EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Jun 2010, 06:05
by spazsinbad
JPALS is for everyone also: Defense Tech International June 2010 p.42

http://au.zinio.com/reader.jsp?issue=416128279&p=46

EDIT JPALS & EMALS story here now:
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... ne=Carrier Launch System Passes Initial Tests
OR
http://alturl.com/q78x

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Jun 2010, 08:25
by shep1978
If find it interesting that the current auto land system cannot acquire the F-35 due to its RCS. What band did the old auto land work in, any ideas anyone?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Jun 2010, 08:33
by popcorn
shep1978 wrote:If find it interesting that the current auto land system cannot acquire the F-35 due to its RCS. What band did the old auto land work in, any ideas anyone?


You'ld think that the F-35C would have some gizmo to enhance its RCS fo such situations.

RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Jun 2010, 09:23
by spazsinbad
All the JSF aircraft will use JPALS - it will be used for not only military but civilian use eventually. Always best to move ahead to better more accurate systems IMHO.

RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Jun 2010, 09:36
by spazsinbad
Rather than post more than a dozen JPALS JPG pages from this PDF - I would prefer if you download the yourselves:

http://acast.grc.nasa.gov/wp-content/up ... allace.pdf (5.5Mb)

RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Jun 2010, 14:22
by stereospace
12 forty-ton motors? Holy smoke!

RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Jun 2010, 16:34
by SpudmanWP
SPN-41 is a Ku band radar while the SPN-46 is X band.

RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Jun 2010, 18:39
by f35phixer
we try to land on carriers with GEAR DOWN, So i think you'll understand now :lol:

Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jun 2010, 02:17
by outlaw162
All the JSF aircraft will use JPALS - it will be used for not only military but civilian use eventually.


Many of the elements of JPALS come from US civil aviation and not the other way around.

US civil air carriers regularly conduct WAAS & to a lesser extent LAAS (GBAS) approach operations on scheduled flights. You will more than likely see more LAAS operations in the future. I flew LAAS tests in a civil transport as far back as the 90’s.

I’m familiar with the FANS CPDLC that is currently incorporated in some Airbus aircraft and is used regularly over the North Atlantic and can and will eventually probably be used domestically. It is basically “text messaging” with a purpose.

US carriers are at present in the process of incorporating ADS-B generated CDTI displays. Once again, way back in the 90’s, CDTI was provisionally flown as a Mode S alternative to TCAS for the cargo carriers. The cargo guys eventually went with TCAS at that time, but with ADS-B, CDTI is big again for onboard traffic separation, sequencing and flow with minimal ATC input and potential for controller error.

The FMS in the B737-800 always has incorporated the capability for 4D navigation with LNAV, VNAV capability and an RTA (required time of arrival) entry available for departure, enroute & arrival fixes. Other Flight Management Systems will certainly provide this through software upgrades.

Instrument approach capability has always been somewhat secondary in the land based fighter business. Unlike the Navy fighter CLS systems, the original USAF F-100’s, F-105’s & F-4’s didn’t even have an ILS. The A-7 may have been the first USAF fighter built with an ILS installed. It’s ironic that student pilots were trained and were checked to do ILS’s in the T-38, and then assigned to fighters that had only TACAN or PAR approach capability. For awhile the T-33 was the preferred fighter trainer when it came to instrument flying and students who completed training in the T-38 and went to certain fighters got additional instrument training in the T-33.

The USN has RNAV approach capability in their TC-12 trainers and P-3's, but as of a few years ago they didn't use it operationally. I think the C-17 is the only USAF transport built with a certified RNAV approach capability, although it may have been retrofitted to E-3’s & KC-135’s & 10’s.

Civil aviation is way ahead on the more “mundane” capability and uses of GPS.

GLOSSARY

WAAS: Wide Area Augmentation System
LAAS: Local Area Augmentation System
FANS: Future Air Navigation System
CPDLC: Controller to Pilot Data Link Communication
CDTI: Cockpit Display of Traffic Information
ADS-B: Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast
4D NAV: Latitude, Longitude, Altitude & Time define a single point in space

OL

(BTW, in the old days before the T-37 got a transponder, you had to put the gear down for a PAR pickup. The original LO airplane.)

RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jun 2010, 02:37
by spazsinbad
outlaw162, thanks for the USN overview. Not my part of ship, being from Oz, initial jet training (many moons ago now) was in a Vampire which had a wooden fuselage but metal wings to aid in radar detection for a GCA (of course metal Goblin engine helped). :D TACAN became available in the A4G Skyhawk era then with the new Macchi MB326H to replace the venerable Vampire. Aahh the joys of modern instruments etc.

BTW the Vampire was more or less invisible to GCA (Ground Controlled Approach) Radar in any kind of rain - not that it flew well in rain either (water leaks). The only other Nav instrument was ADF (direction finder for radio beacon), which is really precise. :D

RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jun 2010, 21:31
by FlightDreamz
Thanks for starting this topic and the links Spazinbad! :thumb: I WAS looking at the electronic catapult at work while on break friday (since they foolishly block f-16.net!) but forgot to forward the article link to my home computer. :shrug:

Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jun 2010, 04:52
by Beazz
[quote="outlaw162"][quote]All the JSF aircraft will use JPALS - it will be

. The cargo guys eventually went with TCAS at that time, but with ADS-B, CDTI is big again for onboard traffic separation, sequencing and flow with minimal ATC input and potential for controller error.

That is totally incorrect Outlaw. TCAS and any derivative of it was and still never is used for ATC seperation of a/c, flow of a/c, or in any way, shape, manner or form to replace ATC control instructions. TCAS is simply a last line of defense to prevent a mid-air collision, whether it be from controller error or pilot error. Matter of fact, if a pilot reports he is responding to a TCAS resolution, the controller is relieved of ALL separation requirements until the a/c acting on the TCAS advisory is through with it and if a loss of separation was caused due to it, legal separation standards have been re-established. And yes, I have saw pilots respond to a TCAS advisory before when ATC had them separated but was to busy to tell the pilot exactly what he was doing and a loss of required separation occur. Even though a controller knows he has the a/c separated, if a pilot advises he is responding to his TCAS advisory, ATC cannot tell him do not do it. All we could do was simply issue traffic and hope they don't hit while doing what their computer told them to do! So in short, NO, TCAS will never be used as a means of conducting air traffic control. It's just one tool in a last ditch effort to prevent a mid air collision.

Beazz

RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jun 2010, 11:53
by popcorn
Will the tech that allows a UCAV to automatically land on a CVN allow a SH or F-35C to land w/o any pilot intervention?

RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jun 2010, 15:13
by spazsinbad
The PDF indicated is informative. My understanding is that CASE III (fully automatic landings) are seldom practiced for various reasons but encouraged. Pilots like to do manual landings for the skill in it. However there have been emergencies (smoke/fog in cockpit that have required almost fully auto landings sometimes). Probably a USN pilot needs to explain further. I only read about this stuff in APPROACH magazine or similar (all these new fangled gizmos are after my time in RAN FAA). The 2nd last graphic explains about the CASE I,II & III approaches.

