Have you ever seen a C-130 Hercules trying to do a hover over the runway ?

"Larry" wrote

Uhm- Scuse me! I don't think I heard that right.
Aircraft landing on a carrier DO NOT use their brakes for any part of
the arrested landing. Once they come to a full stop (slowed by the
arresting wire) then and only then they use their brakes (as directed
by the Yellow Shirt) to hold position.

Larry...Uhm- Scuse us!
The topic is a C-130 making UN-arrested landings
on the Forrestal. I'll bet that he DID use the brakes.

Bob Moore

(John Dallman) wrote:

In article h7mwd.768167$8_6.703195@attbi_s04,
(William W. Plummer) wrote:

Iwan Bogels wrote:
Forward pointing rockets were installed to provide reverse thrust
during landing, as well as downward pointed rockets to cushon the
landing.
There was a famous experiment to prove that a fully loaded C-130 could
land on a carrier. The roll-out was 270 feet. Thrust reversers were
used before it was on the deck.

On a carrier deck, you can at least rely on the wheels for some of your
braking. On a soccer (=mud) field, presumably you have to assume you'll
just slide, and won't get any braking?

---
John Dallman, , HTML mail is treated as probable spam.

Well, I'd think that wheel brakes aren't gonna do much, most of
the braking is provided by the prop reverse anyway, but in the
soccer field they needed humungous braking which even the prop
reverse couldn't supply so they tried those high output rocket
motors.
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)

"Larry" wrote:
snip

Uhm- Scuse me! I don't think I heard that right.

Aircraft landing on a carrier DO NOT use their brakes for any part of the
arrested landing. Once they come to a full stop (slowed by the arresting
wire) then and only then they use their brakes (as directed by the Yellow
Shirt) to hold position.

Larry
AECS (AW/SW/MTS)
USN 'Retired'



Larry, didn't the 130 use prop reverse either?...or do you
know?...
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)

Bob Moore wrote in
. 122:

"Larry" wrote

Uhm- Scuse me! I don't think I heard that right.
Aircraft landing on a carrier DO NOT use their brakes for any part of
the arrested landing. Once they come to a full stop (slowed by the
arresting wire) then and only then they use their brakes (as directed
by the Yellow Shirt) to hold position.

Larry...Uhm- Scuse us!
The topic is a C-130 making UN-arrested landings
on the Forrestal. I'll bet that he DID use the brakes.

Bob Moore

Yes, they certainly did. That was the singular mod to the bird for the
project, beefing up the brakes. I worked for someone who was in the
squadron at the time and he gave us lots of background on the whole deal.

Dave in San Diego

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 14:00:45 -0800, "Larry"
wrote:

Aircraft landing on a carrier DO NOT use their brakes for any part of the
arrested landing. Once they come to a full stop (slowed by the arresting

But if you READ - you'll see this is all in reference to a C-130 and
the oh-so-famous KC-130F landing on a carrier. In that case the
aircraft MUST have used brakes, since it DID NOT make an arrested
landing.

--
Andrew Toppan --- --- "I speak only for myself"
"Haze Gray & Underway" - Naval History, DANFS, World Navies Today,
Photo Features, Military FAQs, and more - http://www.hazegray.org/

"William W. Plummer" wrote in
message news:h7mwd.768167$8_6.703195@attbi_s04...
Iwan Bogels wrote:
There was a famous experiment to prove that a fully loaded C-130 could
land on a carrier. The roll-out was 270 feet. Thrust reversers were
used before it was on the deck. I'll bet those landings left something
to be desired for comfort. I think I can find a short video of the
landings and will be happy to post it if someone can tell me where.

I don't think that pitch was reversed in those trials.

"C.D.Damron" wrote

I don't think that pitch was reversed in those trials.

It sure-as-hell was! I observed the official USN film at
the time and the narator stated that the co-pilot had
used the over-ride for the reverse lock-out and reversed
the engines at about 3' above the deck while the pilot
flew to touchdown.

Bob Moore
Naval Aviator 1958-1967

"C.D.Damron" wrote:


"William W. Plummer" wrote in
message news:h7mwd.768167$8_6.703195@attbi_s04...
Iwan Bogels wrote:
There was a famous experiment to prove that a fully loaded C-130 could
land on a carrier. The roll-out was 270 feet. Thrust reversers were
used before it was on the deck. I'll bet those landings left something
to be desired for comfort. I think I can find a short video of the
landings and will be happy to post it if someone can tell me where.

I don't think that pitch was reversed in those trials.

I don't know but it could have been after the a/c was on the deck
and even before with some futzing with the squat switch circuits
that normally prevent that. I've seen both of the tapes. How do
you know that they didn't use reverse?
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)

On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 23:37:22 GMT, Gord Beaman
wrote:

(John Dallman) wrote:

In article h7mwd.768167$8_6.703195@attbi_s04,
(William W. Plummer) wrote:

Iwan Bogels wrote:
Forward pointing rockets were installed to provide reverse thrust
during landing, as well as downward pointed rockets to cushon the
landing.
There was a famous experiment to prove that a fully loaded C-130 could
land on a carrier. The roll-out was 270 feet. Thrust reversers were
used before it was on the deck.

On a carrier deck, you can at least rely on the wheels for some of your
braking. On a soccer (=mud) field, presumably you have to assume you'll
just slide, and won't get any braking?

---
John Dallman, , HTML mail is treated as probable spam.

Well, I'd think that wheel brakes aren't gonna do much, most of
the braking is provided by the prop reverse anyway, but in the
soccer field they needed humungous braking which even the prop
reverse couldn't supply so they tried those high output rocket
motors.

I'll bet there was a pretty good wind over the deck for that carrier
trial, too.

Bill Kambic

"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
...
"C.D.Damron" wrote:
I don't know but it could have been after the a/c was on the deck
and even before with some futzing with the squat switch circuits
that normally prevent that. I've seen both of the tapes. How do
you know that they didn't use reverse?

I meant reversed pitch prior to touchdown, but I could be wrong. I recall
reading that they reversed pitch upon touchdown. I don't recall the source
being definitive.