Thursday, August 4, 2016

[EDIT] FSX carriers' inconsistencies

Ok, guys

When working on the RFN gauge integration into the next vLSO version I've noticed certain inconsistencies in OLS-wires placement on different carriers, namely on the Acceleration and Javier's CVN68.OLS hereinafter means the Acceleration embedded FLOLS.
Well, I googled a blueprint of the Nimitz and then compared it against the two models:

First thing that you will notice is that the Acceleration model is smaller and loosely reminds the real ship, while Javier's carrier almost perfectly matches the blueprint, which seems to prove that his model is the most accurate. However, the most significant difference (not visible at first glance) is that Javier's OLS and crossdeck pendants are shifted to the stern. Also, you can notice different spacing between wires - the green crossdeck lines above show Acceleration wires and the OLS datum line, the yellow lines show Javier's ones.
This zoomed view displays these differences in more details:

Then I placed an airplane on the deck of these carriers in a position 'on glideslope' to see where it should touch the deck.
'On gideslope' ball as seen from the cockpit

The Acceleration - right on wire #4
Javier's - well past wire #4
Huge disappointment!

Is there a carrier with correct wires-OLS positions, one might ask? Yes, there is. The Team SDB CVN65 in configuration with the default FLOLS. The 'on-glideslope' position on this carrier matches wire #3:

Another comparison screenshot proves that. The green line corresponds to wire #3 of the Big-E.

So, what's the point? What all this means for us? Well, it means that even flying on the ball you shouldn't hope to catch wire #3 on existing Nimitz models. Otherwise you should intentionally fly low at the ramp...

As a workaround you can use the RFN gauge, but in this case you shouldn't take the OLS into account and fly RFN needles exclusively.

======  EDIT  ======

The Aerosoft CV63 Kitty Hawk utilizes a RFN gauge (with its inherent precision). You can see that when flying on the ball you should land right in front of wire #3:

Actually, this gauge is kinda MOVLAS, not FLOLS, and the ball corresponds to your position on the glideslope. The RFN gauge controls the ball the same way as a real LSO controls a MOVLAS.


  1. So basically one needs to use the Team SDB CVN65 carrier for ops. Have you checked how the Aerosoft Kitty Hawk CV-63 performs?

  2. Their carrier utilizes an RFN gauge clone, so it should precisely guide an airplane to the wire #3. But I will certainly check that.

  3. Thank you for looking into the Aerosoft Kitty Hawk CV-63. It looks like we have at least two carriers that work correctly.

  4. ...and three more RFN carriers - Foch, Clemenceau and Charles de Gaulle - which have an adjustable OLS.

  5. Thank you for this analysis. No wonder I had so many "Bolter" on Javier's. Happy to see that the Sludge 323 is still on your deck - Johan

  6. Huge find Paddles!! Ive been doin initial Carrier Quals in the T-45 and I kept boltering when i was on the ball! well, I guess this explains it lol

  7. the RFN gauge stands for Royal French Navy gauge right? where could i learn more about the gauge?

  8. Yes, you're right. You can find the gauge here

  9. Hey NAVYPILOT, Does Javier know about this issue? If so, does he plan on fixing it? Or is it more than just a simple fix?

  10. I know nothing about Javier's intentions...
    IMHO, to fix this issue it would require some changes to the model, namely moving arresting wires forward.

  11. Hi NAVYPILOT, I have Team SDB CVN-65 and I greatly appreciate the fact that glide slope is set at 3.5 deg which is much more realistic than the steeper fsx/p3d default slope. However, I'd like to use your vLSO software in conjunction with it but its groove angle setting (4.12 deg) make me always get the waveoff call. So my question is: is there the possibility to customize the glide slope angle vLSO use for guidance? If not, could you add this feature in the next release? Thanks

  12. That's right, the current vLSO version uses only 4.12 deg glideslope for the Big E. As you know, this ship has two versions - with the default FLOLS (preset to 4.12 deg) and with a custom RFN-based FLOLS (preset to 3.5 deg). Fortunately, with the kind assistance and help of Sylvain Parouty and Michel Panattoni I was able to elaborate a way to deal with RFN customizable OLSs. So, the upcoming vLSO version will support ships with RFN OLSs, among other new features.. ;-)

    1. Great...can't wait for it!

  13. Good day Paddles, I thought that glideslope, angle offset, and touch down position were all adjustable within the TacPack Manager Carriers tab? Maybe I am misunderstanding the issue here?


  14. But the TPM can't change anything about FLOLS, because it is implemented by FSX. The only gauge I know, capable to adjust its OLS, is the RFN gauge.

  15. Again I must be missing something. A member of Virtual US Navy wrote: "We use all of these (vLSO, CCP, TacPack Carriers) in you can pm me and I have the values to put in tacpac that will make your vlso coincide with the ils and the ball is on the three wire every time. Rfn is used for non tacpac aircraft and CCP is used to get us on the boat to start the mission. They all play well together if set up right."

  16. The FSX FLOLS model is hardcoded into the flightsim and can not be changed in any way. That's why its parameters are also hardcoded into vLSO, so this program guides you assuming that you're flying the ball (I mean its visual model).

    So, my only guess here is that VUSN guys use their numbers to make TacPack coincide with vLSO (actually with FSX FLOLS), but not vice versa. ;)

    Would you please email those numbers when available?