Flying off the Deck

[Wander00]

Just been reading an article in a flying magazine about a pilot attempting to do his first night deck landing in a Phantom (three "bolters" and off to land ashore). As a young first tourist on 360 in the 60s I heard tales from the RN aircrew about their style of flying, carrier ops in particular. So the question is, how difficult was operating off a carrier compared with operating off land bases - standing by for incoming...........................

[sailor]

The "runway" was always into wind, so no crosswind problems !

In a nutshell - "The three best things in life are a good landing, a good orgasm, and, a good bowel movement. The night carrier landing is one of the few opportunities in life where you get to experience all three at the same time. (Author unknown, but surely someone who's been there).

Sums it up pretty accurately !

[4Greens]

A lot of the difficulty revolves around the lighting available. There can be little or no depth perception which is important for a night visual approach. The lighting has changed over the years and tends to be less in an operational situation.

[thegypsy]

Hello Sailor:D Not strictly true.

The carrier sailed into wind but with the angled deck there was a slight cross wind component.

[rmcb]

What was/is the reasoning to having an offset deck? ie why have two runways when one would do the trick?

[DaveReidUK]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_deck#Angled_flight_deck

[wiggy]

Being a simple crab I'd guess one reason (probably if many) is that you can perform the aforementioned low bolter/miss the wires, etc,, without clobbering any aircraft positioned "up front" :E near or on the bow catapults.

[rmcb]

DaveReidUK - genius! Thank you. I like the rubber deck - I could sometimes do with this with undercarriage. All hail Winkle Brown.

[Democritus]

As a young and innocent rotary wing pilot on my first tour back in the '60's I went up on the flight deck one wild night and stood near the island to watch Sea Vixens carrying out night decklanding practice including touch and goes. Only did it the once - it scared the bejesus out of me! Only watched them from Goofers after that. Sea Vixen Observers must have had balls of steel to sit in that cubby hole with only a tiny side window to see out of during a carrier landing.

Much easier to stop and land than land and stop in my opinion!

[India Four Two]

Here is a link to my absolute, all-time favourite Flight International article, back in the day, when it was an interesting read.

"The Ark's Strike Power" 1976 | 2198 | Flight Archive (http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1976/1976%20-%202198.html)

A very compelling account a backseat ride in a Buccaneer launched from the Ark offshore from Virginia, combined with detailed descriptions of operations on the carrier

[DaveReidUK]

Only watched them from Goofers after that.I love learning new words. :O

goofers | naval air | goofers platform | 1946 | 1719 | Flight Archive (http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1946/1946%20-%201719.html)

[4Greens]

Just to clear up an issue. Nil wind, carrier speed provides the wind. Result is a cross wind for the angled deck.

[RedhillPhil]

I seem to remember reading an F-4B driver saying that he'd rather face a couple of MiGs than do another night landing on a deck.

[DaveReidUK]

Just to clear up an issue. Nil wind, carrier speed provides the wind.You make it sound as if a carrier can only launch and recover aircraft in dead calm conditions, which I'm sure isn't what you meant.

That would be a tad inconvenient in a war. :O

[Democritus]

As 4Greens says, the only time you had a crosswind over the deck for landing fixed-wing aircraft was when the actual wind in the vicinity was zero.

If the actual wind was anything above zero then the Officer of the Watch would select a ship's heading which would ensure that the relative wind was straight down the angled deck for landing aircraft.

[DaveReidUK]

If the actual wind was anything above zero then the Officer of the Watch would select a ship's heading which would ensure that the relative wind was straight down the angled deck for landing aircraft.Thanks for that.

Forgive my ignorance of these things, but does that imply that the necessary ship's forward speed will be a function of the wind speed (given that the effective "drift" angle is fixed when the carrier is built) ?

So for example in a light wind, you can't steam ahead at 35 kts and expect to get a relative wind direction down the angled deck ?

[John Eacott]

Dave,

As explained, the ship would steam on a heading to give a relative wind down the angled deck but in nil wind there would be a resulting (slight) crosswind for the angle.

Whilst I did plenty of night DL's rotary on a variety of decks I only had one night sortie in a Gannet; I'd have loved to do one in a Bucc or an F4!

To answer the OP the difficulty of deck landings (DLs) compared to shore based was reflected in the long wait for the experience level to build up until a pilot was qualified. For FW they would be day qualified, NDV (non diversion flying) and night qualified all with their own criteria of competence. We RW only had to put up with day/night/command qualifying since we were NDV most of the time once we got over the horizon from land ;)

In response to Democritus' comment I quite enjoyed being on the flight deck during night ops, and frequently we'd be out there waiting for the FW recovery to finish so that we could do a running change on our cab for the next sortie. Ark was intensely difficult for RW as they created a munitions dump extension of the deck aft of the island which became Spot 6 and the favoured spot to put Sea Kings for turn rounds. Night landings there with Ark turning hard out of wind to regain the MLA in marginal weather was....character building. Swing the lamp for a few tall tales :cool:

[DaveReidUK]

As explained, the ship would steam on a heading to give a relative wind down the angled deck but in nil wind there would be a resulting (slight) crosswind for the angle.Thanks, John.

