Aircraft Carrier Catapult Vs Ramp

Aircraft Carrier Catapult Vs Ramp - An AF-1 being hooked up to one of the Sao Paulo's catapults. The carrier has not supported aircraft for nearly a decade but the Brazilian Navy still hopes to return it to service (Photo credit Rob Shleiffert/Wikicommons):

Work on the land-based catapult as a part of the SATS system had been launched more than 10 years previously, inspired at least in part by experiences in the Korea War, when pierced steel matting had been laid to form extemporized airstrips close to the troops.

Aircraft Carrier Catapult Vs Ramp

By the early 1960s, there were experimental SATS sites at Bogue Field, North Carolina, and Quantico, Virginia. At one stage it was planned for SATS to accept a range of carrier-capable naval aircraft, including the A-6 Intruder, F-4 Phantom II, F-8 Crusader, and even the ultimately abortive F-111B.

The Floating Museum

A catapult system may be referred to as CATOBAR (Catapult Assisted Take-Off But Arrested Recovery), and this allows for launching a much wider range of aircraft. For example, CATOBAR carriers can launch large aircraft like the C-2 or E-2.

These aircraft would not be able to take off from a carrier without catapult assistance, and provide carrier resupply or AWACS capability. Even fighters that may be able to take off without assistance can be launched with much more payload.

However, this ability comes with a cost. The aircraft will need to have strengthened landing gear to withstand catapult launches. The carrier is also made more complex, placing an additional demand on a boiler or generator to provide the large amount of steam or electricity needed to launch aircraft.

Modern US carriers are nuclear powered, providing the energy needed for this system. Imposing, flexible, able to sail fast and launch devastating air strikes at long range, aircraft carriers are the ultimate expression of national power.

But The Russians Promised Us She Would Work

And many of the world's best-armed countries are acquiring them. China, Russia, India, Brazil, the U.K., France, America. Not all shitty aircraft carriers are Russian. The U.K. and France have both sold to poorer navies decommissioned flattops that probably should have been permanently retired.

In 2000 the Brazilian navy acquired the former Foch from Paris for $12 million. “A future naval operational concept that mitigates peer competitors’ anti-access/area-denial capability by creating a more survivable, resilient, and persistent forward-postured force. The EABO concept is designed to re-establish the force credibility required to have a deterrent effect.

Using key maritime terrain in the vicinity of close and confined seas, EABO provides decision-makers with sea denial options that are coercive, but not escalatory.” The “Leap Frogs,” the Navy SEALs Parachute Team, jumped into Petco Park to celebrate the San Diego Padres’ home opening game.

And here's that jump from a special point of view. On Mar. 30, the Navy […] BTW if you want to know more about the history of LSOs and trap landings I recommend “Wave-Off!: A History of LSOs and Ship-Board Landings” written by retired pilot and LSO Robert R.”Boom” Powell.

Mother Russia’s Tugboat Bait

A great read! Just last July, the last NATO fixed-wing carrier aircraft to use a bridle, the French Super Étendards Mordernise (SEM), was retired once and for all. The carrier these aircraft operated from, the Charles De Gaulle (R91), was never built with bridle catchers.

For many years SEMs slung bridles into the sea with reckless abandon. The ski jump takes up space in two ways- physically, it occupies front deck space (on the other hand, aircraft can be parked over catapults when not in use), while the take off run required by the aircraft (greater with more gross weight ) eats up more space, leading to limitations of the number of aircraft on the deck.

On the other hand, large aircraft carriers having flat decks have their aircraft launched by catapults (with a notable exception) which basically throw the aircraft from the deck. Although this system is heavy, expensive and complicated, it brings significant advantages to the table:

During the long conflict in Southeast Asia, the U.S. Marine Corps jets regularly flew from bases on land in direct support of troops on the ground. However, only one of the airbases that the service operated from in South Vietnam was actually equipped with arrester wires and even catapult launch gear.

Pitching Decks Can Make A Carrier Trap Landings Extremely Dangerous…

This was at Chu Lai, where the Marines built themselves what was basically a land-based “aircraft carrier” that was used by A-4 Skyhawk light attack jets and, later, F-4 Phantom II fighters. With its four catapults, a US carrier is capable of shooting one aircraft in every 15 seconds.

