F-35C Accident - USS Carl Vinson
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
Never Fear The Marines Are Here (could not get the 'school' perhaps a typo/misunderstanding by author?)
WHEN KNIGHTS WERE BOLD James Deboer Combat Aircraft Journal March 2022 Volume 22 No 03
The USMC’s ‘Black Knights’ [VMFA-314] have made history by being the first USMC unit to deploy with the F-35C aboard an aircraft carrier. James Deboer reports on their work-up to this great milestone....
“...Landing challenges
The squadron was in the top three for landing grades during its time out at the carrier in July, which is great considering only about a third of the pilots had prior carrier experience.
The Black Knights are happy to be on the ship with some of the newest technology including systems that make it much easier to land on it. Major Ahern told CAJ [Combat Aircraft Journal]: “The ship is obviously challenging flying, but this aircraft is very stable and it’s not a stressful jet to land on the boat, whereas the FA-18C could be.
”We have Delta flight path and that basically couples the flight controls and the motor to the same control logic where you get instantaneous, glideslope response. Even if the jet motor has to school[?], it’s very, very stable. And when you land at the ship, the rate of descent is based on a glide slope of three and a half degrees. So just a little bit steeper than like your normal airliner that’s going to land at an international airport. So that’s how the glide slope is set up. So it’s just way lower stress and honestly a lot safer. The boarding rates have been really high. It’s very rare that someone doesn’t catch a wire, and the drama has kind of gone, which is nice”....”
WHEN KNIGHTS WERE BOLD James Deboer Combat Aircraft Journal March 2022 Volume 22 No 03
The USMC’s ‘Black Knights’ [VMFA-314] have made history by being the first USMC unit to deploy with the F-35C aboard an aircraft carrier. James Deboer reports on their work-up to this great milestone....
“...Landing challenges
The squadron was in the top three for landing grades during its time out at the carrier in July, which is great considering only about a third of the pilots had prior carrier experience.
The Black Knights are happy to be on the ship with some of the newest technology including systems that make it much easier to land on it. Major Ahern told CAJ [Combat Aircraft Journal]: “The ship is obviously challenging flying, but this aircraft is very stable and it’s not a stressful jet to land on the boat, whereas the FA-18C could be.
”We have Delta flight path and that basically couples the flight controls and the motor to the same control logic where you get instantaneous, glideslope response. Even if the jet motor has to school[?], it’s very, very stable. And when you land at the ship, the rate of descent is based on a glide slope of three and a half degrees. So just a little bit steeper than like your normal airliner that’s going to land at an international airport. So that’s how the glide slope is set up. So it’s just way lower stress and honestly a lot safer. The boarding rates have been really high. It’s very rare that someone doesn’t catch a wire, and the drama has kind of gone, which is nice”....”
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 3rd Feb 2022 at 23:44. Reason: usual
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
'sandiego89' commented: "...That catapult track, especially the waist cat, looks very short. What did the stroke feel like? I had heard the short hydraulic cats on the early Essex class were especially brutal. Thanks, Dave"
Dave, the first cat shot was a shock - like having someone punch your chest will all their strength - took the wind out of my sails that's for sure. Next time I was better prepared but still got the PUNCH at around 6G. I'm told the first cat shots for a nugget/newbie/sprog are extra ooomphy to ensure they have plenty of endspeed (also they are at a light weight for carquals). Plenty of hairy stories about A4G catshots, including the first for the A4G (years earlier a USN A-4B had demonstrated an arrest & catapult off Manila I believe. The USN pilot reaction to the catshot (with extra GO I guess) on radio cannot be repeated here).
HMAS Melbourne Aircraft Carrier A4G Skyhawk Era 1967-1984
________________________________________
LCDR Charles W. D. Ward, Jr. First USN A4B landing on HMAS Melbourne - 20 May 1965 (HD)
Dave, the first cat shot was a shock - like having someone punch your chest will all their strength - took the wind out of my sails that's for sure. Next time I was better prepared but still got the PUNCH at around 6G. I'm told the first cat shots for a nugget/newbie/sprog are extra ooomphy to ensure they have plenty of endspeed (also they are at a light weight for carquals). Plenty of hairy stories about A4G catshots, including the first for the A4G (years earlier a USN A-4B had demonstrated an arrest & catapult off Manila I believe. The USN pilot reaction to the catshot (with extra GO I guess) on radio cannot be repeated here).
