• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Wow! Great video....

Three things:

1. I can't believe I've never seen this footage - thanks so much for posing it.
2. Resolution is far superior to most other footage from that period - perhaps it was filmed in 35mm?
3. Skyrays, Skyhawks, Skyraiders, Crusaders. Can't do better than that. Has to be about my favorite year/grouping of post war USN aircraft AND on an Essex boat. Outstanding.
 
. . ah, now that I read the accompanying text, it was actually filmed in 70mm. Not an easy format to use on a carrier deck but boy it was worth it.
 
Gorgeous vid. Thanks for posting! That image of the guys leaning backwards into the wind is great. :)
 
Great detail!

A few things to notice about that era. I made a supposed 9 month deployment on "SHANG" in VA-83 in 1967-68, which turned into 11 months when our relieving carrier had some problems coming out of the shipyard upkeep period.

We wore orange flight suits rather than the later OD NOMEX type in use today. The parachute riggers washed them in a compound to make them somewhat fire retardant.

These 27C conversions were tough compared to the bigger FORRESTAL, KITTYHAWK and NIMITZ classes. The glide slope was 4 degrees relative to the ship, and only had 10 feet of hook to ramp clearance when on glide slope. Arresting gear runout was only about 200 feet. This compares to 15 feet hook to ramp and 310 ft runout on later class carriers. Waveoffs and bolters were naturally more common because the margin for error was so small - especially at night. In addition, hangar deck height was only about 17 ft, compared to about 25 ft on a NIMITZ.


I noticed one A-4 bolter that looked like a "soft hook" problem because it looked like he would have picked up a wire. The hook dash pot may have not held the hook down during deck impact as it is supposed to do.

It is not unusual, when this appears to be the problem, for the arresting gear crew to stack rolls of toilet paper on top of each wire support (called "fiddle bridges") and under the cross deck pendant in order to raise it up higher. This usually worked, but with an incredible confetti shower when it did!

Also, notice how the cat crew had the bridles and rope lanyards arranged for ready use between the cats. The rope lanyards were part of the Van Zelm bridle retrieval system, the parallel tracks along each side of a cat. The lanyards attached to the bridle and down to sliding cleats in those tracks. The bridle released from the cat hooks on the plane and slammed onto the tongue at the bow when the cat spears hit the water break. It was then retracted by the Van Zelm system, independent of the cat shuttle.

A-4s had a loop type bridle with attachment hooks in each wheel well. As best I recall, the F-8 had a single pendant, with one attach point under the fuselage.
 
Absolutely superb video. Real quality. Great detail about the operational aspect Mike71. :) Is it me or is the glide slope for Jets steeper than for WWII prop planes?
 
Pips said:
Absolutely superb video. Real quality. Great detail about the operational aspect Mike71. :) Is it me or is the glide slope for Jets steeper than for WWII prop planes?
Click to expand...

Before angled decks, carrier passes were made at a very shallow glide slope angle and a very short straightaway groove distance, following LSO signals. The start was just a little above flight deck height. They took a cut and "high dip" into the wire pattern. This was necessitated by the fact that the pilot could not see LSO signals very well much further out/higher in the groove.

The angle deck and mirror landing system were developed by the Brits, which we adopted, and uses a calculated angle to a hook touchdown point in the middle of the cross deck pattern. A typical pattern today results in a start in the grove at about 450 ft MSL and about 1/2 nm and a constant speed/rate of descent to impact, with no cut or high dip. Visually, it looks very steep to the pilot due to the fact that the angled deck is painted so it looks narrower at the end of the angle than at the ramp, and the projected glide slope angle is steep but compensated for by about a 25 kt headwind, which results in a shallower rate of descent but still seems steep to the pilot. At night, it is pretty tense and you have to believe in your experience and training rather than your senses.
 
Mike71 said:
Before angled decks, carrier passes were made at a very shallow glide slope angle and a very short straightaway groove distance, following LSO signals. The start was just a little above flight deck height. They took a cut and "high dip" into the wire pattern. This was necessitated by the fact that the pilot could not see LSO signals very well much further out/higher in the groove.