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jun 2010, 19:28
by outlaw162
Will the tech that allows a UCAV to automatically land on a CVN allow a SH or F-35C to land w/o any pilot intervention?


As the JPALS info provided by the distinguished RAN Vampire pilot states, the key to the very precise automated boat landings is the LAAS. This system provides for GPS 3D positional accuracies down to incredible values. On the civilian side, the intent is to eventually use this system down to Category III weather minimums, Cat IIIC being zero/zero. The guaranteed landing footprint using this type of guidance can be that small. Any advanced aircraft autoflight system can be coupled to follow a particular approach guidance system to an autoland. The challenge is to have approach system accuracy that guarantees the touchdown point. It’s the demonstrated touchdown footprint that is critical. LAAS will eventually provide the boat guys and the airlines with touchdown footprints much better than a civil Cat III ILS system, with less upkeep.

I hate to say this, but a 100+ mil piece of flying equipment trying to hit a half cubic meter position in space at night in very bad weather might be more wisely placed under the control of an autoland system rather than a mere pilot. In the same vein, I guarantee that if you’re a passenger on a flight going into Seattle when the weather is near zero/zero, you want “George” flying the airplane.

The pilot gets to put the gear and the hook down and will have to climb out of the cockpit on his own.

OL

(B: “Totally incorrect” covers a lot of territory. I keep hearing Hudson’s line from “Aliens”:

“Hey man, maybe you haven’t been keeping up with current events……”

Cancel IFR)

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jun 2010, 23:15
by spazsinbad
As indicated on another thread: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-12631.html (work backwards from last page to get to 'auto land' & SRVL for JSF) but repeated here is the 2005 first auto land by the VACC Harrier simulating what F-35B will do soon:
http://www.qinetiq.com/home/newsroom/ne ... first.html

Since the mid 1960s or thereabouts when an F-8 Crusader did a fully auto landing the USN has had that ability in some form in later jet aircraft (as a very broad generalisation). However this ability is seldom used in practice from what I have 'read' about this issue. From time to time it comes in handy as exemplified in a recent APPROACH story about 'fog in Hornet cockpit' requiring such an auto approach with pilot recommending that Hornet pilots practice these approaches more often (I'll leave details to others to explain).

'outlaw162' explains well. One minor correction about my own experience: Vampire was training aircraft with the A4G Skyhawk being flown from NAS Nowra & HMAS Melbourne with the Macchi MB326H replacing the Vampire/Sea Venom (Venom obsolete by 1969) as the 'advanced training' aircraft at Nowra. Having the TACAN instead of only radio beacon direction finder was 'revolutionary' but that was it; apart from better, more reliable IFR instruments. Precision approaches were via GCA/CCA with night carrier landings being done from a CCA (Carrier Controlled Approach) looking ahead at 1NM at 1,000 feet trying to see the ball in the bright light of mirror, eventually starting to get differentiation of meatball and datum lights from between 3/4 to 1/2 mile thankfully. Line up was not easy to see until then either so it was critical to have a good CCA operator for a good start. :)

All that is mentioned to convey what must be today and soon a much easier 'carrier landing' environment for the JSF/F-35B/C. Also remember the pilot will be able to 'see' through the aircraft to better be able to 'deck spot'. :) Just kidding - however overall with excellent aids as described the carrier landing experience in any weather within limits of ship movement will be outstanding. That's the plan anyway.

I would imagine that any 'auto' approach will have the pilot with hands on controls - just in case.

USAF JPALS Accuracy for F-35

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2011, 03:46
by spazsinbad
USAF JPALS Accuracy Ashore from a Jan 2009 PDF:

Electronic Systems Center New Horizons Symposium

http://www.afceaboston.com/documents/ev ... 20ELSW.pdf (9Mb)

"Rapidly Deploy Adverse Weather, Adverse Terrain, Survivable, Maintainable, and Interoperable Precision Approach and Landing System (Land and Sea) That Supports the Warfighter When Ceiling and Visibility are Limiting Factors"
&
"JPALS Increment 2
- 200 ft/ ½ SM; Supports Auto-Land, Mobile/Fixed Local Area Differential GPS
- Customers: Air Force, Army, Navy & Marines"

RE: USAF JPALS Accuracy for F-35

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2011, 18:56
by neptune
JPALS is based on differential Global Positioning System (GPS) technology, and consists of modular avionics and ground/shipboard components to provide a range of landing minima and system configurations. Aircraft receive ranging and navigation data from the satellite constellation and differential ranging data or corrections from a ground/shipboard station via a data link.

..."At a 20-nm range from the carrier, the autoland level of data link operations kicks in." JPALS is a "UHF TACAN like" system; (NO RADAR).

Rockwell Collins is implementing the airborne UHF datalink for JPALS in the ARC-210 Gen5 radio. The ARC-210 Gen5 radio is a multi-band, multimode receiver-transmitter operating in the V/UHF frequency range, providing extended coverage from 30 to 941 MHz for military and public service radio bands. Rockwell Collins has delivered more than 30,000 ARC-210 radios used on 182 platforms since the start of the product line in 1990. The radio has evolved over successive generations with new capabilities added through software updates. Initial platforms expected to implement the Gen5 radio, a form-and-fit replacement for existing radios, are the MH-60 helicopter, V-22 tiltrotor and F/A-18, F-15 and F-16 fighters. The system tentatively would be integrated into the fleet in fiscal 2014. :wink:

http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-ne ... dio-30178/

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2011, 20:24
by outlaw162
The civilian version of this system (GBAS, previously called LAAS) is already in place at Newark with GLS approaches serving 5 runways.

Two of the runways have minimums at 200' with a 2400' RVR (same as CAT I ILS). The B737 NG Multi-Mode Receivers and Integrated Approach Navigation capability incorporated in the Flight Management System allow for auto-pilot coupled (or hand flown) approaches down to minimums. I would compare this to ILS, precise lateral & vertical guidance, not TACAN.

Auto-land capability & CAT III Ops are the next step on the civil side. That may be a more lengthy process as far as certification.

Military implementation of the JPALS system can probably bypass some of the 'passenger safety' oriented regulatory 'speed-bumps', especially for boat operations and probably even more so for un-manned aircraft. But right now the civil sector is running in first place, military closing fast on the outside, thanks to the F-35.

BTW, for the flight deck managed air traffic separation skeptics, evaluations of ADS-B based CDTI 'Merging & Spacing' and 'Interval Management' capability are currently in progress. It's not a matter of 'IF', but 'WHEN'.

(For Spaz: I believe the Sydney Kingsford-Smith airport has implemented or is the process of implementing a GBAS system also.)

