C-130 on Navy Carrier

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 19:41:49 GMT, in rec.aviation.military.naval Dave in San
Diego wrote:

There are pics of cars getting catted off out on the 'Net, but I can't
find my copies on my computer right now.

I've got one of what looks like an old Buick gallantly attempting to aviate from
the #1 catapult of Enterprise...

Gord Beaman wrote in
:

Dave in San Diego wrote:

Rob van Riel wrote in
news
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 17:39:55 +0000, Gord Beaman wrote:

Rob van Riel wrote:
Didn't know about that one, but yes, there seems to be an
overwhelming urge to get just about anyting that will fly to work
from a carrier.

...aaand some that won't too!...did you see the pic of the car
that they launched from some carrier?...how in 'ell did they ever
float that one by the hedshed?...imagine some crusty Admiral's
question..."You want to catapult WHAT OFF MY DECK Lt?!?"

As I recal that was a publicity stunt to demonstrate the raw power
of
the
catapults. A model T Ford that spent all of a mile in the air,
wasn't
it?

Rob


There are pics of cars getting catted off out on the 'Net, but I can't
find my copies on my computer right now.

As for the distance, nowhere close to a mile. If you make a couple of
reasonable assumptions - 100 feet off the water, and 130 kt end speed
- and do the math, it comes out to about 460 feet in 2.5 sec. This
matches well with what I saw during the deadload tests in port on the
Midway. Reduce either, and the "flight" distance decreases
correspondingly.

Dave in San Diego

Why has the speed anything to do with it Dave?...there's no
'lift' so it would fall just as fast no matter how fast it was
moving forward...it should hit the water just as quick whether
you shoved it off the side or accelerated it to a thousand MPH
(disregarding the curvature of the earth - and assuming that the
carrier deck is level fore and aft)

I agree - horizontal motion and vertical motion are independent. It's a
classic physics demo in HS and college. The height above the water
determines the fall time. The cat end speed determines how far the car
will travel horizontally in that time.

100 feet off the water gives a fall time of 2.5 sec. 130 kt = 219
ft/sec. 2.5 times 219 gives you 460 feet.

Dave in San Diego

Rob van Riel wrote in
news
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:47:38 +0000, Jerry Ennis wrote:
"The CIA and the U-2 Program, 1954-1974" is available in PDF format at
http://www.cia.gov/csi/books/U2/u2.pdf.
Modification of U-2s for carrier operations are discussed on pp.
247-251 and a photo showing markings is on p. 249.

Great, this document goes a long way toward making the model buildable.

Rob



You are going to have ask some folks from those floating "birdfarms"
but I seem to remember something about some South American countries
being allowed to use US carriers for training while those carriers
were passing close to their waters while on transit around the horn.
so that could add some French built birds to your list..

not sure if it was just for approach training or actual traps and
launch.
Professional courtesy, as it were..

In article , John
Szalay wrote:

Rob van Riel wrote in
news
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:47:38 +0000, Jerry Ennis wrote:
"The CIA and the U-2 Program, 1954-1974" is available in PDF format at
http://www.cia.gov/csi/books/U2/u2.pdf.
Modification of U-2s for carrier operations are discussed on pp.
247-251 and a photo showing markings is on p. 249.

Great, this document goes a long way toward making the model buildable.

Rob



You are going to have ask some folks from those floating "birdfarms"
but I seem to remember something about some South American countries
being allowed to use US carriers for training while those carriers
were passing close to their waters while on transit around the horn.
so that could add some French built birds to your list..

not sure if it was just for approach training or actual traps and
launch.
Professional courtesy, as it were..

Folks that did the last Mimitz around the horn had shots of Super E's
doing cats and traps. (Argentina maybe?)Of course the list of aviation
bosuns that have experience hooking up a bridle is getting shorter and
shorter.

Pugs

John Szalay wrote:
Rob van Riel wrote in
news

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 10:47:38 +0000, Jerry Ennis wrote:

"The CIA and the U-2 Program, 1954-1974" is available in PDF format at
http://www.cia.gov/csi/books/U2/u2.pdf.
Modification of U-2s for carrier operations are discussed on pp.
247-251 and a photo showing markings is on p. 249.

Great, this document goes a long way toward making the model buildable.

Rob




You are going to have ask some folks from those floating "birdfarms"
but I seem to remember something about some South American countries
being allowed to use US carriers for training while those carriers
were passing close to their waters while on transit around the horn.
so that could add some French built birds to your list..

not sure if it was just for approach training or actual traps and
launch.
Professional courtesy, as it were..

I remember when the Lincoln was down there in 1991 on a trip around Cape
Horn the Argentine Navy only did touch and go landings with their
Skyhawks and Super Etendards. The ship didn't have the equipment to
hook those planes to the catapult.

I guess I now am going to have to dig through the boxes and find the
pictures I took of the Argentine planes from vultures row.