HMAS Melbourne Aircraft Carrier A4G Skyhawk Era 1967-1984
LCDR Charles W. D. Ward, Jr. First USN A4B landing on HMAS Melbourne - 20 May 1965 (HD)
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 4th Feb 2022 at 08:06. Reason: +txt +vid
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
True however MELBOURNE had the punch to get the A4G airborne in nil wind tropical temperatures at maximum launch weight with lateral 9G - the 'warshot' - however I think I have mentioned AFAIK no human has experienced that ONLY CHLOE most likely as seen in earlier video.
'sandiego89' commented: "...That catapult track, especially the waist cat, looks very short. What did the stroke feel like? I had heard the short hydraulic cats on the early Essex class were especially brutal. Thanks, Dave"
Dave, the first cat shot was a shock - like having someone punch your chest will all their strength - took the wind out of my sails that's for sure. Next time I was better prepared but still got the PUNCH at around 6G. I'm told the first cat shots for a nugget/newbie/sprog are extra ooomphy to ensure they have plenty of endspeed (also they are at a light weight for carquals). Plenty of hairy stories about A4G catshots, including the first for the A4G (years earlier a USN A-4B had demonstrated an arrest & catapult off Manila I believe. The USN pilot reaction to the catshot (with extra GO I guess) on radio cannot be repeated here).
Dave, the first cat shot was a shock - like having someone punch your chest will all their strength - took the wind out of my sails that's for sure. Next time I was better prepared but still got the PUNCH at around 6G. I'm told the first cat shots for a nugget/newbie/sprog are extra ooomphy to ensure they have plenty of endspeed (also they are at a light weight for carquals). Plenty of hairy stories about A4G catshots, including the first for the A4G (years earlier a USN A-4B had demonstrated an arrest & catapult off Manila I believe. The USN pilot reaction to the catshot (with extra GO I guess) on radio cannot be repeated here).
A-4 on the Melbourne- short cat. Shortest cat?
A-4 on the 25 De Mayo- longer cat, but perhaps not as well maintained/performing cat, ship speed/boilers tired. Lack of ship speed/wind cited during the Falklands.
Super Entendard on the 25 Mayo, post Falklands the SuE conducted occasional operations. Cat was overhauled, but ship/boilers were still tired. SuE usually heavier than the A-4?
Banshee on the Bonaventure. Believe the Bonaventure had upgrades for larger/heavier aircraft, but the Banshee was heavy and underpowered.
A-4 on Menas Gerias. Ship got a pretty massive upgrade in the 60's, but not sure it was equivalent to the Majestics?
Sea Hawk and Sea Venom likely more straightforward?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
Yes thought of that but without the UP 'spool' is not so good - one can spool down. Anyway by all reports the F135 does POWER UP/SPOOL UP fast with good acceleration which is most important for carrier landings/WAVE OFFs.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
Thanks so much for the replay and schematics. I have always been fascinated about jets operating from the smallish Colossus/Majestic classes. While there were numerous variables, including cat length and performance (some cats received modification, some were more tired than others) , ship speed (and reliability and power by some of the ships), take off, stall and landing speed, launch weight, etc, what do you think was the dodgiest regular jet use aboard these ships? Some candidates, and others?:
A-4 on the Melbourne- short cat. Shortest cat?
A-4 on the 25 De Mayo- longer cat, but perhaps not as well maintained/performing cat, ship speed/boilers tired. Lack of ship speed/wind cited during the Falklands.
Super Entendard on the 25 Mayo, post Falklands the SuE conducted occasional operations. Cat was overhauled, but ship/boilers were still tired. SuE usually heavier than the A-4?
Banshee on the Bonaventure. Believe the Bonaventure had upgrades for larger/heavier aircraft, but the Banshee was heavy and underpowered.
A-4 on Menas Gerias. Ship got a pretty massive upgrade in the 60's, but not sure it was equivalent to the Majestics?
Sea Hawk and Sea Venom likely more straightforward?
A-4 on the Melbourne- short cat. Shortest cat?
A-4 on the 25 De Mayo- longer cat, but perhaps not as well maintained/performing cat, ship speed/boilers tired. Lack of ship speed/wind cited during the Falklands.
Super Entendard on the 25 Mayo, post Falklands the SuE conducted occasional operations. Cat was overhauled, but ship/boilers were still tired. SuE usually heavier than the A-4?
Banshee on the Bonaventure. Believe the Bonaventure had upgrades for larger/heavier aircraft, but the Banshee was heavy and underpowered.