Yes, I understand the part about the ship's motion generating a crosswind component across the angled deck.

So, assuming it's steaming at 35 kts in calm conditions, with a nominal 9° angled deck, you would have about five and a half kts of built-in crosswind.

And in windy conditions, the ship would sail on a heading such that an equal and opposite crosswind component resulted from the wind, with the net effect producing a relative headwind straight down the angled deck.

But obviously the latter scenario depends on the actual wind speed being at least five and a half kts. So my (rephrased) question is - what happens in a light wind?

Does the ship steam slower, so that the built-in crosswind effect is reduced and can still be cancelled out by the lighter wind?

Or does the ship still steam at full speed, to maximise the headwind component, with the residual crosswind being accepted as a fact of life?

I appreciate that we're only talking about a few knots of residual crosswind, and the wind itself may well be variable in strength and direction, so the question may be an academic one.

Just curious and keen to learn.

[John Eacott]

Dave,

Flat chat, regardless!

An oft discussed issue was that nearly all FW landings were left wheel first, so any crosswind (from the right) obviously had little or no effect on the arrival.

http://www.eacott.com.au/gallery/d/1628-1/Phantom+006+touch+_amp_+go+over+4+wire+Ark+Royal.jpg

http://www.eacott.com.au/gallery/d/1723-2/Night+Bucc+landing.jpg

[DaveReidUK]

Flat chat, regardless!Thanks, that makes sense.

Though only after I'd looked it up in my Aussie Slang dictionary. :O

[Schiller]

Quote

"There are only two sorts of people in the world, those who have done night deck landings, and those who have not; and it is impossible for the former to explain matters to the latter."

[John Farley]

Isn't that the truth.

[Democritus]

Here is quite a good YouTube video of a fixed wing night deck landing on a carrier - the first 20 seconds are total black, presumably he was still in cloud then. Best viewed full screen as the light sources are minimal:
yUrNyNMG33U

[Wander00]

What a heck of a way to earn a crust. I am lost in admiration and respect

[joy ride]

Blimey! That video gives some idea of what it is like. BIG Respect from me too!

[Allan Lupton]

Quote
Sea Vixen Observers must have had balls of steel to sit in that cubby hole with only a tiny side window to see out of during a carrier landing.

And during a catapult launch!
I had a colleague who was a former Sea Vixen pilot and he told me his pre-takeoff briefing to a new observer was along the lines of "watch my legs - if anything goes wrong, I won't have time to give an order to eject before I go!"

[millerscourt]

A bit like Iraklion in the middle of the night except always a howling crosswind there and a slightly longer runway:E

[Schiller]

Excellent video. It really was like that.

[India Four Two]

Following on from Democritus' video, I stumbled on this excellent side-by-side video of day and night landings in an S3:

The Difference Between Day and Night - YouTube


Boy, those runway-end lights come very close!

A question for the experts, something that hadn't occurred to me before. Since the TDZ is moving away, at say 20 kts, is the glideslope angle of the mirror and other carrier-based aids increased to allow for the movement, so that that the pilot follows a normal glide path?

Concerning the Sea Vixen "coal hole", what was the thinking behind that decision? I would have thought it better to have another pair of eyes looking around and then make arrangements to view the radar with a rubber eyepiece or even a hood, like Tiger Moths and Magisters.

[4Greens]

Less drag with a coalhole.

True story : Sea Vixen ready for catshot, Observer notices wing fold indicator showing wings not correctly locked. Shouts to pilot and ejects at the end of the catshot. Pilot suddenly finds he has no Observer but ops normal, albeit with a lot of wind noise. Flies around and burns off fuel and lands back on ok. Observer picked up ok by the carrier. All's well that ends well.

[Fitter2]

I went to the funeral last year of an RAF fighter pilot so intrepid even his squadron mates had noticed (many years after his retirement, so he got away with it.)


He was asked in my hearing once whether he had ever been frightened while flying. He replied 'Only twice, the first time was when I had the opportunity to do a deck landing in the observer's seat in a Sea Vixen, the other was the subsequent cat take off'.


I was told by an FAA pilot that their unofficial motto was ' Flare to land, squat to pee'.

[Democritus]

These are scans of photos so not very good quality but show the results of barrier engagements by two Scimitars on Ark Royal. Both had nosewheel hang ups. The first, to 024 - XD325 - happened on 7 March 1966 during the Beira Patrol. It was operational non-diversion flying so it was a case of land or eject. The incident to 015 I think is the one that occurred to XD274 on 1 June 1966 shortly after Ark Royal left Aden on her way back to the UK. (Information from Ray Sturtivant/Lee Howard's book "Fleet Air Arm Fixed-Wing Aircraft since 1946")
http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p230/Democritus1/Scimitar024intobarrier_zps9b313c57.jpg

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p230/Democritus1/Scimitar024stopped_zps43a6eb26.jpg

And for DaveReidUK look at the many bods in the background of the all the photos - you couldn't have a better description of what I meant by Goofers.

