HMS Illustrious (Now incl photographs)
I did once see a real RN aircraft carrier in Oslo harbour - I think it was HMS Victorious or HMS Ark Royal in late summer 1961, but as I was rather young at the time, I'm far from certain.
VERY impressive though - and, err, somewhat bigger than the Invincible!
Nice sea state, Tudor - and excellent piccies!
VERY impressive though - and, err, somewhat bigger than the Invincible!
Nice sea state, Tudor - and excellent piccies!
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had the pleasure of seeing her in May and she's amazing.
Regarding size- it IS important. When you've been on Nimitz.........................
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re ski jump -
No matter how big a wing or how big an engine or whatever gear stressing cases there are, the ski jump will always add some benefit when compared to the flat deck case. This is because in all circumstance a ski jump increases safety, increases performance, increases ability to handle ship pitch motion and reduces pilot handling workload. However to use a ski jump you do need the aircraft to be fitted with an attitude control system that is effective at speeds below normal wing stall speeds.
No matter how big a wing or how big an engine or whatever gear stressing cases there are, the ski jump will always add some benefit when compared to the flat deck case. This is because in all circumstance a ski jump increases safety, increases performance, increases ability to handle ship pitch motion and reduces pilot handling workload. However to use a ski jump you do need the aircraft to be fitted with an attitude control system that is effective at speeds below normal wing stall speeds.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re.John Farleys comments - spot on as always
- I've often wondered why HMS Ocean is so delibrately a helicopter only vessel, with no ski-ramp and indeed a goalkeeper at the end of the flat flight deck.
This seems a deliberate denial of use to Harriers, which would be an extremely useful asset; in any real war, the Captain / Admiral would be screaming for air cover; as pillocks with shiny chairs have ditched the Sea Harrier with AMRAAM,the next best option is the Harrier 2+, which while slower with an inferior radar has AMRAAM capabality.
These are actually available right now from storage, and have the advantage of a great deal of ' commonality ' with the the GR9's operated by Joint Force Harrier.
But since when have politicians, apart from W.Curchill, taken any notice, until it's too late ?!
Meanwhile the fleet has to rely on type 42's...
- I've often wondered why HMS Ocean is so delibrately a helicopter only vessel, with no ski-ramp and indeed a goalkeeper at the end of the flat flight deck.
This seems a deliberate denial of use to Harriers, which would be an extremely useful asset; in any real war, the Captain / Admiral would be screaming for air cover; as pillocks with shiny chairs have ditched the Sea Harrier with AMRAAM,the next best option is the Harrier 2+, which while slower with an inferior radar has AMRAAM capabality.
These are actually available right now from storage, and have the advantage of a great deal of ' commonality ' with the the GR9's operated by Joint Force Harrier.
But since when have politicians, apart from W.Curchill, taken any notice, until it's too late ?!
Meanwhile the fleet has to rely on type 42's...
Last edited by Double Zero; 9th Jul 2009 at 11:37.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: crewe
Age: 77
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did once see a real RN aircraft carrier in Oslo harbour - I think it was HMS Victorious or HMS Ark Royal in late summer 1961, but as I was rather young at the time, I'm far from certain.
VERY impressive though - and, err, somewhat bigger than the Invincible!
Nice sea state, Tudor - and excellent piccies!
VERY impressive though - and, err, somewhat bigger than the Invincible!
Nice sea state, Tudor - and excellent piccies!
.jpg)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instead of waxing lyrical about the Buc' - " a steam driven slum " of a cockpit - one might recount it's plus points, as in internal weapons bay ( originally before Sea Eagle, another great loss ) F-22 / 35 anyone ?!
It was widely said that a fully ( internally ) loaded Buccaneer was faster and much longer range than a loaded Tornado...
It was widely said that a fully ( internally ) loaded Buccaneer was faster and much longer range than a loaded Tornado...
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 80
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think anyone has mentioned it but the ramp was a later add on to the design and a retrofit on Hermes. The inventor was given an exceptionally 'large' GEMS award of, IIRC, £25k. Given that many navies with a STOVL aircraft use the ramp, I guess he was under rewarded.
.jpg)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remember the ski jump has the rather welcome effect of imparting a ballistic trajectory upwards, which sounds a good idea to me if driving off the end of the deck.
Re. undercarriage stresses, the take-off run for any particular load is calculated; when first trying it, 4 Flight Test engineers went away seperately to do their sums; they only proceeded once all 4 came up with the same answer !
Re. undercarriage stresses, the take-off run for any particular load is calculated; when first trying it, 4 Flight Test engineers went away seperately to do their sums; they only proceeded once all 4 came up with the same answer !
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: West Midlands, UK.
Age: 73
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forgive the intrusion, I guess most RAF/FAA chaps on this forum know about the ski jump performance enhancer qualities but anyway JF's remarkably accessible and readable reply to my layman's question can be found here:
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/111...ferrerid=30158
Regards
Cron
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/111...ferrerid=30158
Regards
Cron
Last edited by Cron; 11th Jul 2009 at 22:54.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Firmly grounded, thankfully
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Impressive. But not that good.
Having watched numerous Harriers (FA2 and GR7) go off the front I can say that nought compares to watching the Flanker launch itself off the front of Kuznetzov. Seen them launch 5 in quick succession and its mighty impressive. Don't know how many ergs those donks throw out but it must be a LOT as they line up at the bottom of the ramp, blast deflector up and seem to float at the top of the ramp before rocketing up into the wide blue yonder.
If any of those Northern Fleet guys are on - you guys have really big cohones. Seriously. Very brave or very stupid!!!
If any of those Northern Fleet guys are on - you guys have really big cohones. Seriously. Very brave or very stupid!!!
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is because in all circumstance a ski jump increases safety, increases performance,
How much kinetic energy does an aircraft gain by using a "ski jump"?
...increases ability to handle ship pitch motion and reduces pilot handling workload.
Please explain those statements in more detail.
However to use a ski jump you do need the aircraft to be fitted with an attitude control system that is effective at speeds below normal wing stall speeds.
So, when a Harrier I or II takes off using a "ski jump," relative wind over the main airfoil is "below normal wing stall speeds" shortly after the aircraft departs from the ramp?
How much kinetic energy does an aircraft gain by using a "ski jump"?
...increases ability to handle ship pitch motion and reduces pilot handling workload.
Please explain those statements in more detail.
However to use a ski jump you do need the aircraft to be fitted with an attitude control system that is effective at speeds below normal wing stall speeds.
So, when a Harrier I or II takes off using a "ski jump," relative wind over the main airfoil is "below normal wing stall speeds" shortly after the aircraft departs from the ramp?