ALV

"William Hughes" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:44:48 -0000, in rec.aviation.military.naval "Keith
W"
wrote:

CVN 77 was used to transport the ski-equipped R4D's (based
^^^^^^^^^

Brainfart it should have been CV-47 of course

Keith

Dave in San Diego wrote:
--cut--

Why has the speed anything to do with it Dave?...there's no
'lift' so it would fall just as fast no matter how fast it was
moving forward...it should hit the water just as quick whether
you shoved it off the side or accelerated it to a thousand MPH
(disregarding the curvature of the earth - and assuming that the
carrier deck is level fore and aft)

I agree - horizontal motion and vertical motion are independent. It's a
classic physics demo in HS and college. The height above the water
determines the fall time. The cat end speed determines how far the car
will travel horizontally in that time.

100 feet off the water gives a fall time of 2.5 sec. 130 kt = 219
ft/sec. 2.5 times 219 gives you 460 feet.

Dave in San Diego

Of course...you're right...I wasn't thinking, sorry.
--

-Gord.
(use gordon in email)

Greasy Rider© @invalid.com wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 19:03:10 +0100, Rob van Riel
postulated :

As I recal that was a publicity stunt to demonstrate the raw power of the
catapults. A model T Ford that spent all of a mile in the air, wasn't it?

When I was in a Navy airgroup (CVG-6 in the Fifties), it was standard
procedure to launch a concrete filled "wagon" off the cats after a
carrier left Portsmouth , VA yards to test the cats. The weight was
supposed to simulate an aircraft of the time. Difficult to plot the
trajectory from the flight deck but they went "way" out before arcing
down to the water. I would think that a Model T would disintegrate
with the forces applied from a steam catapult.

In the UK there is a programme called Top Gear which launched an old Jaguar
off the Ski Jump of one of the RN Carriers, I forget which. I'll Have a look
and find out though.

--

Richard Battle

I'm running the 2005 Flora London Marathon for CLIMB (Children Living with
Inherited MetaBolic diseases).
Please sponsor me by clicking the link below.

http://www.justgiving.com/battle

Sadly, Cdr. Walter "Smokey" Stovall, Jim Flatley's co-pilot, passed away
from leukemia in Bethesda Naval Hospital in 1972.

An even stranger event was the landing aboard and immediate deck launch from
USS Ranger of a U-2 in the mid 1960's. Anyone have the details on that? It
was a secret operation and the majority of the crew were not allowed above
flight deck level during the op.

"W. D. Allen Sr." wrote in message
...
Does anyone know anything about the C-130 that made arrested landings and
launches from a Navy aircraft carrier back in the 1960s?

WDA

end

John Randolph wrote:

Sadly, Cdr. Walter "Smokey" Stovall, Jim Flatley's co-pilot, passed away
from leukemia in Bethesda Naval Hospital in 1972.

An even stranger event was the landing aboard and immediate deck launch from
USS Ranger of a U-2 in the mid 1960's. Anyone have the details on that? It
was a secret operation and the majority of the crew were not allowed above
flight deck level during the op.

"W. D. Allen Sr." wrote in message
...

Does anyone know anything about the C-130 that made arrested landings and
launches from a Navy aircraft carrier back in the 1960s?

WDA

end





Japan to Join U.S. Policy on Taiwan
Growth of China Seen Behind Shift

By Anthony Faiola
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, February 18, 2005; Page A01
The Chinese seem to feel they are in control in the North Korea nuclear
situation. The following is from the 'other' Washington paper, the one
without ties to South Korea.


TOKYO, Feb. 17 -- The United States and Japan will declare Saturday for
the first time in a joint agreement that Taiwan is a mutual security
concern, according to a draft of the document. Analysts called the move
a demonstration of Japan's willingness to confront the rapidly growing
might of China.

The United States has long focused attention on the Chinese
government's threat to use military force against Taiwan if the island,
which China views as a renegade province, moves toward independence.
Until now, Japan has been content to let the United States bear the
brunt of Beijing's displeasure.

But in the most significant alteration since 1996 to the U.S.-Japan
Security Alliance, which remains the cornerstone of U.S. interests in
East Asia, Japan will join the Bush administration in identifying
security in the Taiwan Strait as a "common strategic objective." Set
for release after a meeting of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice,
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and their Japanese counterparts in
Washington on Saturday, the revisions will also call for Japan to take
a greater role in conjunction with U.S. forces both in Asia and beyond,
according to a draft copy obtained by The Washington Post.

Although it is likely to anger China, the move is being welcomed by
Taiwan, which, despite having been occupied by Japan from 1895 to 1945,
maintains an empathy for the Japanese that is rare in Asia. Elderly
Taiwanese, for instance, still show delight in Japanese language and
culture. Last month, Taiwan inaugurated its $3 billion, Japanese-built
bullet train, which can reach speeds of almost 200 miles per hour. And
in December, Japan angered China by granting a tourist visa to former
Taiwanese president Lee Teng-hui, who was educated in Japan and had an
emotional reunion here with a former professor.

