Search this Topic:
Mar 7 12 2:52 PM
Mar 7 12 3:05 PM
bager1968 wrote:That last is a rather old story... that contract was followed by a USN-funded contract to Lockheed (58%), BaE (35%), and NG (7%) in October 2010 for continued SRVL development work.
Apr 7 12 12:04 PM
MattReloaded wrote:Cody2 wrote:Could a 20 knot bulk merchant ship be fitted with a flight deck, and operate STOBAR type aircraft? Something similar to the CVE program in WWII, but with modern aircraft and ships.New Panamax containerships (e.g. Maersk Edinburgh) might do the trick, since they offer enough speed (24+ knots service speed) for STOBAR ops and enough deck space (366m LOA, 49m beam) to accommodate a separate angled deck (~200m x 20m) and take-off ski-jump (~200m x 20m).You'd nevertheless need to : 1) get the deckhouse and funnel out of the way2) build a modular structure (something along the lines of what Maersk proposes for its AFSB concept) to accommodate the hangar and such equipment as the arresting gear. Such a structure would have to be strong enough to cope with arrested landings.A couple more tidbits on the AFSB concept : Link, Link
Cody2 wrote:Could a 20 knot bulk merchant ship be fitted with a flight deck, and operate STOBAR type aircraft? Something similar to the CVE program in WWII, but with modern aircraft and ships.
Apr 11 12 10:49 PM
Apr 12 12 12:32 AM
We can launch F-4s and F-14s loaded for an air defense mission from a CV moored to a pier, with a tail wind. BTDT with the F-4.I recall one of the CVs in San Diego (Independence I think) doing that once as part of a wartime harbor exit exercise, launched an F-14 CAP and IIRC an S-3 to 'sanitize' the harbor approaches before departing. Nobody informed the public who could see the harbor from their work/home about the exercise (obviously?); apparently they were freaking out about it, at least according to the evening news.
We can launch F-4s and F-14s loaded for an air defense mission from a CV moored to a pier, with a tail wind. BTDT with the F-4.
Jul 4 12 11:28 PM
Indian aircraft carrier enters sea trials as navy eyes RafaleRussia has commenced sea trials involving the Indian navy's refurbished aircraft carrier the INS Vikramaditya, as sources suggest the service could consider a future acquisition of the Dassault Rafale.Originally built for Russia as the Admiral Gorshkov, with a maximum displacement of 43,500t, the refitted and modernised vessel left Severodvinsk in the north of the country on 8 June for open-sea trials, preceeding its delivery to India in December. Once operational, the Vikramaditya will be capable of carrying 30 to 34 aircraft, including RSK MiG-29K deck-based fighters.Sources say the Indian navy is considering the carrier-capable Rafale M as a possible acquisition, with a potential cost benefit to come from the air force's pending deal for 126 of the type to meet its medium multi-role combat aircraft requirement.Already operational with the French navy and similar in size to the MiG-29K, the Rafale M could potentially be operated from India's future ski-jump-equipped domestic aircraft carriers and offer a greater operational capability than current Russian aircraft and India's Aeronautical Development Agency Tejas naval fighter.India's interest in new naval fighters stems partly from China's ongoing test work with the aircraft carrier Shi Lang, which will be capable of deploying locally-built versions of the Sukhoi Su-30.
Jul 4 12 11:41 PM
Le Rafale Marine compatible avec les porte-avions dotés de tremplin
Voilà qui peut donner à l'avion de combat français de nouvelles perspectives à l'exportation. A l'issue d'études et de simulations, les ingénieurs de Dassault Aviation ont déterminé que le Rafale Marine serait capable de décoller de porte-avions dépourvus de catapultes mais dotés d'un tremplin. Pour cela, aucune modification de structure ne serait nécessaire par rapport aux Rafale de l'aéronautique navale française, mis en oeuvre depuis le Charles de Gaulle au moyen de catapultes. Pour le recueil de l'avion, une piste oblique avec des brins d'arrêt est toutefois nécessaire. Pour l'heure, seules la Russie, la Chine et l'Inde disposent, ou vont disposer, de porte-avions avec tremplin et brins d'arrêt. Si pour les deux premiers pays, l'acquisition de Rafale Marine est exclue, il s'agit en revanche d'une nouvelle possibilité pour l'Inde. Cette dernière a, pour le moment, prévu de doter ses deux nouveaux porte-avions, les Vikramaditya et Vikrant, de MiG-29K russes. Mais New Delhi est aussi en phase de négociations exclusives avec Dassault Aviation pour l'achat de Rafale destinés à ses forces aériennes. Le contrat, qui pourrait être signé dans les mois qui viennent, ne comprend pas d'avions navalisés. Mais si l'Inde le souhaite, elle pourra disposer d'une alternative au MiG-29K, avec l'avantage d'homogénéiser sa future flotte aérienne. Pour le moment, aucune demande n'a été formulée en ce sens, mais l'option existe techniquement, ce qui est bon à savoir.
