Had a catapult at RAE Bedford when I was there (1970s). Had no choice but to do it "at anchor!" F4s and Buccaneers mostly I remember.

arriers Left-Handed
 

Perhaps they should put the island in the middle - one side for taking off and the other for landing.

Just think how efficient that would be;)

Kinda of on the same topic, but I've seen a line of booms extending about the deck width to the right in some pictures. What were these for?

Funny, you don't sound Japanese.......

It's been done.

HMS Furious (?)

AA,

Whilst at CU in Dec 78 I witnessed HMS ARK ROYAL disembarking its Air Group, I believe it paid off after that deployment.
SJ

Why does the boss driver on the bridge of those airyplane thingies sit in the left hand seat? also one believes some of the Carriers on convoy escort duties during our last bout of unpleasentess with those continentals, did not have any superstructure at all on the upper deck,
:rolleyes:

They did have superstructure on the upper decks but they may have been open to the elements!!!!

Very early carriers were simply flat decks bolted onto the existing structure. Scary!

Some carriers had deck-edge netting carried outwards on booms, IIRC. Others may have had radio masts etc, which would have to be folded out of the way for air ops.

Yes, lots. (All hands on deck!)

This is actually a "hangover" from Commercial Aviation.

They had to standardise on what side of the Hairyplane the main cabin doors would be (so as not to confuse the airstairs drivers - easily done:oh: ). And the great commercial BOAC ("Better On A Camel" - or was it Imperial Airways in those "pre-PanAm" days) decided that, as charabangs always had the doors to the left, so would the new-fangled Hairyplanes

In those days, a flight from "Blighty" to Far-Flung Empire (such as the popular Chinese destination airport HFD - Hoo Flung Dung International:suspect: ) took several days, and several night-stops (navigation being largely following rivers, mountain ranges, and in the case of well - colonialised areas - motorways) It was considered "Fourringer Perks" to chat up the best looking feeeemales on the flight.

This meant that the Fourringers had to sit on the left side of the Hairyplane, in order to "assess" the oncoming feeeemale pax, as they boarded, as to which were worthy of their valuable time in the bar of the night-stop hotel, to "build their strength" for the following day's 1000 km sector, following roads, rivers, and conspicuous configurations of paddy fields (the latter on routes that were later to be handed over the Air Cunnilingus and Ryan).:{

In those far-of times, the gallant Fourringers were the gods of the profession, much envied and their positions sought-after by the lowly Effos (as well asthe Effees, and even more lowly Navoffs and Radops, and much later the Peethrees of the Trydent) and deemed them selves worthy of all the perks they could get.

So what's changed?:E

What I want to know is why is the Navy also called the Andrew?:confused: :confused:

Why are aircraft carriers right handed?

Well it's obvious: they haven't figured out how to build ambidextrous ones yet...


Getting back onto a serious track here: the French have made some modifications to the carrier Charles de Gaulle, after all their problems with her propellors.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...DG_cartoon.jpg

In the event of any future incapacitation of the carrier's main propulsion due to enemy attack (or even just shoddy craftsmanship), provision has been made so that a pair of Rafales can be strapped-down onto the after-part of the flight deck. This will provide the Charles de Gaulle with a "get you home" auxilary power source...

Wasn't there an instance of a couple of F4s, Scooters and A6s used to maneouvre a carrier into it's berth using jet thrust?

It must have been a very hot day then...offshore winds?!

SRT, That procedure predates the carrier jet age.

I have read of and seen a photo of a carrier being helped into berth by a line of piston engined aircraft; Skyraiders and Bearcats IIRC.

The manoeuvre was done in "The Bridges at Toko-Ri" (William Holden, Grace Kelly, et al, about 1954). The politics between the Commander of the Air Group who did not want to burn out his engines and the captain who wanted to berth his carrier formed a sub-plot in the movie.

All I can say is that the aircraft involved must have had exceptionally strong undercarriage to shift so many tens of thousands of tonnes of deadweight.
What they should have done was to heave unemployed or unemployable, flipper-equipped, aircrew overboard at the back end with instructions to swim and push.
It is much cheaper and does not interfere with the ongoing operational status of the ship as long as they are instructed to talk as normal and keep up the airflow over the deck.

Great spelling of manoeuvre there Davaar, I'd have expected nothing less from you! :ok:

If one had been born a woman, I'd have quite fancied William Holden methinks. As it was, I sometimes harboured secret thoughts of wishing he was my dad sometimes as an adolescent. As for Grace Kelly, well, I've always fancied Princess Caroline... :O

Anyway, I think aircraft-carriers are an outdated concept. They look impressive from any angle but the image is mainly a projected one.