The angle deck and mirror landing system were developed by the Brits, which we adopted, and uses a calculated angle to a hook touchdown point in the middle of the cross deck pattern. A typical pattern today results in a start in the grove at about 450 ft MSL and about 1/2 nm and a constant speed/rate of descent to impact, with no cut or high dip. Visually, it looks very steep to the pilot due to the fact that the angled deck is painted so it looks narrower at the end of the angle than at the ramp, and the projected glide slope angle is steep but compensated for by about a 25 kt headwind, which results in a shallower rate of descent but still seems steep to the pilot. At night, it is pretty tense and you have to believe in your experience and training rather than your senses.
Click to expand...

Hi Mike,

I never knew that about the angled deck, especially how they paint it narrower at the end. Do you know the reason for that? Is it just geometrically less space at one end than the other, or is there an approach reason why they do that? BTW, thanks for both posts, they're very informative. I have to say, I was happy to see the Vigilantes in Mal's video post.

Regards, Ken
 
Sundog said:
Hi Mike,

I never knew that about the angled deck, especially how they paint it narrower at the end. Do you know the reason for that? Is it just geometrically less space at one end than the other, or is there an approach reason why they do that? BTW, thanks for both posts, they're very informative. I have to say, I was happy to see the Vigilantes in Mal's video post.

Regards, Ken
Click to expand...

The "ladder lines" painted along the edge of the defined landing area are nearly parallel on big decks, but at night, the lights on the end of the angle are skewed in relation to the ladder line lights - a lot better than the older ships, but still distracting if you don't ignore it. The angle can only project to port so far - the hull shape to compensate for it is bulged which increases underwater drag, so everything has to be a compromise. A lot of thought goes into this.

The NIMITZ class has gradually made small changes making a big difference, especially moving the island aft in later ships, giving more deck spotting flexibility during recovery. You want to get as many planes a possible forward to the bow as quickly as possible, and the island impacts that. This becomes critical in what is called "flex deck" ops, where planes are constantly coming and going over a long period, the deck is crowded with planes at the same time, and space is limited to the bow - but keeping one cat open (usually the port bow cat) as well as outside the landing area on the aft port elevator area and starboard side aft of the island. The danger of going "locked deck", wherein you have to interrupt a recovery to move planes around or down to the hangar deck to make more room is a reality and takes careful planning. Remember, jets land with not a whole lot of fuel at max trap weight, and recovery delays start a whole new problem of tanker fuel available, etc. It can easily turn into a can of worms at night.

There have been times when a ship would "shoot their way out of Dodge", launching a couple of planes not scheduled - just to make some room for recovery. Unusual, maybe because a temporarily immobilized airplane (flat tire, etc), pilot screwup taxing in the wrong direction and needing to be manuvered with a tow tractor, other crazy things.
 
Last edited:
Mike71 said:
The "ladder lines" painted along the edge of the defined landing area are nearly parallel on big decks, but at night, the lights on the end of the angle are skewed in relation to the ladder line lights - a lot better than the older ships, but still distracting if you don't ignore it. The angle can only project to port so far - the hull shape to compensate for it is bulged which increases underwater drag, so everything has to be a compromise. A lot of thought goes into this.

The NIMITZ class has gradually made small changes making a big difference, especially moving the island aft in later ships, giving more deck spotting flexibility during recovery. You want to get as many planes a possible forward to the bow as quickly as possible, and the island impacts that. This becomes critical in what is called "flex deck" ops, where planes are constantly coming and going over a long period, the deck is crowded with planes at the same time, and space is limited to the bow - but keeping one cat open (usually the port bow cat) as well as outside the landing area on the aft port elevator area and starboard side aft of the island. The danger of going "locked deck", wherein you have to interrupt a recovery to move planes around or down to the hangar deck to make more room is a reality and takes careful planning. Remember, jets land with not a whole lot of fuel at max trap weight, and recovery delays start a whole new problem of tanker fuel available, etc. It can easily turn into a can of worms at night.

There have been times when a ship would "shoot their way out of Dodge", launching a couple of planes not scheduled - just to make some room for recovery. Unusual, maybe because a temporarily immobilized airplane (flat tire, etc), pilot screwup taxing in the wrong direction and needing to be manuvered with a tow tractor, other crazy things.
Click to expand...

Thanks, as that also explains why they moved the island so far aft on the new Ford class carriers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top