OL

edit: Substituted 'flight deck managed air traffic' separation for 'onboard' separation. Onboard sounds like a boat thing. Although 'deck' does too. My apologies.) :D

Unread postPosted: 16 Sep 2011, 20:56
by spazsinbad
neptune, an interesting link about the radios. The article mentioned - at the end - has this to say about JPALS:

Paris 2011: Rockwell Collins delivers first software-defined ARC-210 radio By: Bill Carey | June 21, 2011

http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-ne ... dio-30178/

"...The company expects to deliver about 300 Gen5 radios this year, including 90 low-rate initial production (LRIP) models. Of those 90, 20 were delivered to PMA 209 and 70 to PMA 213, the naval air traffic management systems program office. PMA 213 is running the joint precision approach and landing system (JPALS) program. Through JPALS, which is comparable to the civilian GPS local area augmentation system, aircraft will receive differential GPS corrections from a shipboard station via datalink, providing U.S. Navy aircraft carriers with all-weather landing capability. Rockwell Collins is implementing the airborne UHF datalink for JPALS in the ARC-210 Gen5 radio.

In September 2008, Raytheon was awarded a $233 million contract for the JPALS system development and demonstration phase, heading a team including Rockwell Collins, Northrop Grumman and SAIC. Raytheon is performing the shipboard integration piece of JPALS.

Brunck said Rockwell Collins anticipates a contract from Navair for the airborne piece of JPALS. First software delivery would be in July 2012, allowing further development and testing of airborne and shipborne links. The system tentatively would be integrated into the fleet in fiscal 2014."

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2011, 13:44
by spazsinbad
More context - here is an illustration about PALS details/limits from the LSO Reference Manual 1999, lots of good text to go with it if anyone interested.

http://63.192.133.13/VMF-312/LSO.pdf (5.5Mb)

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2011, 16:03
by outlaw162
LSO Reference Manual 1999


The LSO pdf doc from 1999 (chapter 7) covers details/limits of the ILS beam style and CCA radar style approaches, not the differential GPS style approaches. The limits and capabilities of the GPS based approaches are still classified. PALS is just a generic acronym for precision approach capability.

The only existing operational differential GPS precision landing systems are at civilian airports right now. They are called GLS approaches. The only operational (not test or developmental) aircraft with the MMR's to use GBAS/LAAS for GLS are civil airliners. What may eventually be retro-fitted to the existing civil systems from the military systems under development will be some security oriented and anti-jam features.

Civil aviation goal is CAT III zero-zero auto-land, just as is the military goal for both land & sea based systems. Right now the lowest civil minimums are 200' ceiling and 2400' RVR.

http://www.hanscom.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123246189

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2011, 21:06
by spazsinbad
outlaw I'm not suggesting that PALS is JPALS - ilustration/pointer to PDF - 1999 - merely for context about both systems. Other information about JPALS accuracy limits (that is public knowledge) has been posted elsewhere on this forum) [See graphic below first graphic for example]. Thanks for new link for JPALS getting back on track [Land-based precision approach system program resumes | Mar/10/2011] URL above.

This aspect from text at URL above is interesting for Carrier Approaches at night for example. Nowadays necessarily they are from long straightaways but with the F-35C DAS/HMDS night vision combo and JPALS a shorter, more 'carrier time efficient' night landing scenario might be envisioned: "...In the future, plans are for the LB JPALS to support not only straight-in approaches to the runway, but curved, segmented approaches or specialized approaches...."

ALSO from 'neptune's radio link above' it is suggested that not only will USN JPALS have satellite GPS but also shipboard GPS (derived from satellites or another independent source?). In this way I'll imagine the USN is independent in some ways if required. "...PMA 213, the naval air traffic management systems program office. PMA 213 is running the joint precision approach and landing system (JPALS) program. Through JPALS, which is comparable to the civilian GPS local area augmentation system, aircraft will receive differential GPS corrections from a shipboard station via datalink, providing U.S. Navy aircraft carriers with all-weather landing capability. Rockwell Collins is implementing the airborne UHF datalink for JPALS in the ARC-210 Gen5 radio...."
&
From the 'runway' graphic entry above in this thread: "JPALS Increment 2
- 200 ft/ ½ SM; Supports Auto-Land, Mobile/Fixed Local Area Differential GPS
- Customers: Air Force, Army, Navy & Marines"

"This graphic depicts the concept of operations for the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System, or JPALS...."

http://www.hanscom.af.mil/shared/media/ ... 10-002.jpg

Image

FROM: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopi ... rt-60.html
http://attach.high-g.net/attachments/jp ... nt_614.gif

Image

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2011, 22:58
by spazsinbad
There is some very technical JPALS stuff on the web (so don't expect me to understand it all :D ) but I does me best. I like graphics much the same way I like PLAYBOY for the articles....

A Robust GPS/INS Kinematic Integrity Algorithm for Aircraft Landing
Alison Brown and Ben Mathews, NAVSYS Corporation

http://www.navsys.com/Papers/06-09-002.pdf (0.5Mb)

ABSTRACT
Next generation GPS receivers will take advantage of Spatial processing from a Controlled Reception Pattern Antenna (CRPA) and Ultra-Tightly-Coupled (UTC) and Tightly–Coupled GPS/inertial signal processing to improve their robustness to interference and their performance in a multipath environment. This introduces the potential for failure modes to be introduced into the GPS solution from the Spatial processor, GPS signals or Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs). For high integrity applications such as nonprecision approach or precision approach, the integrated GPS/Inertial receiver must be designed to perform fault detection and exclusion of any hazardously misleading information....

INTRODUCTION
The Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) Shipboard Relative GPS concept (SRGPS) is illustrated in Figure 1. The goal of the SRGPS program is to provide a GPS-based system capable of automatically landing an aircraft on a moving carrier under all sea and weather conditions considered feasible for shipboard landings. The presently utilized Aircraft Carrier Landing System (ACLS) is a radar-based system which was developed more than 30 years ago and has a number of limitations that make the system inadequate to meet present and future ship-based automatic landing system requirements. The goal of SRGPS is to monitor and control up to 100 aircraft simultaneously throughout a range of 200 nautical miles from the landing site[1]. Integrity monitoring is especially important for the last 20 nm of an approach and accuracy requirements are 30 cm 3-D 95% of the time.

The SRGPS architecture provides a precision approach and landing system capability for shipboard operations equivalent to local differential GPS systems used ashore, such as the FAA's Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS). A relative navigation approach is used for SRGPS with the "reference station" installed on a ship moving through the water and pitching, rolling, and yawing around its center of motion. In addition, the ship's touchdown point may translate up/down (heave), side-to-side (sway), and fore and aft (surge). Since the shipboard landing environment is much more challenging than ashore, the SRGPS approach must use kinematic carrier phase tracking (KCPT) to achieve centimeter level positioning relative to the ship’s touchdown point.


Next generation GPS systems designed for JPALS and SRGPS operations are expected to have performance advantages over previous generation user equipment (UE). While these designs will meet the objective of high anti-jam (A/J) and high accuracy performance, they must also implement integrity monitoring to be able to use the KCPT solution to support precision approach and landing...."

& from this thread: http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... e&start=30

http://attach.high-g.net/attachments/ho ... ks_700.gif

Image

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2011, 23:13
by spazsinbad
And on similar thread: http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... e&start=30

JPALS Program Update CAPT Drew Williams, US Navy NAVAIR PMA-213 15 APRIL 2010
http://www.afceaboston.com/documents/ev ... 20Williams).pdf (2.5Mb)

http://attach.high-g.net/attachments/jp ... nt_100.gif

Image

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2011, 23:52
by spazsinbad
Graphic from: ‘Automated Carrier Landing of an Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle Using Dynamic Inversion’

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Lo ... =ADA469901

But also repeated in JPALS graphic above - again here for clarification.

