A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Naval Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Straight deck ops



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 7th 07, 08:44 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
Greasy Rider[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Straight deck ops

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ye6We...related&search
  #2  
Old January 8th 07, 12:49 AM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
Kyle Boatright
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 578
Default Straight deck ops


"Greasy Rider" wrote in message
...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ye6We...related&search


It is always interesting to watch film of WWII carrier operations. The
aircrew all had to have big brass ones. Even if you survived combat, you
still had to survive deck landings and those godawful barriers they put up
to punish people who missed the wires. Beyond that, your dead reckoning
navigation had to be decent in order to find the carrier before you ran out
of fuel. Even worse, if that carrier changed course, it could be 150 NM
from where you expected it.

Even getting off the deck was a tough proposition, with the occasional
engine burp, cold cat shot, or defective bridle.

Has anyone seen a source which gives the odds of a WWII carrier pilot
getting wet on any given mission? I'd bet the odds were 1:50 or worse.

KB


  #3  
Old January 8th 07, 01:18 AM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
DDAY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43
Default Straight deck ops

----------
In article , "Kyle Boatright"
wrote:

It is always interesting to watch film of WWII carrier operations. The
aircrew all had to have big brass ones. Even if you survived combat, you
still had to survive deck landings and those godawful barriers they put up
to punish people who missed the wires. Beyond that, your dead reckoning


I once interviewed a guy who had been a Navy test pilot during WWII. He did
not fly combat because of a medical condition (stomach ulcer, with the
prescription being access to a steady supply of milk, which they could not
guarantee on deployment). He flew every plane in the Navy at the time and
did quite a few landings on (I think) the USS Wright on Lake Michigan. May
have also done landings on an East Coast carrier.

Anyway, he said that landings were not as difficult as you would think,
because the stall speed of the planes was low and the carrier at speed meant
that you approached the deck at less than 70 miles per hour in many cases.
He said that landing was in many ways like driving a car onto the deck. He
never flew jets, but he figured that bringing a jet in was much harder
because the approach speed was so fast.

His favorite plane to fly was the F4U Corsair. I cannot remember why. He
described one other plane--I cannot remember which one--as really
interesting to fly because the center of rotation was essentially at the
pilot's seat, meaning that you pretty much turned the plane around you. He
said that one was very easy to fly.





D
  #4  
Old January 8th 07, 02:22 AM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
vincent p. norris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 122
Default Straight deck ops

I was too young for WW II but CQed in an SNJ aboard USS Wright off
Pensacola in 1950. Not very different from WW II conditions.

Even getting off the deck was a tough proposition, with the occasional
engine burp, cold cat shot, or defective bridle.


Cat shots were infrequent in WW II ops. Even Doolittle's B-25s took
off without benefit of a cat shot. Engines were wound up to full
revs before being released for take-off.

I once interviewed a guy who had been a Navy test pilot during WWII.......
He flew every plane in the Navy at the time and did quite a few landings on
(I think) the USS Wright on Lake Michigan.


That's possible, but I think the two carriers used for CQ on Lake
Michigan were converted lake steamers. One, IIRC, was a side-wheeler.

Anyway, he said that landings were not as difficult as you would think,
because the stall speed of the planes was low and the carrier at speed meant
that you approached the deck at less than 70 miles per hour in many cases.


I would agree, so far as the SNJ is oncerned. After field carrier
practice, a flight of six of us flew out to the boat. We had to get
six "cuts" to qualify. Every one of us, green beginners, got six cuts
for six passes. So it couldn't have been too hard.

Of course, we did it on a sunny day with relative calm seas, not at
night in a storm, with controls shot up.

vince norris
  #5  
Old January 8th 07, 06:09 AM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
DDAY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43
Default Straight deck ops

----------
In article , vincent p. norris
wrote:

I once interviewed a guy who had been a Navy test pilot during WWII.......
He flew every plane in the Navy at the time and did quite a few landings on
(I think) the USS Wright on Lake Michigan.


That's possible, but I think the two carriers used for CQ on Lake
Michigan were converted lake steamers. One, IIRC, was a side-wheeler.


It was one of those. I mixed up the names. They were Wolverine and Sable
and I think he landed on the Sable, flying out of Chicago where he did a lot
of test flights. He said that landing was ultimately unremarkable. Of
course, he was doing it in pristine aircraft in good weather on the Great
Lakes, not in the middle of the Pacific.

