Another carrier hook placement dilemma
 

Have a look at another carrier hook placement dilemma, this time with the hook placed between the fore & aft wheels. Quite a pitching moment if the speeds are not spot on. Typical landing speeds were around 83-87 kts – with the throttle closed just before touchdown, and like a glider, spoilers 'pickled' to initiate the roundout.

Only a single catch wire was used because of the gear trampling problems.

I wonder if the 2015 date for F-35C Sea Trials is an error and really slated for 2013 as has been said for some time now? [I guess one can read also that - without any mention of any F-35C trials or further F-35B sea trials - that the dates above refer to the aircraft actually being embarked?]

Panetta Lifts F-35B Probation Jan 20, 2012 By Amy Butler [email protected] NAS PATUXENT RIVER, Md.

Panetta Lifts F-35B Probation | AVIATION WEEK Lifts F-35B Probation

"...Kelly says he also expects to begin testing a redesigned tailhook for the F-35C in the second half of the year. The current design encountered problems last year when officials attempted rolling tests and the tailhook skipped over the wire owing to its weight [QUE???] and a problem with the dampening system. CF-3 will be the first test aircraft to have the new tailhook installed.

After the initial ship trials with the F-35B last fall, the B model is not expected to go to sea until 2013, with the C model following in 2015, Kelly said...."

It should be noted that in USN parlance, 'Go to Sea' means enters service, not just simply the literal meaning. Context is everything here.

Obi Wan wrote: ''It should be noted that in USN parlance, 'Go to Sea' means enters service, not just simply the literal meaning. Context is everything here.''

in that case, somebody is off their tits.

Spaz is talking about the first carrier trials, which may or may not require most of the back end of this aircraft to be redesigned from sctratch, being in 2013. how then can the USN seriously be talking about it being in service - potential redesign and all - in 2015?

is this a bit like the USMC talking about DaveB being in service in 2012 as late as last year?

The FW Star-Telegram's Bob Cox reports F-35C carrier trials in 2013:

Is F-35 program flying high or sputtering? | Business | Dallas Business, Texas Business,...

That has to be preceded by rolling arrest tests (which is what the C just failed) and runway arrested landings.

F-35C IOC is undisclosed, but it sure as heck is not going to be 2015.

Being an ex-RAN FAA A4G arrestor pilot some 40 years ago now, I don't always know all the USN lingo inferences today. So be it. No WuckinFurries. Here is a thread wot may interest some: [graphics in this thread show F-35A emergency hook (shoe point) similar to redesigned F-35C hook (shoe point) with similarity to A-4 hook shoe point and distance of that point to main wheels]

F-35C Lands at Lakehurst For Testing

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewt...start-120.html

As a veteran of a short field night arrest on empty drop tanks in an A4G at NAS Nowra after second night deck landing ramp strike I can attest after some 100+ deck landings onboard HMAS Melbourne with an additional 13 night deck landings, that the A-4 hook works well. Although the A-4G could 'hook skip bolter' onboard that was for different reasons IMHO. And once people got the hang of it with five wires out there was not much chance of missing an arrest. Take one or two wires away though - to leave a big gap - then all bets were off. :eek:
______________

This old wrinkly PRUNE page has outdated links now:
http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-a...-dumped-3.html

Here is a new couple for A4G/FAA/Fixed Wing/MELBOURNE info:
Fleet Air Arm | adf-history.com
&
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=cbcd6...6&sa=822839791
&
Videos:
bengello's Channel - YouTube
&
Photos:
The A-4 Alley - RAN A-4 Skyhawk Operations 1968-1984

Did the A-4 fail its run-on tests due to trampling?

The hook point is well aft of the MLG axle line - and the A-4 wheels don't deliver anything like the same energy to the wire.

It's not the shape of the hook, it's the ability of the hook to perform consistently in an off-nominal (wire flat on deck) engagement.

Not to say it can't be done, but it's not in the bag until it has been done.

Burbage on hook redesign testing soonish
 

Agree the fix needs to be tested successfully, however as indicated in this and other reports from Burbage, more tweaking may be required to what is after all a complex system (arrestor wire behaviour) interacting with another complex system (hook behaviour).

Testing new hook should be soonish according to:
Is F-35 program flying high or sputtering? Posted Saturday, Jan. 21, 2012

Is F-35 program flying high or sputtering? | Business | Dallas Business, Texas Business,...

"...One of the more glaring problems spotlighted in recent weeks by news media and critics is that the tailhook on the F-35C, the version intended for the Navy to operate off aircraft carriers, failed repeatedly to snag the arresting wire in mock carrier landings last summer.