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2011, 12:15
by spazsinbad
JPALS: Not Just LAAS in Navy Uniform by William Reynish | October 1, 2002

http://www.aviationtoday.com/print/av/i ... 12893.html

"The seagoing Joint Precision Approach and Landing System for the U.S. Navy provides much more than GPS differential accuracy corrections. It uses data link to give pilots a plethora of data from a host of sources.

When the U.S. Department of Defense opted for the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) in the mid-90s, most observers understood that this would be the military’s version of the GPS-based Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS), which is being developed for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). And to a certain extent, it will be. When deliveries commence around 2010 to the Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy, land-based JPALS installations will closely resemble the FAA system.

Extraordinary Environment
But the seagoing JPALS will be a horse (or a LAAS) of a different color. One of the biggest differences will be its data links. For, as development has evolved, carrier-based JPALS has become a generic term applied to a wider data link environment than just the automatic landing portion....

...In fact, the Navy’s seagoing JPALS will be the centerpiece of a dedicated, data link-based, communications, navigation and surveillance/air traffic management (CNS/ATM) system, which will be aboard each of its 12 carriers. The Navy needs such a capability to provide safety, airspace management and, of course, surveillance protection against adversaries, as the vessel moves away from the mainland and across oceans, often towards unfriendly territory.

In a way, it will be like picking up a complete FAA air route traffic control center (ARTCC) from the mainland, along with all its radars and infrastructure, and shoehorning it into an aircraft carrier. And since the carrier’s raison d’etre is to extend military air power in all weather, you could even say that the seagoing JPALS’ ultimate purpose is to thread the tip of an autolanding aircraft’s arrester hook through an imaginary 9-square foot (0.83-square meter) box centered precisely 14 feet (4.3 meters) above the pitching and rolling stern of a carrier in very low visibility, by day or night....

...At a 20-nm range from the carrier, the autoland level of data link operations kicks in. Uplinked data will include landing weather conditions, such as the all-important wind speed and direction over the carrier deck, plus the continuously updated GPS differential accuracy corrections similar to those required for a LAAS-like precision approach. The corrections will be similar but with much higher accuracy than those used in LAAS or the shore-based JPALS units.

Extreme Accuracy
To assure the exact positioning of the aircraft’s arrester hook within the very small area on the carrier deck, the Navy turned to the commercial survey industry’s real-time kinematic (RTK) GPS technique, which uses the carrier phase of the GPS signals to achieve accuracies within centimeters. The Navy requires horizontal and vertical accuracies of less than 15 cm (5.9 inches), with integrity assurance of no more than 1.1- meter (3.6-foot) error in 10 million landings.

Remember that imaginary 9-square foot box? The Navy has proved that accuracies of this type are possible in autolanding exercises with F/A-18s and other aircraft on carriers and land facilities, using a modified, prototype JPALS system in conjunction with RTK. The service also has demonstrated the system’s immunity to GPS jamming....

...But JPALS has the answer here, too. Real-time corrections for deck movement, derived from the carrier’s inertial navigation system, are continually uplinked to an aircraft, as it makes its final approach. The corrections are fed to the autoland system, which makes attitude adjustments all the way to touchdown–or, more precisely, to the point of placing the arrester hook exactly between the second and third arrester cables, four of which are stretched across the deck 40 feet (12.2 meters) apart. JPALS will bid farewell to the "bolter," that colorful expression used by naval aviators for an aircraft whose arrester hook misses the cables and is forced to make a missed approach. But in tomorrow’s Navy, bolters may simply be an undesirable impediment to 4D, high-speed traffic flows...."

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2011, 14:42
by popcorn
I find it amusing they use a F-111 in the illustration. :D

Unread postPosted: 18 Sep 2011, 18:11
by spazsinbad
The image has been distorted for some reason (not done by me). Here is a closeup.

Unread postPosted: 19 Sep 2011, 12:42
by spazsinbad
'Threading the needle' with JPALS accuracy: http://acast.grc.nasa.gov/wp-content/up ... allace.pdf

Unread postPosted: 28 Sep 2011, 08:59
by spazsinbad
Navy's new electromagnetic catapult 'real smooth' 28 Sep 2011 VIDEO of E2-D launch also

http://www.app.com/article/20110927/NJN ... al-smooth-

"...In the 1980s Navy engineers thought about electromagnetic power as an eventual replacement for the 1950s-designed steam powered catapults. Those early discussions included speculation over whether powerful electromagnetic would upset aircraft electronic systems — or send out a potentially deadly magnetic pattern that enemies could use to home in on aircraft carriers.

“Shielding and the way we wrap cables” takes care of any magnetic emissions, Donnelly said. The real challenge was learning how to properly control magnetic impulses, and advances in technology enabled those computer controls, Wojtowicz said.

The control system allows launch officers to more precisely tune the forces to reflect aircraft weights and required air speeds, a fact that also puts less wear and tear on the aircraft, Donnelly said....

...Navy planners anticipate using EMALS on all future American carriers, and the Royal Navy has ordered a pair for HMS Prince of Wales, the British supercarrier anticipated to be in service by the early 2020s carrying F-35 strike fighters.

But there’s no plan to replace the venerable steam catapults, Donnelly said: “These two systems will be out in the fleet, side by side, for many years to come.”

That could mean more job security for the joint base, which is home to manufacturing facilities that rebuild steam catapults and fabricate arresting cables that brake landing aircraft. Near the EMALS test site, the base is also the location for developing advanced arresting gear that will use electromagnetic forces to absorb the shock of heavy aircraft slamming onto the flight deck."

Unread postPosted: 29 Sep 2011, 02:40
by spazsinbad
EMALS successfully launches E-2D Advanced Hawkeye Sep 28, 2011

http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=4770

"...In addition to testing the E-2D as part of the ongoing aircraft compatibility test phase, the EMALS program has also launched an F/A-18E Super Hornet, T-45 Goshawk and C-2A Greyhound, with 63 to 65 launches planned for each aircraft type.

The EMALS test schedule is planned to reap the full benefits for future fielding. While system functional demonstration continues here through late 2011, the second phase of aircraft compatibility testing is scheduled to begin next year.

Engineers will continue reliability testing through 2013, perform installation and checkout, as well as shipboard testing according to NAVSEA’s schedule, with shipboard certification in 2015."

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 18 Nov 2011, 09:14
by spazsinbad
Perhaps more detail shown than in any earlier version of First EMALS Super Hornet Launch.

Navy Tests Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS)

"uploaded by airboyd on Dec 21, 2010"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 7k6pH5sZ5M

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Nov 2011, 06:56
by spazsinbad
Difficult to gauge the overall context [I guess one above this entry here provides the ground level view from start forward?] of these photos but here they are anyway.