En dehors de l'Inde, la capacité du Rafale Marine à décoller sur un pont s'achevant par un tremplin pourrait, dans les prochaines années, intéresser d'autres pays, comme le Brésil, qui souhaite se doter à terme de deux nouveaux porte-avions et ne serait, ainsi, pas obligé d'opter pour des bâtiments à catapultes. Ce, alors que le Rafale est déjà proposé pour moderniser la force aérienne brésilienne.
Dans l'absolu, tout porte-avions ou porte-aéronefs disposant d'un tremplin et étant suffisamment large pour accueillir une piste oblique pourrait, pourrait être concerné. Le point technique le plus critique porte sur les espaces disponibles sous le pont d'envol pour accueillir la machinerie des presses de frein, liées aux brins d'arrêts. Les nouveaux porte-avions britanniques peuvent en être équipés, mais c'est en revanche moins évident pour le Cavour italien, qui nécessiterait probablement de lourds travaux. Pour le moment, ces bâtiments de la Royal Navy et de la Marina militare doivent mettre en oeuvre des avions à décollage court et appontage vertical F-35B. Mais ce programme accuse déjà beaucoup de retard et d'importants surcoûts, alors même que le F-35 entre tout juste dans la phase de développement de ses systèmes, considérée généralement comme la plus complexe d'un programme aéronautique.
Dec 1 12 12:20 PM
over on SDF user no_name posted an excellent translation
of an article documenting the various take off weights, profiles under various
headwind and engine availability conditions, of Su-33/J-15 from
Kuznetsov/Liaoning (post 417)http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/navy/plan-carrier-operations-news-videos-photos-ii-28-6173.html#post211746Basically
for the lazy, at 25 knots headwind (which is more or less the standard speed a
CVBG operates at), Su-33/J-15 can take off with 32.8 tons from all launch
positions.So really, it seems like ski jump is not as big a limitation
wrt TOW as thought, if this is right (and it passes my smell test, you don't
just make those numbers up in your head).Certainly it is the most
comprehensive article detailing the use of Su-33 on ski jumps I've ever come
across. I've always thought the "ski jumps = small payload" stereotype was a
little too straight forward, and this seems to clarify things greatly and makes
the benefits of catapult vs ski jump much less of a black white
Dec 1 12 12:35 PM
舰载武器军事评论第10期，《苏-33/歼-15舰载战斗机航母起飞性能研究》一文，详细地给出了苏-33/歼-15的性能和使用方式，当发动机推力是12800公斤时，零风速，长点，无任何飞行轨迹下降，32.8吨， 最大38吨，短点，无任何飞行轨迹下降，27吨，最大28.2吨，25节甲板风，110米以上的滑跑距离， 苏-33/中秋以最大重量32000千克可以很轻松地直接起飞，在有25节甲板风的情况下，苏-33/中秋可以在1、2号起飞位置，110米的滑跑距离提供类似于无风状态195米的3号起飞位置同样的起飞性能 ，这样的起飞距离和起飞效果与蒸汽弹射器提供的能力非常接近，如果发动机推力增加到14000公斤以上，将 完胜蒸气弹弓。 文中还详细地分析了特殊情况及安全余度，包括推力损失、单发安全、单发起飞，以及这些情况对舰载机实际在航 母上使用时所产生的影响，并给出了苏33/中秋在航母上初级飞行员作训模式、正常作训模式、1、2号位置的紧急起飞模式下的使用起飞重量 范围以及苏-33/中秋的几个典型作战状态等内容。
Assuming 12800Kg thrust, 0 knot headwind: From long take-off point can take-off with 32.8 tonnes, maximum 38 tonnes. From short take-off point can take-off with 27 tonnes, 28.2 tonnes max. At 25knots headwind, Su-33 can easily take-off at max load of 32000kg from 110m. Taking off from 110m under 25 knots headwind gives the same condition as taking off from 195m under no wind. (so the extra 85m length translates to 25 knots more speed). This kind of take-off capability is very close to that provided by conventional steam catapult. IF engine thrust can be improved to 14000kg the performance will be superior to steam catapult.