A-4 on Menas Gerias. Ship got a pretty massive upgrade in the 60's, but not sure it was equivalent to the Majestics?
Sea Hawk and Sea Venom likely more straightforward?
I'll attempt to recreate earlier lost reply. The answers to some of the questions may be vaguely answered in the 4.4Gb MEGA PDF here: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/our-history/spazsinbad-a4g/ Please follow download/view directions on that page. My only experience flying the Sea Venom was ashore without an Observer in the right hand seat calling the airspeed in one knot increments during the approach. Visibility over the bulbous nose was atrocious, meaning tight circuits. At the carrier their circuit height was 400 feet with I guess a short straightaway and without an LSO it was ??? Initially in the A4G we followed same height with a level base turn picking up the ball in the mirror about half way around base turn. However our USN trained LSOs managed to convince the greybeards to use NATOPS height of 600 feet, about half way in the first part of our cruise late 1971. It was difficult for me as a newbie to adjust to a descending base turn during the cruise. Hook to ramp clearance in NATOPS minimum is 6.5 feet whereas aboard MELBOURNE it was 6 feet. Generally there were no problems operating at sea with carrier movement except the carrier could wallow a bit. The earlier video shows effect of big swell high wind inside Jervis Bay (near NAS Nowra). The effect at sea outside the bay was worse. My first and only view of a Sea Venom carrier landing from goofers/vultures row was inside JB in similar weather back in mid 1966. The Venom arrested with flight ops called off thereafter. AFAIK the Super Etendard was only TESTED to be found unsuitable.
Forgot some of the many questions... The catapult when working handled the load for sure, however two A4Gs were lost to bad catshots. Cause unknown for the first one with the pilot going into the sea etc. The second & VERY LAST A4G catshot (pilot ejected OK) was caused by cat crew not doing all required checks properly in their haste. One A4G lost to wire break (bad juju under deck) with pilot ejecting OK. There were a few close calls on arrest (details in the MEGA PDF). My only experience is MELBOURNE with my first roller/touch and go deck landings aboard HMS Eagle visiting our east coast Aug 1971. As a sprog/newbie/nugget I had no other DL experience then to allow me to arrest/catapult from EAGLE, unlike other VF-805ers. I recall the deck felt EXTREMELY bumpy (not just arrestor gear) and that carrier looked small (the first time I had seen one from the air) then I got to MELBOURNE.
MELBOURNE could trundle to 20 knots but the shipboard experience was something to behold - she rarely needed to go that fast thank goodness. As you can see from the LSO gouge there are limits to WOD for weight however I never experienced any issues at max carrier landing weight of 14.5K lbs.
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 4th Feb 2022 at 17:49. Reason: txt txt & more txt & grfx
Sandiego89
To insert my twopenneth at your query about dodgiest carrier jet I have always admired the Douglas A3 Skywarrier guys/gals.
An enormous aircraft with teenie-weenie engines of 1950s vintage still operating at Gulf War 1 in 1991.
I stress I am not of a Naval Aviator hertitage but have done AAR with them, and thought you have got to have big b***s
to operate that off a teenie weeie boat. (Is it still the heaviest aircraft to be catapulted from a boat?)
To insert my twopenneth at your query about dodgiest carrier jet I have always admired the Douglas A3 Skywarrier guys/gals.
An enormous aircraft with teenie-weenie engines of 1950s vintage still operating at Gulf War 1 in 1991.
I stress I am not of a Naval Aviator hertitage but have done AAR with them, and thought you have got to have big b***s
to operate that off a teenie weeie boat. (Is it still the heaviest aircraft to be catapulted from a boat?)
Sandiego89
To insert my twopenneth at your query about dodgiest carrier jet I have always admired the Douglas A3 Skywarrier guys/gals.
An enormous aircraft with teenie-weenie engines of 1950s vintage still operating at Gulf War 1 in 1991.
I stress I am not of a Naval Aviator hertitage but have done AAR with them, and thought you have got to have big b***s
to operate that off a teenie weeie boat. (Is it still the heaviest aircraft to be catapulted from a boat?)
To insert my twopenneth at your query about dodgiest carrier jet I have always admired the Douglas A3 Skywarrier guys/gals.
An enormous aircraft with teenie-weenie engines of 1950s vintage still operating at Gulf War 1 in 1991.