EMALS Catapult Launch At Lakehurst September 27, 2011

http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/apps ... 076&Ref=PH

"The new electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS) catapult at Joint Base Lakehurst Tuesday morning is examined after launching a Navy E-2D Advanced Haweye radar surveillance aircraft. This is the testbed catapult and the first production models will be installed on the USS Gerald R. Ford now being built at Newport News. LAKEHURST 9/27/11 EMALS0927I ASBURY PARK PRESS PHOTO BY THOMAS P. COSTELLO"

http://cmsimg.lansingstatejournal.com/a ... h=465&q=60
&
http://cmsimg.lansingstatejournal.com/a ... h=465&q=60
____________________________

.GIF GRAPHIC ADDITION from: carcamal.ele.cie.uva.es/CEM/articulos/Catapult.pdf (187Kb)
_______________

And yes in a very long time ago (early 1970s) etc... I flew RAN FAA A4Gs - have a look at URL links in sig below.

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Nov 2011, 18:36
by jetnerd
Nice closeups, Spazsinbad. I like reading your many posts on the carrier ops side of the JSF program. What are the 2 rails/slots running parallel to the main track? I'd guess these aren't on the actual shipboard units and are for test gear.

(By the way, I never realized this, my brother flew T/A-4J's in training around '95 or '96 - just found an old t-shirt of his with the squadron and the motto "Last of the Scooter Drivers" - you flew them for the RAN, right?)

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Nov 2011, 20:34
by spazsinbad
The other tracks either side of EMALS photo above are [NOT] steam catapult tracks [just part of the EMALS construction in the ground (a bit different to likely ship construction)] I guess. I don't know which steam catapult is which but they are ..... ?Here is a Google Earth overhead dated Sep 2010. Lat: 40.0175722 Lon: -74.3791580

[addition] Explanation in following entries about the 'rusty' "Recessed guide slots are used to maintain stability of the four wheeled vehicles"....

We can see a lot of catapult tracks here. The HOWDAH (Brit/Oz name for the catapult firing station below deck with view above) is marked which can be seen in the first steam catapult launch if I'm not mistaken. If Google Earth details were a bit more refined it might be easier to tell differences and as I have never been to Lakehurst I could guess all I want and still be wrong. :D You decide. Have a look at the video here: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xg80bt ... emals_tech to see the southern HOWDAH which gives me the impression that the southernmost track is EMALS and is 400 feet long total.

Centre track at 300 feet is the STEAM catapult in use today?

Lakehurst Steam Catapult(s):
http://www.navair.navy.mil/lakehurst/nl ... res-02.asp
“A C13 Mod2 steam catapult can generate 75 million foot-pounds of energy. It can accelerate a 79,000 pound weighted cart to 140 knots in 302 feet.”

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Nov 2011, 20:50
by spazsinbad
Please bear in mind I have been figuring this out as the graphics have been made so here is the 'proof' that the southern track is EMALS. Hornet is seen in first EMALS launch screenshot showing HOWDAH and stairs with Google Overhead showing same detail. North is vertical top of all Google Earth photos.

Then there is another video showing the view at beginning looking from North to South (with screenshot): http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xg7zff ... emals_tech

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Nov 2011, 21:29
by spazsinbad
EMALS Inaugural SHOOTERS: http://www.jointbasemdl.af.mil/shared/m ... 1J-001.jpg

"NAVAIR officials cut ribbon for new system on Lakehurst
NAVAIR and community leader "shoot" the first official movement of the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System Nov. 12 [2009] here. EMALS is an armature, the portion of a catapult that an aircraft tail hook connects to when it lifts off. This system will be installed on the next generation of aircraft carriers scheduled to become operational in 2015. (U.S. Navy photo/Sherry Jacob) L-R: Chief Warrant Officer A. Melendez, NAVAIR test facility; Capt.R. Mahr, EMALS program manager, Representative C. Smith, Rear Adm. D. Philman, director Air Warfare Division, Cmdr. R. Griffin, NAVAIR program management office; Rear Adm M. McMahon, program executive officer for aircraft carriers; Capt. J. Donnelly,EMALS deputy program manager; K. Donnelly, director for support equipment/aircraft launching and recovery equipment; S. Forney, vice president of General Atomics; and Col. G. Grosso, Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst commander."

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Nov 2011, 21:36
by spazsinbad
Only my guess but perhaps the foreground track is EMALS whilst the F-35C is hurtling down the middle STEAM catapult track for the first time? OR move northwards for the other steam track?

http://www.jointbasemdl.af.mil/shared/m ... 59-001.jpg

"JB MDL F-35C
An F-35C test aircraft piloted by Lt. Christopher Tabert launches from a steam catapult for the first time at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst on July 27. CF-3 is the designated carrier suitability test aircraft. The F-35C carrier variant of the Joint Strike Fighter is distinct from the F-35A and F-35B variants with its larger wing surfaces and reinforced landing gear for greater control in the demanding carrier take-off and landing environment. The F-35C is undergoing test and evaluation at NAS Patuxent River before eventual delivery to the fleet. (Photo courtesy of Lockheed Martin/Released)"

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Nov 2011, 22:22
by spazsinbad
The ZIPPED '.KML' file attached will take you via Google Earth directly to the Lakehurst catapults 'STEAM CATAPULTS LAKEHURST 5907-export.zip'
_________________

Lakehurst Steam Catapult(s): I'll presume this is the centre 300 footone in use (see above overhead photos)?

http://www.navair.navy.mil/lakehurst/nl ... res-02.asp

“A C13 Mod2 steam catapult can generate 75 million foot-pounds of energy. It can accelerate a 79,000 pound weighted cart to 140 knots in 302 feet.”
________________________

Reaction Motors? Well I never... :D I'm guessing the 'centre Reaction system' was replaced by steam with EMALS being constructed on the left? Photographer is looking from East to West.

"Internal Combustion Catapult Project

http://www.bobholland.com/me/reaction3.htm

"... Lakehurst New Jersey. The left catapult is steam, the center was the Reaction Motors catapult and the large building to the right is the steam house required to generate the steam for the steam catapult...."

http://www.bobholland.com/me/images/cat2.gif

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Nov 2011, 23:45
by spazsinbad
STEAM CATAPULT LAUNCHES F-35C FOR THE FIRST TIME TC-13 Mod 2 Catapult

www.jsf.mil/news/docs/20110727_CATAPULTTEST.pdf (49Kb)

"NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, LAKEHURST, N.J. – The F-35C completed its first steam catapult launch July 27 marking another milestone toward initial ship trials in 2013. Chief Aviation Boatswain’s Mate (Launch and Recovery Equipment) Brandon Barr used a TC-13 Mod 2 test steam catapult, representative of current fleet technology, launching F-35C test aircraft CF-3 into the sky...."
__________________________________

F-35 Flight Test Update 6 By Sydney Carroll Posted 20 November 2011

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=83

"...In the F-35C, pilots had accomplished nearly[?] twenty-five catapult launch tests at Lakehurst.... A total of twenty-seven pilots have flown the F-35. Twenty-one pilots are still flying the aircraft."
__________________________

At last an explanation why the steam catapults have such long extensions (beyond the catapult stroke - for bringing the deadweights back under control) and why the 'rusty steel tracks' are either side of the shiney EMALS track:

The Steam Catapult Complex Lakehurst

http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.p ... d=1#import

"The Test Catapult Complex is composed of the TC13 Mod 0 and TC13 Mod 2 Steam Catapults, and a high pressure steam plant, located at the threshold of a 12,000 foot long runway. This test facility is used to simulate the launching of naval aircraft from the flight deck of US Navy aircraft carriers. These test catapults are capable of launching both aircraft and deadloads, thus allowing both manned and unmanned testing.