Most of what he did was taking up existing aircraft that had received new
equipment. For instance, if the manufacturer had changed the engine design,
he would take it up and see how well it performed. He was also assigned to
one of the paddlewheel carriers for a short time until he got taken out by a
failed arrestor cable and ended up in the hospital for awhile. He's still
alive, but considering his bad luck during WWII, it's amazing that he wasn't
killed 63 years ago.



D
  #6  
Old January 8th 07, 02:48 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
qui si parla Campagnolo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 41
Default Straight deck ops


Greasy Rider wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ye6We...related&search


JJJeeeesussss..

I thought the F-14 was tough to bring aboard. Corsair pilots, very
impressed. Gotta love paddles in shorts too, getting their tan set for
liberty.

  #7  
Old January 8th 07, 02:55 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
Greasy Rider[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Straight deck ops

On 8 Jan 2007 05:48:43 -0800, "qui si parla Campagnolo"
postulated :

I thought the F-14 was tough to bring aboard. Corsair pilots, very
impressed. Gotta love paddles in shorts too, getting their tan set for
liberty.


It was my understanding that the Corsair was not an ideal aircraft for
carrier ops because of the limited forward visibility and most were
transferred over the Marines.


  #8  
Old January 8th 07, 03:26 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
niceguy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 66
Default Straight deck ops

Ah Yes! Those were the days.

"Greasy Rider" wrote in message
...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ye6We...related&search



  #9  
Old January 8th 07, 03:30 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
Andrew Robert Breen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Straight deck ops

In article ,
Greasy Rider wrote:
On 8 Jan 2007 05:48:43 -0800, "qui si parla Campagnolo"
postulated :

I thought the F-14 was tough to bring aboard. Corsair pilots, very
impressed. Gotta love paddles in shorts too, getting their tan set for
liberty.


It was my understanding that the Corsair was not an ideal aircraft for
carrier ops because of the limited forward visibility and most were
transferred over the Marines.


The early Corsairs - what the RN called the Corsair I - were distinctly
sub-optimal for 'carrier operations: the undercarriage oelos were prone to
bouncing on landing, the unbulged cockpit hood meant that visibility was
restricted and the pilot's head took a beating on landing and - as you say
- forward visibility was restricted (though not much worse than many
V-engined types, such as Firefly or Seafire). The Fleet Air Arm took on
Corsairs as soon as it could get them and very quickly evolved a curving
approach to the deck which meant that forward visibility was not a problem
for landing - this had been done before the first FAA Corsair squadrons
started forming (835 was first, in August 1943): could be that "Winkle"
Brown was responsible? The Corsair Is were still difficult to land -
Norman Hanson makes this very clear in "Carrier Pilot" - and by the time
the Corsair went into action with the RN Eastern Fleet they'd re-equipped
with Corsair IIs (there were also Corsair IIIs - Brewster built - and IVs
from Goodyear). The Corsair II onwards don't seem to have been regarded as
more difficult around the ship than anything else, and the USN seems to
have been happy enough with them once it adopted the FAA style of deck
approach.

--
Andy Breen ~ Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Feng Shui: an ancient oriental art for extracting
money from the gullible (Martin Sinclair)
  #10  
Old January 8th 07, 03:36 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
qui si parla Campagnolo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 41
Default Straight deck ops


Greasy Rider wrote:
On 8 Jan 2007 05:48:43 -0800, "qui si parla Campagnolo"
postulated :

I thought the F-14 was tough to bring aboard. Corsair pilots, very
impressed. Gotta love paddles in shorts too, getting their tan set for
liberty.


It was my understanding that the Corsair was not an ideal aircraft for
carrier ops because of the limited forward visibility and most were
transferred over the Marines.


All true but it was flown around the boat by a few really good
avaitors, had to be to be able to do it.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Torque Value for Mounting an O-320 wide deck. Ebby Home Built 2 May 31st 06 01:00 AM
Need very detailed WW2 Carrier Deck Operations WhatMeWorry Naval Aviation 4 December 18th 05 02:39 AM
Deck height Sean Trost Home Built 5 July 16th 04 03:46 AM
Straight restrictor fitting? nauga Home Built 5 April 15th 04 01:06 PM
The "Gipper" is ready! Phineas Pinkham Naval Aviation 0 July 8th 03 10:57 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.