Dec 1 12 12:53 PM
wabpilot wrote: Go grab a NATOPS manual for your favorite aircraft and see what it says.
Apr 29 13 2:55 AM
MattReloaded wrote:Below is a repost from The Sino Defence Forum :------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(snip) European carriers tends to have lower top speed. British, Italian manages 28 knots max, and the new CVF only 26 knots. For american carriers propulsion power is not an issue, and their speed all exceed 30 knots, even reaching 33 knots max. Soviet carrier max speed is also over 30 knots. Naval aviation tend to set the useable maximum wind speed over flight deck at 25 knots.Normally carriers should be able to maintain a speed of 28 knots, so even if travelling with medium tail wind one can still ensure a headwind of no less than 25 knots.25 knots headwind and above 110m of runway to end of skip-jump will still allow a 32000kg TOW Su-33 to take-off easily. Glide time (I'm assuming this is the time that the pilot has to wait for the plane to gather speed before he can pull up?) of less than 5 seconds, and climb rate always above 2m/sec.(snip)
(snip) European carriers tends to have lower top speed. British, Italian manages 28 knots max, and the new CVF only 26 knots. For american carriers propulsion power is not an issue, and their speed all exceed 30 knots, even reaching 33 knots max. Soviet carrier max speed is also over 30 knots. Naval aviation tend to set the useable maximum wind speed over flight deck at 25 knots.Normally carriers should be able to maintain a speed of 28 knots, so even if travelling with medium tail wind one can still ensure a headwind of no less than 25 knots.25 knots headwind and above 110m of runway to end of skip-jump will still allow a 32000kg TOW Su-33 to take-off easily. Glide time (I'm assuming this is the time that the pilot has to wait for the plane to gather speed before he can pull up?) of less than 5 seconds, and climb rate always above 2m/sec.(snip)
Apr 30 13 5:56 AM
The Fleet Admiral of the Soviet
Union Kuznetsov, currently the only aircraft carrier serving as the
flagship of the Russian Navy, will be upgraded, the media reported,
quoting Navy sources. The aircraft carrier, due to enter a dry dock in
2012, will be re-launched in 2017.
Originally laid as the Leonid Brezhnev in 1982, launched as the Riga
in 1985 and renamed as the Tbilisi in 1987, the warship received her
current name in 1990. Western analysts call her a ship of a thousand
The Admiral Kuznetsov entered service with the Russian Navy in 1991
and was used for the operation of deck aircraft, the development of new
tactics, including those for dealing with carriers of theoretical
In the late 1990s and the early 2000s, it was repeatedly proposed
that the Admiral Kuznetsov, which remained moored for long time periods,
be decommissioned and sold for scrap.
However, an improved situation in the country gave the ship a new
lease of life. Her propulsion unit and other equipment were repaired,
and she started taking part in various high seas war games more often.
In the mid-2000s, Navy representatives and Russian political leaders
once again started speaking of the need to build aircraft carriers for
the Navy. Moscow decided to preserve the Admiral Kuznetsov, used to
train deck aircraft pilots.
The upcoming large-scale modernization was motivated by the need to
eliminate the ship's inherent drawbacks and to repair some of her units.
Plans for docking the ship in 2010-2012 were discussed more frequently
and have now been confirmed.
Although it is hard to assess the revamped carrier's specifications,
her future appearance can be predicted on the basis of available
First of all, the defective propulsion unit comprising steam turbines
and turbo-pressurized boilers will be replaced either with a
gas-turbine or nuclear propulsion unit.