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p230/Democritus1/Scimitar015recovery_zps1eca5ace.jpg

Next one shows Ark Royal handing over the Beira Patrol to Eagle (foreground) on 15 March 1966.

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p230/Democritus1/BattleofBeira-Eagleforeground-Arktorear15Mar66_zpsef704a96.jpg

....and here is one of the grand old lady (Ark Royal) in her prime in 1965/66 with an 803 Squadron Scimitar on short finals. Happy days!

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p230/Democritus1/803ScimitarlandingArkRoyal_zps20efe42d.jpg
http://s1123.photobucket.com/user/CharlieOneSix/media/Scimitar024intobarrier_zpsd66560bd.jpg.html

[4Greens]

Fitter two, on a carrier you do not flare to land. If you did you would miss the wires.

[sailor]

The most difficult thing about night DL was lining up with the deck centreline; in the smaller carriers like Hermes and Centaur, designed for the Venom and Seahawk, there was not a huge lateral space for a 50ft wingspan Sea Vixen, especially when some centreline lights were out ( sometimes only 2 or 3 left ) and the aircraft had a yawdamper system which meant it liked to continue in a straight line when you wanted to turn it. Late on in my experience some really clever bod had the idea of dropping a donkey's plonk of lights over the stern from the deck centreline which reduced the lineup problem hugely, in that when lined up properly there was a straight line of lights, and if you went off centre the line showed an angle in it rather than a continuous straight line. Whoever it was should have been elevated to just below the guys who invented the angled deck and the landing mirror system.

[Agaricus bisporus]

What are the three horizontal gantries on the portside for? Always wondered...

[sailor]

Wireless/radio aerials - kept out of the way during flying returned to the vertical to work.

[John Farley]

sailor

Agree your comments re donkey's plonk 100%.

They were an RAE invention (as was the angled deck and mirror of course) They existed when I joined at the end of '63. There were three units there Naval Air Dept (NAD), Blind landing experimental unit (BLEU) and Aerodynamics flight. They all collaborated where appropriate and NAD and BLEU especially so re lighting patterns. I think (very much not certain) that I once heard a boffin say the donkey's plonk originated with a BLEU guy. The BLEU guys were very much into lighting displays of how to help the pilot in the final stage of an approach.

[4Greens]

Vitally important issue - the donkeys plonk also referred to a fuel drain underneath a Scimitar. A famous event occurred when an 800 Squadron pilot removed his on contact with the sea when dive bombing a splash target.

[Noyade]

Read this the other day...

http://imgbin.me/image/MQINPRFY.jpg

[4Greens]

That guy had it easy. In the Vixen days there was no inflight refuelling and you couldn't land on with much fuel in the tropics as the wires couldn't take the weight.[

[FlightlessParrot]

4greens

Fitter two, on a carrier you do not flare to land. If you did you would miss the wires.

I rather think that's the point, though it's not immediately obvious: read the saying as: (If you) flare for landing, (then you must be a person who has to)...

Always ignored the ability and courage of female pilots, of course, and not sayable now (good thing). But it has an imagistic and rhetorical shapeliness.

[gpugh]

Hi my father has some interesting stories having flown in various Sea Fury and Sea Venom squadrons during the 1950's off Ocean, Vengence, Hermes and Bulwark and others I have missed

[sailor]

Hi John !

If you are still in touch with any of the guys you mentioned who were involved in the development and installation of that great bit of kit please pass on my heartfelt thanks to them. Reduced the sweat levels by half !

[Captain Dart]

I operated Grumman Trackers off Australia's HMAS Melbourne and she had what was called 'drop lights' over the stern to give some semblance of perspective with line-up (12 foot clearance between wingtip and island!).

I also remember references to 'Bedford Pattern' lighting; whether this referred to the drop lights or the whole flight deck illumination setup I can't recall.

Thank heaven for the LSO's, at night and in the middle of the Pacific I say! They were never short of a beer afterwards.

[Democritus]

That guy had it easy. In the Vixen days there was no inflight refuelling and you couldn't land on with much fuel in the tropics as the wires couldn't take the weight.[

As an ex rotary wing pilot I hesitate to challenge the above but in 65/66 I know we had some Scimitar tankers on Ark Royal and they refuelled the Vixens. If memory serves me correctly, on 10 May 1966 when I and my crew picked up pilot Allan Tarver out of the sea off Beira when he ejected from his Vixen, sadly with the loss of his Observer John Stutchbury, to try and get the Vixen back to the ship there had been an unsuccessful attempt to refuel it from a Scimitar tanker to stem the fuel loss following the loss of one engine and damage to fuel systems of the other. Allan Tarver was awarded the George Medal for his efforts to save his Observer when his ejection seat malfunctioned after the aircraft ran out of fuel.

Edit: just found the citation in the London Gazette : http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/44096/pages/9491

[4Greens]

Good one on Allan Tarver. It was before the Scimitar tankers that the real problem existed.