Both catapults at the test complex are capable of launching weights up to 100,000 pounds and producing endspeeds up to 185 knots. The steam plant is capable of 138,000 pounds per hour. A unique feature of the test site is the capability of launching deadloads.

Recessed guide slots are used to maintain stability of the four wheeled vehicles, and a friction brake brings the vehicle to a stop after release at the end of the power stroke.

Although used primarily for testing catapult performance, the site can be used as a linear acceleration/deceleration force platform for testing such things as drop tanks, cargo slings, aircraft fuel tanks, and fuel cells. The object under test can be oriented to obtain programmed forces in the X, Y or Z axis, and loads up to 15 G s when required.

Launch Energy:
TC13 Mod 0: 62 million ft-lbs
TC13 Mod 2: 99 million ft-lbs

Launch Stroke:
TC13 Mod 0: 250 feet
TC13 Mod 2: 310 feet

Cycle Time:
45 seconds both cats

End Speed (F-14 heavyweight):
TC13 Mod 0: 120 knots
TC13 Mod 2: 145 knots

Max Acceleration:
TC13 Mod 0: 6 G s
TC13 Mod 2: 5 G s

STILL DON'T KNOW WHICH steam IS WHICH FOR SURE :roll: :lol:

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Nov 2011, 00:43
by spazsinbad
THE AIRSHIP Jan - Feb 2010

www.nlhs.com/newsletter/10-jan.pdf (84Kb)

Navy Lakehurst to test new catapult
"...Steam-powered catapults built at Lakehurst and used since the 1950s have "shot more than 5 million times," said Kathleen Donnelly, director of the Navy's support and launch and recovery equipment engineering at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst. 'Now we move into the era of the electromagnetic catapult, which uses linear motors instead of steam pistons."

Tests with the 300-foot long EMALS will gradually increase speeds and loads "until it is capable of launching a F -35 off the bow," she said...."

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Nov 2011, 01:02
by SpudmanWP
jetnerd wrote:What are the 2 rails/slots running parallel to the main track?
I think they are support tracts to lift and maintain sections of the EMALS track. Look at Spaz's partially exposed EMALS system pic above. At the far end you can see some supports and a cross-brace that line up with those slots nicely.

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JS

Unread postPosted: 28 Nov 2011, 01:06
by spazsinbad
The info above has been slightly amended this morning as new information discovered. Probably confusing but any newcomer readers will see a better result IMHO. Anyway here is a possible explanation for the 'other tracks' (included above now also). I have been reading that testing with deadweights is mandatory - especially on carriers with catapults installed (however these deadweights are flung overboard to float in the harbour or where ever - at Lakehurst the deadweights have to be restrained). I'll post an HMAS Melbourne 'deadweight fling' into the harbour. The deadweight is always called 'CHLOE' (in RAN anyway).

http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/ubbthreads.p ... d=1#import

"...Both [steam] catapults at the test complex are capable of launching weights up to 100,000 pounds and producing endspeeds up to 185 knots. The steam plant is capable of 138,000 pounds per hour. A unique feature of the test site is the capability of launching deadloads.

Recessed guide slots are used to maintain stability of the four wheeled vehicles, and a friction brake brings the vehicle to a stop after release at the end of the power stroke...."

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JS

Unread postPosted: 28 Nov 2011, 01:22
by SpudmanWP
Found a detailed pic showing the construction of the EMALS and use of the parallel tracks.

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JS

Unread postPosted: 28 Nov 2011, 01:30
by spazsinbad
Fair enough. Good find. Perhaps these slots have a dual use. Makes sense because of land base ease of use, being able to make use of the ground alongside (unlike on a carrier where environment - steel deck - is quite different). Looks as though in the case of the EMALS that these 'slots' don't continue very far. I guess the previous info referred only to the old STEAM catapult deadweights. Perhaps these days computer simulation takes care of the 'deadweight' issues? I have no idea. Vaguely recall reading about some computer simulation. :D

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JS

Unread postPosted: 14 Dec 2011, 13:05
by spazsinbad
Old news but news to me.

WASP wraps up year filled with accomplishments Dec 11, 2011

http://www.dvidshub.net/news/81212/wasp ... plishments

"...One of the first big events for Wasp came in June when the number one ship in the fleet tested new joint-precision approach and landing system technology underway. The JPALS is a global positioning system-based technology designed to assist pilots in making a precise approach and landing, more precise than ever before, on land or at sea, anywhere in the world. Several engineers from Raytheon Company monitored data gathered for JPALS June 14 [2011] aboard Wasp...."

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS for th

Unread postPosted: 14 Dec 2011, 20:12
by neptune
[quote="spazsinbad"}..One of the first big events for Wasp came in June when the number one ship in the fleet tested new joint-precision approach and landing system technology underway. .. June 14 [2011] aboard Wasp...."[/quote]

Good Catch, missed it also. This was a good test for the "Bee" with automated data transfer to the Wasp and an early checkout of the Wasp system for the F-35. The helos; MH-60, CH-53, CV-22, H-1s and even the AV-8B will all be using the Wasp's Jpals. It would be interesting to know how wide spread the upgrade to Jpals has progressed in the fleet. The X-47B is on it's way (this week) to Pax and it will be using JPals both onshore and on the carrier. :)

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS fo

Unread postPosted: 25 Jan 2012, 13:15
by spazsinbad
PMA-213 Celebrates New GPS-Based Landing System Progress Patuxent River, MD - Jan/24/2012

http://www.thebaynet.com/news/index.cfm ... y_ID/25955

"The latest in a series of Engineering Development Models (EDM) of a technology that promises to revolutionize how the DoD safely lands its aircraft was unveiled by the Naval Air Traffic Management Systems Program Office (PMA-213) during a dedication ceremony here Jan. 11.

“We now have real, testable hardware after several years of conceptual modeling and design,” Capt. Darrell Lack, PMA-213 program manager, told the group gathered to celebrate the latest advancement of the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS).

“We will retire aging, radar-based, precision-approach and landing systems that are experiencing increasing obsolescence issues and evolve into a GPS-based precision-approach and landing system,” Lack said. “This system will provide secure performance at sea, on land and in expeditionary environments with increased operational availability and interoperability.”

PMA-213 received the second JPALS EDM in October and plans to install it on all CVN, LHD and LHA class ships as part of “Increment 1A.” The system offers critical enabling technology for the CVN-78 ship class, F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter and Navy unmanned air systems, while allowing retirement of costly, radar-based systems, Lack said. JPALS-compliant aircraft will be compatible with the civil aviation, GPS-based infrastructure when fielded.