The ship's 3M45 P-700 Granit (SS-N-19 Shipwreck) anti-ship
cruise-missile launchers will be dismantled, and her internal layout
changed. Consequently, the hangar area will be expanded to 4,500-5,000
sq. m. for storing additional fixed-wing aircraft.
The Admiral Kuznetsov's air defenses will be strengthened by
replacing 3K95 Kinzhal (SA-N-9 Gauntlet) missiles with a multi-role
naval system featuring 80-120 new-generation and medium-range
surface-to-air missiles (SAMs).
Moreover, 4-6 Pantsir-S1 (SA-22 Greyhound) combined short to
medium-range SAM and anti-aircraft artillery weapons systems will be
The new weapons systems will feature state-of-the-art
radio-electronic equipment, probably including the standard Sigma combat
information and control system, due to be installed on all new
generation Russian warships. The system facilitates unprecedentedly
effective cooperation between task force elements.
The carrier will also receive aircraft catapults, a logical option.
Considering the fact that her ski-jump will remain intact, one or two
catapults can be located on the angled flight deck.
A similar engineering solution was envisioned for the incomplete
Ulyanovsk super-carrier, whose keel was laid down in 1988, but the
project was cancelled when it was 40% complete along with a sister ship
in 1991 after the end of the Cold War.
By that time, the Soviet Union had developed steam catapults and
tested an experimental version at the ground-based NITKA training
facility incorporating a ski-jump and deck arrestor. Consequently, this
task is feasible.
The choice of catapults is linked with the choice of the ship's
propulsion unit. Steam catapults require a nuclear propulsion unit,
while a gas turbine propulsion unit leaves no choice but electromagnetic
catapults. Moscow will either have to develop such catapults
independently or buy them abroad, or ... copy them illegally. [This can't be correct, IIRC the USN's steam catapults use steam from an auxiliary boiler]
The carrier's air wing is to comprise 26 new Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29K
Fulcrum-D multi-role fighter aircraft, helicopters and navalized Sukhoi
T-50 PAK FA (Future Frontline Aircraft System) fifth-generation
fighters, currently under development. It appears that 15-20 of these
aircraft will be built pending the ship's re-launching, which is likely
to take place in 2020 rather than 2017.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti military commentator Ilya Kramnik)
Apr 30 13 12:35 PM
seasick wrote:Moscow set to upgrade Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrierhttp://en.rian.ru/analysis/20100406/158454665.html17:45 06/04/2010(snip)MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti military commentator Ilya Kramnik)
(snip)MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti military commentator Ilya Kramnik)
Apr 30 13 10:00 PM
MattReloaded wrote:seasick wrote:Moscow set to upgrade Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrierhttp://en.rian.ru/analysis/20100406/158454665.html17:45 06/04/2010(snip)MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti military commentator Ilya Kramnik)1) Old news (2010)2) Admiral Kuznetsov won't receive any catapult on the angled deck and won't be re-engined. In both instances, RIA Novosti military commentator Ilya Kramnik seems to have confused his wildest dreams with the reality !
Feb 17 15 4:15 PM
Feb 17 15 4:20 PM
MattReloaded wrote:But the Naval Tejas presents additional design challenges, such as being able to take off from an aircraft carrier’s ski-jump after accelerating for just 200 metres. Even more challenging are repeated carrier deck landings, in which a hook on the aircraft snags on an “arrestor cable” on the deck, forcing the aircraft to a standstill in just 90 metres. These landings, in which the fighter slams into the carrier deck at more than 7 metres per second, are often described as “controlled crashes.”
