F/A-18 with JATO/RATO

[mike-wsm]

Does any military pilot have experience of both (a) flying with JATO/RATO and (b) flying with catapult launch from a carrier? Is the thrust comparable? And are the piloting skills similar?

Would it be possible to use JATO/RATO on an F/A-18 to provide a cost-effective way of simulating catapult launches from a land base?

And could JATO/RATO be used to fly F/A-18 from a carrier without use of catapult (using a passive steering guide shoe if necessary)?


Note: JATO/RATO refers to rocket-assisted take-off. The letter J was used prior to subsequent development of jet engines.

[SpazSinbad]

Perhaps asking your question here will bring a result?

SATS-EAF Association (http://sats-eaf.com/)

[mike-wsm]

skyhawk chu lai - Google Search (http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=skyhawk+chu+lai)

Thanks, Sinbad, followed through to Chu Lai Airbase, arrestor wires and A-4 with RATO, also found use of RATO on Buccaneer for hot-and-high in South Africa and some Mirage III tests.

RATO thrust seems rather limited, for example 8000lbf from two Bristol Siddeley rockets on the Buccaneer, enough to assist but not really sufficient for carrier launch. Hurrricanes ramp-launched from merchant ships during WWII used very large rockets.

Rockets are usually dropped after launch. Difficult to recover at sea, especially in an active warzone. The SA Buccaneer rockets folded in for stowage but took up fuselage space and their weight was a penalty.

Structural strengthening is necessary to carry the rocket thrust into the airframe.

I guess the answer to my question is that JATO/RATO does not provide sufficient assistance for carrier launch, and development of a practical system would cost many thousands of dollars and take a couple of years to develop (uk equivalents: many billions of pounds and a couple of decades).

Many thanks to all who have viewed and contributed. :ok:

[SpazSinbad]

A4G pilots experienced at first a 100 foot catapult stroke at approx. 6Gs, then later HMAS Melbourne catapult lengthened to approx. 110 feet via bits from BONAVENTURE (when scrapped). It was quite a shock for a first timer. Literally took your breath away from a solid punch to the chest.

Usually RAN fixed wing pilots were trained beginner/advanced with the RAAF system so there was no opportunity in the Skyhawk era to experience a catapult before the first A4G arrest and cat. However in the mid-60s some new RAN FAA pilots were trained in the USN in the USofA so they got to do arrests and free deck takeoffs in Trojans aboard USS Lexington.

Early Fireflies and Sea Fury used RATOG from HMAS Sydney but it was fraught with problems, particularly if only one rocket of the two fired. One pilot and aircraft were lost due this asymmetric problem.

[Waddo Plumber]

But could you restrain a rocket pack to a rail on the deck so it accelerated the aircraft whilst itself remained attached to the ship? I accept the many problems with impressive flames setting fire to matelots etc (although reheat doesn't seem to be a problem), but you could pack a huge amount of energy into a system that was added to an existing deck, without the supporting generating kit for electro magnetic or steam launch, just a magazine full of cartridges. Since there would not be huge forces to react, the ship shouldn't need fundamental strengthening.

[SAMXXV]

mike-wsm

This seems a loaded question & suggests that you form part of the program for the F-35 UK Carrier design team. Am I right?:confused:

[mike-wsm]

Sinbad - Thanks for the information about A-4, especially the 6g, for F/A-18 this gives:
Max t/o weight: 60,000lb
Thrust for 6g: 360,000lbf
Engine thrust: 70,000lbf with burners
Required rocket thrust: 290,000lbf
Rather a lot of rocket!

Waddo - Yes, rocket trolley launch is an option, for example Barnes Wallis used rocket trolley launch for his Wild Goose programme:
Sir Barnes Wallis - Supersonics (http://www.sirbarneswallis.com/Supersonics.htm)
Rocket thrust requirement is again a bit of a problem.

Sam - Wow, I've been called a troll many times, especially on a nearby thread. I am greatly honoured by your suggestion that I might be a Super-Troll with Whitehall connections. Alas no, just a dumb old engineer, retired from active involvement. Thanks! :ok:

[Waddo Plumber]

The required acceleration depends on distance travelled and launch angle. What speed would a fully loaded F35C need to clear a ski jump?

[mike-wsm]

Waddo - Interesting question, difficult to answer. I wonder whether Farnborough still have their ski-jump available for trials. Not sure what happens to the rocket-powered trolley....

[Waddo Plumber]

It shouldn't be too difficult to deflect the efflux upwards at about 30 ° from the sled avoiding singed bell bottoms, whilst only putting about 120K pounds vertical into the deck.