Kuznetsov has only three takeoff tracks. Furthermore, two bow tracks are not intended for fully-loaded aircraft! They can take off Kuznetsov only from one track which starts far behind the midship, i.e. An aircraft must run almost the whole flight deck!

Comparing to catapult, takeoff rate of ski-ramp is at least twice lower. Armed with 12,500-pound bombs, an F-4B from VMFA-323 completed a first catapult shot from Chu Lai in August 1966, but it was not the smoothest start, as the pilot, retired Colonel Robert Johnson, recalls in Peter E. Davies'

I made a slight turn to the right in the direction of what appeared to be a clear area where we could jettison. As I tried to level the wings the stick bucked and froze in my hand.

All I had to say was, 'Eject, Jim, Eject.' Jim responded instantly, and after hearing the second explosion, canopy and seat, I followed suit. Out altitude at the time was 100 feet or less. When my seat fired the aircraft was nearly 90 degrees to the horizon.

As advertised, seat separation and chute opening occurred automatically, and I got a 90-degree swing in the chute before landing in a the-wire concertina fence. I looked up to see Jim come down in his chute about 30 yards away, The aircraft disintegrated about 50 yards beyond that, but none of the bombs detonated.

The catapult system finally became operational in May 1966 and was powered by a pair of General Electric J79 turbojets (as used in the F-4, among others), providing almost 35,000 horsepower. This could launch A-4s off the runway in either direction and, from a pilot's perspective, reportedly made operations remarkably similar to flying to and from a real carrier deck.

There was even a mirror landing aid to aid their recovery. Once up and running, the catapult could launch a fully armed Skyhawk into the air once every 90 seconds. The “instant airfield” at Chu Lai was destined to be a one-off, but the lessons of SATS continue to this day, as the Marines continue to work on their Expeditionary Advanced Base Operations (EABO) concept, a modern approach to bringing tactical airpower to bear anywhere it might be needed.

The 2019 Marine Corps Aviation Plan describes the EABO concept as follows: A Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov has an interesting aspect: the edge of the runway is raised, which “pushes” the plane in the air during the takeoff.

Looking at takeoff videos, the curved edge seems very natural. A pitching deck complicated things as an aircraft on a perfect glide slope can suddenly find itself too high or (even worse) too low and dangerously close to the fantail.

Along with the difference in height relative to flight, the visual perception of the landing area on the angled deck and the usual references change as a consequence of the deck motion. The basic SATS concept envisaged a rapidly established airfield with a runway that was 2,000 to 3,000 feet long and 72 feet wide.

But since Chu Lai was expected to be in use for a considerably longer period than a typical expeditionary operation, and host many more aircraft, the design was adapted, with a planned length of 8,000 feet and width of 107 feet.

Initially, however, only 4,000 feet was actually completed, while work continued to stabilize the ground below the other half. Thereafter, constant attention was required to keep the runway planking from sinking into the mud. Later on, Chu Lai also got its own conventional runway, located in parallel to the SATS airstrip.

Once the green shirts hooked the aircraft up to the catapult and fired it (read all about this process here), the bridle or pendant that links the shuttle to the aircraft would pull it down the catapult track at increasing speed.

At the end of the deck the aircraft would depart into the air. The bridle or pendant would then be flung out into the sea, or if the carrier was so equipped, it would whip down onto the sloped bridle catcher so that it could be recovered and used again and again.

In essence the bridle catcher was a feature of economy more than anything else. The reason for angling the bridle carrier extension downward was so the bridle would not bounce up and strike the aircraft as it left the deck.

Almost 2,000 men. Twenty-five latrines. Do the math. Training and morale are so poor that in 2009 Admiral Kuznetsov sailors apparently botched an at-sea refueling, spilling hundreds of tons of fuel into the Irish Sea, pictured at left.

However, with Da Nang's capacity to support additional aircraft increasingly stretched to the limit, the decision was made to set up a new airbase from scratch. This was Chu Lai, located on the coast, around 55 miles south of Da Nang.