Mar 16 16 12:51 AM
Taking a fighter to sea, ship deck different ball game: Maolankar Cmde Maolankar was the guest speaker during the National Science Day celebrations at NALMarch 9, 2016, 02:10 PM IST......Bengaluru: One of India’s leading Test Pilots Commodre Jaideep Avinash Maolankar gave a glimpse of sea and ship deck operations to a select group of scientists and engineers at National Aerospace Laboratories (NAL) recently. Cmde Maolankar was the guest speaker during the National Science Day celebrations at NAL. He spoke at length about the urgent need to break away from the shorebased mindset, that’s probably hampering the pace of homegrown naval fighter jet programme. “We are committed to carrier-based operations. Ignoring the problem is not an option. We need to design airplanes that can survive sea and ship deck for 30 years. We have more aircraft carriers joining the fleet and more fighters are needed (in addition to MiG-29K),” the ace Test Pilot said. He said the resources devoted to naval flight operations needs to be increased and the Navy fighter jet programme has to be a standalone one.“We need to buck the trend. You cannot have an Indian Air Force (IAF) programme linked to a naval one. There are lots of complexities while operating from an aircraft carrier. Carrier deck operations are always an armament officer’s nightmare,” he said. He said a number of aspects need to be factored in while operating from a ship deck, including EMI/EMC interferences and landing gear rebound among many others. “Navy pilots will have to think differently when coming back to landing. It will be great achievement when NLCA begins its carrier operations,” he said. The Bahrain experience He spoke about the media hype ahead of the recently concluded Bahrain International Air Show (BIAS2016). “There were lots of talks about Thunder (Pak) vs the Wonder (Tejas). It was more than comparisons to us. Air shows are not about aerobatics. It is more than what’s being generally perceived,” Comde Maolankar said. He said the Tejas’ performance at Bahrain boosted the morale of the team. NAL Director Shyam Chetty backed the pilot’s views and said naval LCA should not be seen as another variant of LCA Tejas“The naval programme is much more complex than the IAF one. NAL has contributed immensely for the Tejas programme and we are playing an active role for NLCA project as well. It’s important that we are aware of the ConOps (Concept of Operations), especially from a ship deck,” Shaym said.
Mar 18 16 12:19 AM
MattReloaded wrote:MattReloaded wrote:Below is a repost from The Sino Defence Forum :------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(snip) European carriers tends to have lower top speed. British, Italian manages 28 knots max, and the new CVF only 26 knots. For american carriers propulsion power is not an issue, and their speed all exceed 30 knots, even reaching 33 knots max. Soviet carrier max speed is also over 30 knots. Naval aviation tend to set the useable maximum wind speed over flight deck at 25 knots.Normally carriers should be able to maintain a speed of 28 knots, so even if travelling with medium tail wind one can still ensure a headwind of no less than 25 knots.25 knots headwind and above 110m of runway to end of skip-jump will still allow a 32000kg TOW Su-33 to take-off easily. Glide time (I'm assuming this is the time that the pilot has to wait for the plane to gather speed before he can pull up?) of less than 5 seconds, and climb rate always above 2m/sec.(snip)Taking the 28 knots figure as baseline, the "best" candidate for a STOBAR conversion would be the Maersk B-class of fast container vessels, with their top service speed of 29.2 knots (@ 85% MCR, design draught).Given the beam of the Maersk B-class (32.2 meters), separate angled deck for landing may not be an option. Deck layout would therefore be similar to what LS20A suggested in another thread (without cats) :Suitable re-configuration of funnel and deckhouse would leave enough room for a 240m x 20m axial deck, for both landing and take-off events. Provision should be made for a retractable ski jump at the forward end of the axial deck (to be lowered during landing events and raised during take-off events).Two flight deck elevators, the first one right forward of the re-configured deckhouse (for aircraft recovery after landing), and the second one right abaft the re-configured deckhouse (for take-off events).To (somewhat) facilitate aircraft movement, an "Alaskan Taxiway" could be added next to the re-configured deckhouse. Deck park being be more of a taxiway than a park ("elephant style" parking at best), most of the airgroup would be parked in the hangar deck, which might be large enough for about 20+ aircraft. As in AFSB, full storage (JP-5) would be as much as 3,500 m3, and hardened magazines for weapons stowage in accordance with NAVSEA OP04 would be provided.Contrary to AFSB, there would be no boat complement (6 x 40ft SOF boats in AFSB) and no dry cargo stowage (144 HMMWV in AFSB).Most suitable aircraft would be the (notional) Sea Gripen (compact size, low maintenance requirements).