The Pentagon report that revealed the tailhook problem left no doubt that officials considered it potentially a very serious problem. Fixing it, the report said, might require major changes to the aircraft design, adding more delays and still more costs to the already soaring bills for the F-35.

Burbage, a former Navy pilot who made his share of carrier landings, understands the significance of the problem as well as anyone. There won't be many carrier landings if the tailhook doesn't catch and stop the plane when it lands.

It's a challenging issue, a more complex engineering problem than with past Navy planes because of the "stealth" design of the F-35C. Tailhooks ordinarily extend from the back of Navy planes at all times. The F-35C tailhook must be shorter and retract into the body of the aircraft so it doesn't ruin the plane's low visibility to radar signals.

Burbage says he's confident that Lockheed and the Navy can solve the problem without major and costly delays.

"We put our A team on it," Burbage said, with Lockheed engineers working closely with the Navy's top engineering and carrier aviation experts. "We did detailed engineering analysis. There are some physics problems related to the way the [arresting] wire reacts when the plane rolls over it."

By the end of the month, Burbage said, he expects the tailhook to be redesigned and new parts ordered from suppliers. By midsummer the new version should be flying at the Navy's Lakehurst, N.J., base, where carrier operations are tested on the ground. [Remember also this 'carrier' at NAS Lakehurst does not move much. :D ]

"We'll go back and check it and see if we have to tweak it again," Burbage said, adding that he's confident that the F-35C will be ready and cleared for initial carrier testing schedule for 2013.

"I believe that's where we are. We need to prove it to people...."

I'm sure those predictions will be as accurate as those over the past decade from the same source.

Mr Burbage's job for the past 12 years has been to keep JSF sold, and he has done it very well.

And your job?

Fighting for truth, justice, freedom and decent beer.

Chicken Man (He's every where - he's every where) is my hero - 'the most fantastic crime fighter the world has ever known':

danoday.com - Dick Orkin's Chickenman First Episode
________

Earlier LO asked 'did A-4 fail trample tests'. Dunno - that would have been a very long time ago indeed. I may go away in an attempt to find out - but then again I might not. Below is an excellent Laurie Hillier photo of an almost 'taxi 1' wire with some possible trample effect but also probably the main wheels/tyres have hit the deck just after no.1 wire.

Also the F-35C hook redesign (to make it look like the F-35A emergency hook and the A-4 hook) is to enable it to catch a trampled wire flat on the runway or deck - so not a future problem one hopes.

http://a4-alley.x90x.net/A4-Alley/RA...-871-dkldg.jpg

http://a4-alley.x90x.net/A4-Alley/RA...-871-dkldg.jpg

Developing a water based arrester gear at Bedford in the mid 60s we did I hate to think how many run in trials. But clearly a real landing compresses the gear more than somewhat while the hook dynamics/angle following a high sink rate touchdown are quite different from the run in case. While the new hook shape at post 144 looks lovely for a run in, on a landing with the gear compreesed I would think it could wound the deck nicely/and or wear itself.

Funny... SpazSinbad posted a link with that very info 3 days (and 12 posts) ago in this very thread.
http://www.pprune.org/6971391-post202.html

Funny... SpazSinbad posted a link with that very info 3 days (and 12 posts) ago in this very thread.
More delays for the F-35

Thank you, Green Knight. I don't know how I'd get by here if you weren't following me around, wiping my nose for me.

I mean, what? You expect me to read every post in a long, repetitive set? :cool:

When you get down to it, roll in landings are always harder to catch a wire than fly in landings. My hook skip rate in the F-4 was pretty high in cases where gear hit the wire first. Of course, the sharp pitch down the F-4 did on touchdown plus a bit of tendency of the main mounts to rebound off the deck didn't help either.

As I recall, the F-4 hook tip was redesigned from the original. No big deal. I'm surprised that the F-35 folks didn't have a spare in their back pocket of an alternate design.

What they will have to watch with the lower point tip is that wear limits are strictly observed. Too sharp and they will be tearing out strands.

Copied from an article in The Times today.

Superhornet anyone? Maybe, just maybe.

Interesting idea to replace the 'similar to Hornet but not at moment working hook on the F-35C' A/C with a CompleatWuckingSuperHornet. Good oh. :*:ugh:

The RN situation is only partly connected with the hook. The concern is that the USN IOC will slip due to other factors to the point where the UK's first carrier has an empty deck at commissioning.