EDM-2 is the initial production representative unit of the AN/USN-3(V)1 JPALS, consisting of four shipboard-suitable equipment racks and multiple GPS and UHF data-link antennas. A team, including the JPALS prime contractor Raytheon Network Centric Systems and NAWCAD Research and Engineering personnel will integrate the unit into the System Integration Lab at the Landing Systems Test Facility for further development.

With Navy, Air Force and Army participation, JPALS will provide a family of interoperable systems for civil and multinational, manned and unmanned aircraft. A JPALS increment 1A Test Readiness Review is scheduled for April and a Milestone C review to enter production is planned in fiscal 2013."

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS fo

Unread postPosted: 02 Feb 2012, 23:35
by spazsinbad
Perhaps of interest.

L-CLASS PRECISION APPROACH AND LANDING SYSTEM (PALS) CERTIFICATION

http://www.hrana.org/documents/PaddlesM ... ry2012.pdf

"Carrier suitability testing frequently involves “unconventional” flying, which is certainly the case for certifying amphibious assault ships (LHA and LHD classes). These ships have a Precision Approach and Landing System (PALS) similar to those currently found on any aircraft carrier (CVN), and require similar certification every two years. As VX-23 does not fly the Harrier, we perform these certifications using the F/A-18. L-Class ships have a TACAN and SPN-41 Instrument Carrier Landing System (ICLS), similar to the systems found on a CVN. Instead of a SPN-46 Automatic Carrier Landing System (ACLS) however, they have a SPN-35 which provides a precision approach capability. They also have an optical lens which appears similar to the lens found on a CVN, but it’s located on the starboard side of the ship and on the back side of the island. Instead of a marked centerline in the landing area, they have a “tramline” which pilots use to reference their lateral position.

The goal of an L-Class PALS certification is to verify that the SPN-35, SPN-41 and lens agree, and that they get the pilot safely to the point where he can take over and land visually. In this respect it’s similar to a Mode II certification of an aircraft carrier. Obviously the F/A-18 isn’t designed to touch down on an L-Class, so all of the approaches are terminated no later than 200 feet. The pattern is similar to that used for CVN certification , essentialy the Case III pattern with a higher airspeed on downwind. The pilot flies the ICLS needles while cross-checking and reporting TACAN range and radar altitude on the radio. Simultaneously test engineers onboard the ship monitor the SPN-35 to ensure that it matches what the pilot is reporting. Technicians are capable of making near real-time adjustments if errors in the system are detected.

Flying a low approach to a straight-deck boat is an interesting experience. Since there is no possibility of touch-down, approaches are generally flown with the landing gear up to conserve fuel. The urge to fly to the right of the wake and make the sight picture look like a CVN is almost irresistible. The location of the lens on the starboard side of the ship also contributes to the tendency to drift right. Combine all these factors and add in the requirement to fly an on-and-on approach while simultaneously reporting range and altitude data on the radio, and this quickly becomes a challenging task.

To all those who get to enjoy their ’rats on an L-Class, while we don’t get to interact with you as much as with CVN pilots, we at VX-23 are dedicated to ensuring that you have the most accurate and reliable landing aids pos-sible. Please let us know if you have any concerns with your ship’s systems. While the L-Class PALS certification may not help us increase our trap count, it is challenging and rewarding flying, and an important part of VX-23’s service to the fleet.
LT Matt “Brasso” Davin
VX-23 Ship Suitability"

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS fo

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2012, 02:29
by spazsinbad
The Aviation Data Management and Control System (ADMACS)

http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... 099DE79C91

"The Aviation Data Management and Control System (ADMACS) is a tactical, real-time data management system connecting the air department, ship divisions and embarked staff who manage aircraft launch and recovery operations on CV/CVN ships. ADMACS communicates aviation and command-related data elements across the ADMACS Local Area Network (LAN) and Integrated Shipboard Network System (ISNS) that electronically display position and location of aircraft on flight and hangar decks. ADMACS also displays the aircraft’s status, launch and recovery equipment, fuel, weapons types and quantity, and other aviation and ship related information. The primary goal of the ADMACS program is to significantly improve ship air operations effectiveness and workload reduction through process automation, optimization and integration of key operational systems.

The complexity of air operations aboard naval aircraft carriers requires accurate, continuous and timely information distribution to all work centers in need of vital data. The ADMACS family of block upgrades will develop and integrate a standard data management and control system to provide accurate and timely data throughout the ship.

ADMACS will provide an interface for data sharing to other key programs such as the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System, Advanced Arresting Gear, Joint Precision Approach and Landing System and the Moriah Wind System. ADMACS Block 1 is currently operational on nine commissioned aircraft carriers."

http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/ADMACS4.jpg
CAPTION: "Engineers at Naval Air Systems Command, Lakehurst, N.J., test upgrades to the Aviation Data Management and Control System to enhance information communication across shipboard operation departments on CV/CVN ships."

http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... 099DE79C91
Caption: "ADMACS is an integrated, network-centric shipboard aviation operations information management system that provides naval aviation operations planning, execution and readiness assessment. U.S. Navy Photo"

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: EMALS & JPALS fo

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2012, 02:48
by spazsinbad
MWS Moriah Wind System

http://www.agiltd.co.uk/marine_instrume ... ochure.pdf (2Mb)

"...The MWS is based on AGI’s AGIMET Naval Wind Measurement and Meteorological System, which is proven and in service with many navies worldwide. The MWS has been expanded to provide greater capability for data distribution, alleviating the need for dedicated retransmission units. The design is highly modular and has spare capacity for plug-in RS422 modules, LAN modules, Synchro modules, together with spare memory and processor power, which allows for future system expansion, upgrades and refit.

The MWS Processor Unit is a stand alone Data Distribution System with multiple input / output capability. It can be bulkhead or deck mounted and contains two Sub-Processors, operating in a dual redundant configuration to avoid system downtime. Built-In-Test facilities are included, using an external PC and Graphic User Interface for detailed reporting of faults and system set up.

The Processor unit provides sensor interface and data distribution to other ship’s systems and/or AGI’s range of Multi-Function Color Displays. These TFT Liquid Crystal Display instruments provide highresolution color displays, suitable for complex graphics data and feature multiple pages on a single instrument. Data pages include, but are not limited to, True & Relative Wind Speed and Direction, Meteorological and Oceanographic data, Deck Crosswind, Headwind and Tailwind, Ship’s Speed and Heading, Ship’s Roll and Pitch, Launch and Recovery Envelope data, Recovery Only Bulletin data, Fox Corpen data, BRC data and MWS Status Indication. The instruments offer excellent viewing angle properties and with fully dimmable back lighting, ensure maximum readability in a variety of ambient conditions, from direct sun light to the subdued environment of the Operations Room...."

Pic from: http://www.goqpi.com/products/navy/moriah/poster.pdf

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2012, 03:00
by archeman
Haaaay!
I know Space Invaders when I see it.
Those clowns over there are just playing video games all day, now I see what is causing the F-35C delays...