"This is the first time that Japan has made its stance clear; in the
past, Japan has been very indirect on the Taiwan issue," said Koh
Se-kai, Taiwan's special representative to Japan, which since 1972 has
had formal relations with China but not with Taiwan. "We're relieved
that Japan has become more assertive."

Japan's constitution, drafted by the United States at the end of World
War II, prohibits the country from going to war. But there is strong
pressure to revise the constitution so that Japan's Self-Defense Forces
can act as a real military.

Along with the threat of North Korea, which declared itself a
nuclear-armed nation last week, the rise of China has become the
primary concern fueling Japan's shift away from nearly six decades of
pacifism.

Japan has generally been inclined to sidestep conflict with China. But
in recent years, China has dramatically modernized its military while
expanding its sphere of influence in Asia on the strength of its
booming economy. The effort to extend its reach has included exploring
for natural gas near Japanese-claimed waters only 110 miles north of
Taiwan and countering Japan's claims to exclusive economic zones in the
Pacific.

In response, Japan has also shifted course in the past year, moving to
defend its territorial claims in the East China Sea. Last November,
Japan dispatched aircraft on a two-day hunt for a Han-class Chinese
submarine that briefly intruded into Japan's far southern waters in
what many here saw as a test of Japanese resolve in the event of
Chinese aggression against Taiwan.

"It would be wrong for us to send a signal to China that the United
States and Japan will watch and tolerate China's military invasion of
Taiwan," said Shinzo Abe, the acting secretary general of Japan's
ruling Liberal Democratic Party who is widely considered a likely
successor to Junichiro Koizumi as prime minister. "If the situation
surrounding Japan threatens our security, Japan can provide U.S. forces
with support."

Such talk reflects what diplomats and scholars call the defining drama
of East Asia for the 21st century -- the competition for economic and
political dominance in the region between Japan, the world's
second-largest economy, and China, the world's most populous nation and
a fast-developing economic and military power.

"I think the biggest challenge to Japan is going to be how it arranges
its relationship with China," the U.S. ambassador to Japan, Howard H.
Baker Jr., said on Wednesday. "But how they do that is going to say a
lot about stability in this region for years to come. . . . Japan is a
superpower; China is on its way to being a superpower. They are both
rich, they both have a history and tradition in this region, and they
don't much like each other, I think."

Analysts note that both China and Japan have substantial reasons for
restraint. Last year, China surpassed the United States as Japan's
number one trading partner, while massive investments by Japanese
companies in search of cheaper labor and larger markets have become a
driving factor behind China's blistering 9.5-percent annual growth
rate.

But if their economic relations are hot, politically the two nations
are cool. The Chinese complain about Koizumi's visits to Tokyo's
Yasukuni Shrine commemorating fallen warriors -- including World War II
war criminals. The two governments have also battled over the route of
a trans-Siberian pipeline for Russian oil and territorial rights in an
East China Sea island chain known as the Senkaku in Japanese and the
Diaoyu in Chinese.

The Chinese government granted rights two years ago for domestic and
foreign oil companies to explore and drill an area only three miles
from Japanese-claimed territory -- a region rich in natural gas and
oil. This month, Japan pushed back, boosting its claims to the area by
officially taking over ownership of a 15-foot lighthouse built on the
island chain by Japanese nationalist activists in 1978.

"It is time Japan began protecting what is ours," said Makoto Yamazaki,
director of the Japan Youth Association, which built the lighthouse and
freely handed it over to the government this month. "If our sovereignty
is being threatened, we have a right to defend ourselves."

But the idea of Japanese military cooperation with the United States in
the sea lanes north of Taiwan has particularly rankled Chinese
diplomatic and military planners because it goes to the heart of their
Taiwan strategy.

On the one hand, diplomats and other specialists say, the Chinese
military has embarked on a buildup of short-range missiles, naval
vessels and electronics-aided aircraft to enable it to threaten the
island militarily if President Chen Shui-bian should take what China
considers an unacceptably decisive step toward independence. On the
other hand, they added, China has set out to improve and extend its
maritime and airborne might in the sea lanes north of Taiwan, with the
goal of forcing the United States to think twice about military
intervention. Within the next five years, according to U.S. estimates,
the Chinese navy is expected to have more than 20 modern attack
submarines, including half a dozen nuclear-powered vessels.

Japanese officials said that the official position advocating a
peaceful resolution of the Taiwan issue has not changed. They said the
constitution limits the level of assistance that Japan could offer in
the event of a U.S. confrontation with China over Taiwan. But the joint
statement on Saturday could help lay the groundwork for the Japanese to
extend as much cooperation as they legally can, including logistical
support such as transportation and medical rescue operations behind the
lines of combat, officials said.

"We consider China a friendly country, but it is also unpredictable," a
senior Japanese government official said. "If it takes aggressive
action, Japan cannot just stand by and watch."

Correspondent Edward Cody in Beijing and special correspondents Sachiko
Sakamaki and Akiko Yamamoto contributed to this report.




http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer