me if I could land the 747 in Microsoft Flight Sim 2000.......because he couldn't!!! Fortunately he greased it in to Sanford, Florida!! Happy days.
I read of a sim in Oz which included ground attack. Somebody armed the roos with AK-47s or suchlike.
I had that! But unsatisfied with it I built my own from my back garden up a poplar tree across some waste land and down into my mate's driveway, a distance of about 80 yards or 75,22234576m (made up number). We slidevery Airfix model I had down fishing line on copper wire hooks, the went like stink, you needed leather gauntlets to catch them before they crashed into the garage door. Heavy ones dipped down as the crossed the road much to the surprise of any passing motorist - especially when we had set them on fire before launching them. Happy Days
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes
on
46 Posts
Cold War Pilot for the Day - Eugenio Facci [carrier approach & catapult excerpts]
"The USS Nimitz is straight ahead, a small dot in the vast blue ocean. I lower the gear, lower the hook, and select landing flap. I add a bit more power, 63% N1, to keep my speed at the target 150 knots. I actually have no idea whether I’m lined up with the deck or not: all I see is a dot in the distance, and I need to ask the ‘tower’ to try to line up (“left of centreline” is the answer). I’m concentrating a lot, trying to keep the moving carrier in the same spot, the aspect ratio constant, the speed at 150kt – and all this on an aircraft new to me.
“A quick and gentle hand,” I keep telling myself. The angled deck is becoming visible now, and then it starts to get bigger. Do I need to sideslip a bit to match the moving ship? I don’t know, I forgot to ask in the brief… but it’s not a good time for theory questions, what I need now is quick hands and feet to keep these two pieces of metal (the carrier and the Phantom) roughly aligned. As I get closer, everything becomes faster. I need to apply more corrections, but they must become smaller, and quicker. I’m low… I’ll shear off the undercarriage on the stern of the ship! Nose up, add a bit of power. Now I’m drifting... nose left… but not too much, easy! Small corrections, you’ll end up swinging! Almost there, “keep it stable,” I tell myself, gentle hands… last 200ft… 100ft…the stern passes below, the parked aircraft pass on my right, full power! Boom! My head goes forward, the straps hold me back, power idle. Am I down? Yes I am, I landed on the carrier, I can’t believe it! Definitely not elegant – drifting a bit, and with an uneasy feeling of only partial control over the whole manoeuvre, but I’m down in one piece. Phew!
At this point, a full disclosure is needed: a few minutes earlier I had ingloriously ended up in the water, along with a few tons of metal, and millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money. But luckily no one was hurt and no money was actually wasted, because we’re in a simulator. That first approach taught me a lesson about the razor-thin margin within which naval aviators fly (I am not one, and I never was). Ten feet too high, and you won’t catch the wires; ten feet too low, and you’ll crash on the ship. All this at 150kt, trying to land on a moving deck.
On that first approach, everything happened so quickly. All seemed normal until about 100ft: on-speed, on-centreline (roughly), and on-profile. Then, in what was probably a stretch of three seconds maximum, things went wrong: first I had the impression that the deck was getting ‘shorter’ instead of ‘taller’, then I realised I was getting low, I did apply power but, by then, I’d hit the water. Talk about no room for error…
...[Former RAF F-4 Pilot Alan Munro comments: The aircraft carrier approach was quite realistic though. I have never done a carrier landing, but I have flown a few carrier approaches, and as ever the carrier seemed to get smaller the closer you approached. The hook worked. A landing sight system (a ‘meatball’) was not operational the day I tried it but would be a nice addition.]...
...Next on my list are carrier operations. I get positioned on the USS Nimitz and, for the catapult launch, I set takeoff flap (thirty degrees) and hold on the brakes. Next, I set full dry power and advise the ‘tower’ that I am ready to engage re-heat. Dan says he’s ready, I click the power levers left and forward for re-heat, release the brakes, and boom! The catapult brings the Phantom to 150kt in about two seconds. Pull up, gear up and flap up: with re-heat we are building up speed at a crazy rate, even with the nose about thirty degrees above the horizon. It’s a different kind of takeoff (more like an explosion really), where in the first several seconds I’m simply raising the nose more and more to try and keep the speed from ripping off the undercarriage and the flaps before I can raise them.