SpazSinbad wrote:Using Simulation to Optimize Ski Jump Ramp Profiles for STOVL AircraftGreg Imhof and Bill SchorkNaval Air Warfare Center/Aircraft DivisionAir Vehicle DepartmentPatuxent River, MDDecember 01, 1999Abstract for AIAA Modeling and Simulation Technologies Conference14-17 August 2000Denver, Coloradohttp://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA378145Introduction “Ramps have been used for many years aboard the Navy ships of many countries to reduce takeoff run distance and wind-over-deck (WOD) requirements, as well as to increase the aircraft takeoff gross weight capability over that of a flat deck carrier. Under the Joint Strike Fighter program, an effort has been funded to evaluate various ramp profiles and ramp performance optimization methodologies. Results of these evaluations will be used with an advanced STOVL aircraft to provide the maximum benefit to takeoff performance, while not becoming a design driver for landing gear or adversely affecting ship designs. The Boeing AV-8B Harrier is a true STOVL aircraft, in that it routinely performs short takeoffs and vertical landings. This allows operations from ships not equipped with catapults or arresting gear and that are considerably smaller than the US large deck carriers. This unique capability is obtained through a group of variable angle nozzles for vectored lift and a reaction control system for stability and control, which uses engine bleed air to provide thrust through several small nozzles located on the aircraft. Many foreign navies operate Harriers from ships equipped with smooth profile ramps. The US Navy has conducted many ship and shore-based tests of smooth and segmented (flat plate) ramp profiles over the years to demonstrate the performance advantages of a ramp-assisted takeoff. Much of this work serves as the basis for our research initiative. Preliminary Work The first step was to collect data from prior flight tests to validate the AV-8B landing gear model. The test data were incomplete because the test aircraft did not have sufficient instrumentation to measure gear/store loads and accelerations. Therefore, criteria were developed which enabled us to compare predicted gear load trends and instead of actual gear and structural loads. Preliminary Criteria for Ramp OptimizationI. The landing gear shall not compress to full closure at any point during the takeoff. Harrier flight tests have been conducted to within 1/2 inch of full closure with no adverse results. 2. Investigate a segmented ramp versus a smooth profile ramp, and how it could be used with the existing structural and operational requirements of the aircraft. If so, what is the maximum angle change between segments that can be tolerated by the aircraft and aircrew? 3. Resonance effects from segmented ramps on landing gear and wing mounted stores are unknown, and efforts should be taken to break up or reduce these loads. Preliminary Results Preliminary simulation runs have been completed. Test results indicate that the segmented ramp concept shows great promise and could allow ship designers options in building retractable or reconfigurable ramp designs for future STOVL capable ships. Segmented ramp takeoff performance is not diminished as compared with a smooth ramp. Initial results indicate that segmented ramp profiles can be modified to keep the gear loads well within their structural limits. Since the velocity of the aircraft remains fairly constant while it is on the ramp, an equally distributed (same length) segment pattern generates a recurring load on the landing gear at each joint. If the frequency of these inputs is close to the natural frequency of the gear, or transmitted through the aircraft structure to a wing store, a resonance condition could be excited. This will be investigated at in more detail in the coming months. Preliminary Conclusions The smooth and segmented ramp profiles have demonstrated significant performance gains over a field or flat deck ship takeoff. Work will continue over the next several months to expand and refine the optimization criteria and investigate various ramp profiles and quantify their benefit to aircraft performance.”
Mar 18 16 9:25 PM
Mar 22 16 3:53 AM
larce wrote:I don't know if I've linked to this before but here's the Gripen taking off and landing at Farnborough:
Using Google Maps, the runway used can be seen to be about 250-300 meters. Unknown loadout and unknown wind, both probably light. A 300 meter long containership should be usable, without arrestor gear or catapult and with suitable safety margins, if moving with 25 or 30 knot of wind over the flight deck.
With regard to the drawing above of a flight deck layout, it should be possible to have much more deck overhangs providing much more flight deck area. It might even be a good idea to have the island and elevators on the centerline and one runway on each side. A modern jet like the Gripen has a wingspan of 8.4 meters compared to 16.5 meters for the TBF Avenger. The flight deck of the new RN QE class is about 70 meters wide, the Nimitz is 76.8 meters wide. Gripen road bases are specified to be at least 9 meters wide.
© 2017 Yuku. All rights reserved.