It would be a Marine-led effort that included the installation of a Short Airfield for Tactical Support (SATS) system, which would launch jets via a trackless catapult and recover them using aircraft carrier-style arresting gear. Unlike a catapult found on an aircraft carrier, which runs down a trackway recessed in the deck, the trackless version was based on a wheeled dolly and a cable-tow driven by a capstan, powered in turn by turbine engines.

A TBM Avenger (left) seen with a bridle attached while sailing aboard the USS Cape Gloucester in 1945. An FM-2 Wildcat (right) seen launching off the deck of the USS Makin Island, bridle being hurling into the ocean, in 1945:

“Active service” being a relative term. If Russia's own experience of her with its crappy carriers is any indication, the Indian ship will spend most of her time in port being repaired between brief forays into near waters.

New Delhi is building a new carrier from scratch that should eventually complement the Russian hand-me-down. More repairs. More delays. More money. “The problems revealed during sea trials last year have been fixed,” Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin vowed in late 2013, by which point Vikramaditya was expected to enter active service in India in the spring of 2014.

Although the U.S. Involvement in Libya was scaled down a few days after NATO took control over the air campaign on Mar. 31, 2011, American tactical aircraft (“tacair”) played an important role during the opening stages […]

In the months that followed, Chu Lai's Skyhawks saw heavy action, flying day and night in support of Marines and South Vietnamese troops sometimes engaged only half-a-dozen thousands from the base perimeter. At times, Chu Lai itself came under attack from North Vietnamese forces, and the A-4s were required to defend their own base, which they did successfully.

By the end of May 1965, taxiways, a parking ramp, and arrester gear had also been built at Chu Lai. The catapult arrived sometime later. All this was built in an area that was not only unstable but also prone to becoming seriously waterlogged after heavy rain.

Admiral Kuznetsov's ill reputation did not deter the Indian and Chinese governments from acquiring second-hand Russian carriers. China's Liaoning, a rebuilt sister ship of Admiral Kuznetsov, began limited testing in the summer of 2012, serving a mostly educational role while a Chinese shipyard slowly built a new carrier from scratch.

Jets frequently returned to Chu Lai with significant combat damage, while poor weather led to a suspension of flying activity in late November 1965. By this time there were four Skyhawk squadrons at the base, with the addition of VMA-211 and VMA-214, and each unit had a complement of around 20 aircraft.

Much heavier and more powerful than the A-4, the Marine Corps F-4 was the other type to make extensive use of the SATS system in an operational capacity. During tests of the catapult, a Skyhawk was found to require 1,165 feet to take off, while a Phantom II needed 1,485 feet.

There are also practical considerations in aircraft carrier design. The ramped deck may detract from available space on deck for parking aircraft. You can find many pictures of CATOBAR carriers with aircraft parked on the bow area, which would be difficult on a STOBAR carrier.

The angled deck on modern carriers would still allow for launch and recovery of aircraft on a CATOBAR carrier with the bow area occupied. The ramp also reduces forward visibility for maneuvering the carrier. On a CATOBAR carrier, the flight deck must be designed to include the catapults, while on a STOBAR carrier, only the blast deflectors must be integrated into the deck.

But just getting your hands on a flattop is hardly enough. For every example of a country that succeeds in deploying a functional carrier and matching air wing, there's a counter-example: a flattop hobbled by mechanical problems, strucken by age, sidelined by bad design or stuck with warplanes that simply don't work.

But her age began to show, despite Brazil spending an additional $100 million on upkeep. On-board fires in 2005 and 2012 killed two sailors and left the flattop “barely functioning beyond flag-flying and light duties,” according to Warships International Fleet Review.

“The Brazilian defense ministry admitted the ship’s effectiveness is extremely limited.” Today the A-4s rarely fly.

aircraft carrier catapult system, catapults on aircraft carriers, steam catapults on aircraft carriers, aircraft carrier catapult numbers, carrier flight deck hand signals, aircraft carrier catapult car, c 47 airplane pictures, first aircraft carrier catapults