In any event, I do manage to get away from the ship in one piece, and then I start to prepare for the approach and landing. The preparation is the same as for a normal runway landing, with three differences. First, you need to lower the hook (controlled by a big lever on your right side, almost a ‘twin’ to the undercarriage lever on the left). Second, you really cannot flare here, you basically fly the aircraft into the ship. Third, and the most difficult part, is that you need to be very precise in following the glide accurately to land on the wires: it’s an extreme form of short field landing, and it takes a lot of concentration. After a good few hours of flying and managing my first successful ‘trap’ on the Nimitz I was so tired that I called it a day...." PILOT Magazine August 2023
"The USS Nimitz is straight ahead, a small dot in the vast blue ocean. I lower the gear, lower the hook, and select landing flap. I add a bit more power, 63% N1, to keep my speed at the target 150 knots. I actually have no idea whether I’m lined up with the deck or not: all I see is a dot in the distance, and I need to ask the ‘tower’ to try to line up (“left of centreline” is the answer). I’m concentrating a lot, trying to keep the moving carrier in the same spot, the aspect ratio constant, the speed at 150kt – and all this on an aircraft new to me.
“A quick and gentle hand,” I keep telling myself. The angled deck is becoming visible now, and then it starts to get bigger. Do I need to sideslip a bit to match the moving ship? I don’t know, I forgot to ask in the brief… but it’s not a good time for theory questions, what I need now is quick hands and feet to keep these two pieces of metal (the carrier and the Phantom) roughly aligned. As I get closer, everything becomes faster. I need to apply more corrections, but they must become smaller, and quicker. I’m low… I’ll shear off the undercarriage on the stern of the ship! Nose up, add a bit of power. Now I’m drifting... nose left… but not too much, easy! Small corrections, you’ll end up swinging! Almost there, “keep it stable,” I tell myself, gentle hands… last 200ft… 100ft…the stern passes below, the parked aircraft pass on my right, full power! Boom! My head goes forward, the straps hold me back, power idle. Am I down? Yes I am, I landed on the carrier, I can’t believe it! Definitely not elegant – drifting a bit, and with an uneasy feeling of only partial control over the whole manoeuvre, but I’m down in one piece. Phew!
At this point, a full disclosure is needed: a few minutes earlier I had ingloriously ended up in the water, along with a few tons of metal, and millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money. But luckily no one was hurt and no money was actually wasted, because we’re in a simulator. That first approach taught me a lesson about the razor-thin margin within which naval aviators fly (I am not one, and I never was). Ten feet too high, and you won’t catch the wires; ten feet too low, and you’ll crash on the ship. All this at 150kt, trying to land on a moving deck.
On that first approach, everything happened so quickly. All seemed normal until about 100ft: on-speed, on-centreline (roughly), and on-profile. Then, in what was probably a stretch of three seconds maximum, things went wrong: first I had the impression that the deck was getting ‘shorter’ instead of ‘taller’, then I realised I was getting low, I did apply power but, by then, I’d hit the water. Talk about no room for error…
...[Former RAF F-4 Pilot Alan Munro comments: The aircraft carrier approach was quite realistic though. I have never done a carrier landing, but I have flown a few carrier approaches, and as ever the carrier seemed to get smaller the closer you approached. The hook worked. A landing sight system (a ‘meatball’) was not operational the day I tried it but would be a nice addition.]...
...Next on my list are carrier operations. I get positioned on the USS Nimitz and, for the catapult launch, I set takeoff flap (thirty degrees) and hold on the brakes. Next, I set full dry power and advise the ‘tower’ that I am ready to engage re-heat. Dan says he’s ready, I click the power levers left and forward for re-heat, release the brakes, and boom! The catapult brings the Phantom to 150kt in about two seconds. Pull up, gear up and flap up: with re-heat we are building up speed at a crazy rate, even with the nose about thirty degrees above the horizon. It’s a different kind of takeoff (more like an explosion really), where in the first several seconds I’m simply raising the nose more and more to try and keep the speed from ripping off the undercarriage and the flaps before I can raise them.
In any event, I do manage to get away from the ship in one piece, and then I start to prepare for the approach and landing. The preparation is the same as for a normal runway landing, with three differences. First, you need to lower the hook (controlled by a big lever on your right side, almost a ‘twin’ to the undercarriage lever on the left). Second, you really cannot flare here, you basically fly the aircraft into the ship. Third, and the most difficult part, is that you need to be very precise in following the glide accurately to land on the wires: it’s an extreme form of short field landing, and it takes a lot of concentration. After a good few hours of flying and managing my first successful ‘trap’ on the Nimitz I was so tired that I called it a day...." PILOT Magazine August 2023
To say nothing of the Star Wars Death star and assorted Tie fighters