I stress I am not of a Naval Aviator hertitage but have done AAR with them, and thought you have got to have big b***s
to operate that off a teenie weeie boat. (Is it still the heaviest aircraft to be catapulted from a boat?)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
NATOPS for RA-3B Skywarrior: https://www.docdroid.net/SqVt2i0/dou...ght-manual-pdf (103Mb PDF)
https://www.historynet.com/air-force...flies-navy.htm [scary story indeedy]
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-...-navy-carrier/ [substitute ORANGE for RED in this story]
Bit of a delay whilst uploading some NATOPS 'landing' PDF pages but I don't know what the file size limit is so it is suck it & see.... Now in two parts-1st part FIELD Landing procedures-2nd part CARRIER OPS
https://www.historynet.com/air-force...flies-navy.htm [scary story indeedy]
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-...-navy-carrier/ [substitute ORANGE for RED in this story]
Bit of a delay whilst uploading some NATOPS 'landing' PDF pages but I don't know what the file size limit is so it is suck it & see.... Now in two parts-1st part FIELD Landing procedures-2nd part CARRIER OPS
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 5th Feb 2022 at 00:12. Reason: + PDFs +gif
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
A-3 HISTORY: https://www.a3skywarrior.com/ready-r...n-history.html
Skywarrior RA-3B NATOPS
WEIGHT LIMITATIONS
The maximum recommended gross weights
are as follows:
a. Field takeoff . . . . . . . 78,000 pounds
b. Field landing . . . . . . . 56, 000 pounds
c. Catapulting . . . . . . . . 73,000 pounds
d. Shipboard and shore-based arrested landings;
touch and go; FCLP . . . . 50,000 pounds
Skywarrior RA-3B NATOPS
WEIGHT LIMITATIONS
The maximum recommended gross weights
are as follows:
a. Field takeoff . . . . . . . 78,000 pounds
b. Field landing . . . . . . . 56, 000 pounds
c. Catapulting . . . . . . . . 73,000 pounds
d. Shipboard and shore-based arrested landings;
touch and go; FCLP . . . . 50,000 pounds
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 5th Feb 2022 at 03:53. Reason: +earl
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
https://external-preview.redd.it/7D4...=webp&aceda16b NOW TINY URL: https://tinyurl.com/bdf6v2v2
RAFALE M HUD VIEW Carrier Approach Arrest Charles de Gaulle [white line/TRIANGLE fever?]
Carrier Charles de Gaulle, SUPER Etendard Approach From 'the Start' and Trap 'Arrest' WHITE TRIANGLE [short]
Carrier Charles de Gaulle, Etendard trap [long]
Super Etendard Modernise SEM Carrier Approach Pilot Actions [musick]
C-2A Greyhound COD Trap FS Charles de Gaulle Mar 2014 [mehican rad]
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 7th Feb 2022 at 07:01. Reason: ADvid & smilly & TINNYearl +vids
A second video of the crash is now doing the rounds. I won't link it myself because I despise those who leak what should be kept internal, but it certainly shows it in grim detail and puts paid to certain rumours of the cause.
Its up on redit so no point trying to keep it quiet
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/co...tm_name=iossmf
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/co...tm_name=iossmf
Ouch! Glad everyone survived that. Such things have ever been a hazard with arrested landings.
Mogwi Snr "arrives" after a ramp-strike caused by engine failure on finals (due to Japanese bullet!) January 6th 1945.
The dent was still there when Indefatigable was scrapped 11 years later.
Mogwi Snr "arrives" after a ramp-strike caused by engine failure on finals (due to Japanese bullet!) January 6th 1945.
The dent was still there when Indefatigable was scrapped 11 years later.
Its up on redit so no point trying to keep it quiet
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/co...tm_name=iossmf
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/co...tm_name=iossmf
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 0
Received 52 Likes
on
45 Posts
Fairly accurate description of the PLAT (probably called something else these days) video: https://theaviationist.com/2022/02/0...leaked-online/
VIDEO about ILARTS no longer available but may be somewhere else?
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu822BsBi-I [without the HAITCH 'cause it ain't there]
PLAT [pilot landing assistance television] tape - now ILARTS [Integrated Launch and Recovery Television Surveillance]
VIDEO about ILARTS no longer available but may be somewhere else?
ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu822BsBi-I [without the HAITCH 'cause it ain't there]
PLAT [pilot landing assistance television] tape - now ILARTS [Integrated Launch and Recovery Television Surveillance]
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 6th Feb 2022 at 14:26.