Unread postPosted: 28 Oct 2012, 03:15
by spazsinbad
And they get to play with the OUIJA BOARD (electro version Video then UCKERS version JPG)

Short DCAP video GangnamStyle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwAmwLT2YvA

Decaf: http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/images/unmanned.jpg

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/images/unmanned.jpg

Caption: “Pacific Ocean, December 13, 2005 — Air-craft Handling Officer Lt. Cmdr. Thomas McKean, right, explains the basic layout of the flight deck to Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Defense for Reserve Affairs (Readiness, Training and Mobilization), U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba, by using the "ouija board" located in Flight Deck Control aboard USS Ronald Reagan (CVN-76).” http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/027645.jpg
THEN:
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA496675

Unread postPosted: 29 Oct 2012, 04:02
by spazsinbad
ADMACS Modifications [PADDLES Monthly June 2011]

http://www.hrana.org/documents/PaddlesM ... ne2011.pdf (1.6Mb)

“The Aviation Data Management and Control System (ADMACS) connects the air department, the air wing, and many other embarked entities who are involved in the launch and recovery of aircraft aboard the CV. Using both the ship's Local Area Network (LAN) as well as the Integrated Shipboard Network System (ISNS), ADMACS electronically displays locations of aircraft both airborne as well as on the flight and hanger deck.

At this year?s conference, the LSO Community put forth some priorities concerning what we would like the ADMACS system to display to us on the LSODS, in addition to what is currently available. Here are some of the ideas that were proposed:

- A continuously updated master Air Plan where all of the numbers would be dynamically updated over the course of the day. This modification would allow Paddles to monitor changes, additions, and cancellations from the platform, in real-time.

- Ability to view the VDB board with accurate, real time locations of aircraft in the pattern as well as pilot names, profiles being flown, and requirements during CQ. It was even suggested that for TRACOM/FRS CQ a running GPA and boarding rate tally could also be included. This screen would be displayed on the LSODS in a similar manner as to what is depicted below:”

Unread postPosted: 14 Nov 2012, 19:17
by spazsinbad
JPALS team wins DoD award Nov 13, 2012

http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=5175

"NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. — NAVAIR’s Joint Precision Approach and Landing Systems (JPALS) team was recognized Oct. 25 as one of the Defense Department’s top five systems engineering teams during a ceremony in San Diego.

The team, part of Naval Air Traffic Management Systems Program Office (PMA-213), was presented the award by the National Defense Industrial Association. The award represents the recognition of significant achievement in Systems Engineering by teams of industry and government personnel.

“Each year, we recognize excellence in the application of systems engineering discipline and implementation of systems engineering best practice that result in highly successful Department of Defense programs,” said Steve Henry, National Defense Industrial Association Systems Engineering Division chairman. “The selection of the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) Increment 1A Ship System program reflects highly on the collaboration and engineering efforts of the JPALS government and contractor team.”

JPALS uses GPS and two-way data links for navigation and landing approaches for carrier-based aircraft and helicopters landing in harsh weather.

“One of the best practices that won the team this award is that the JPALS program required the use of Modeling and Simulation where requirements validation via test and demonstration was impossible,” said Michael Primm, JPALS guidance quality lead, PMA-213.

“Given the importance of the M&S program to JPALS, extensive verification, validation and accreditation was completed upfront and early to ensure a robust and accurate M&S environment was available.”

“I could not be prouder of our JPALS team,” said Capt. Darrell Lack, PMA-213’s program manager. “This first time award validates the dedicated work of PMA-213 and our industry partners.”

JPALS is a critical technology for the Navy that will allow ship and land based aircraft to safely land in all weather conditions and in conditions where enemy forces may try to jam GPS signals, added Lack.

“This award represents the outstanding teaming relationship that has existed since the JPALS 1A contract was awarded in 2008,” said Lee Wellons, JPALS government chief engineer.

The government JPALS 1A team with our industry partners Raytheon and Rockwell Collins not only utilized the solid systems engineering practices but also demonstrated exceptional organizational alignment and communication processes, Wellons said.

The next significant milestone for the JPALS team is reaching Milestone C in the fall of 2013. Milestone C is the decision to authorize full production and fielding of the JPALS system."

Unread postPosted: 19 Nov 2012, 00:31
by spazsinbad
US Navy, Raytheon receive Pentagon engineering award for GPS-guided precision landing program 15 Nov 2012

http://raytheon.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=2223

"MARLBOROUGH, Mass., Nov. 15, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- A U.S. Navy program that uses Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTN) technology to land aircraft in harsh weather has been recognized with a Department of Defense engineering award....

...Raytheon is currently installing JPALS on the aircraft carrier George H.W. Bush, CVN-77. Government integration of the system with other ship systems was completed in the Navy's test facility, and flight testing commenced in May 2012. Shipboard testing on the carrier [CVN-77] is planned to start as early as December. Raytheon completed development activities on time -- including delivery of eight ship system engineering development models and five avionics test kits on or ahead of schedule...."
__________________________

Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) USAF (no USN) variant explanation

VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PmfxXTu ... r_embedded

"Uploaded by mitrecorp on Feb 27, 2009
This video examines the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS), which provides the pilot with a much more precise idea of his position in relation to the terrain."

Unread postPosted: 04 Dec 2012, 19:06
by spazsinbad
Paddles Monthly Dec 2012

http://www.hrana.org/documents/PaddlesM ... er2012.pdf (1.4Mb)

"Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS)
[author] - Ken “Waldo” Wallace is a former Tomcat pilot and currently the JSF and JPALS liaison for Navy PMA-213 at Coherent Technical Services

As of this writing, a JPALS engineering unit is being installed onboard the USS George H.W. Bush (CVN-77) for at-sea test and evaluation with an F/A-18, MH-60, and King Air test aircraft in early 2013. This takes the next step beyond the LSO OAG presentations, Fleet Project Team forums, and technology demonstrations, and gives Paddles the opportunity to view the next generation precision approach and landing system at work in the operational environment.

Designed to replace aging sea-based and land-based aircraft landing systems, JPALS is a GPS-based system to provide enhanced joint operational capability in a full spectrum of environments ranging from CAVU to Sea State 5 in all weathers in a hostile environment. By complying with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) for Ground Based Augmentation System (GBAS) and Space Based Augmentation Systems (SBAS), JPALS provides an interoperable civil divert capability. JPALS incorporates both encrypted data link and GPS anti-jam technology with high levels of accuracy, reliability and capabilities beyond what we have today.

NAVAIR is developing JPALS with an incremental strategy to meet all requirements from replacing the SPN-46, SPN-35, and PAR for manned aircraft to landing unmanned aircraft both ashore and at sea. The first step of which is to achieve 200 ft. decision height with ½ NM visibility at CVN and L-Class ships.

System Overview
Figure 1 (on page 2) depicts the Operational Concept of the nodes and information exchange for JPALS Increment 1. The JPALS data link provides shipboard information for the aircraft to determine a Relative Navigation (RelNav) location to the ship.

The development schedule calls for two separate data links for JPALS. For Increment 1, the JPALS UHF data link is for the air wing aircraft (F/A-18 E/F, EA-18G, E-2D, C-2A, MH-60R/S and other future platforms) with a line of sight limit of 200 NM (for RelNav). Within 60 NM, the aircraft logs into the network and initiates two-way data link for aircraft parameters to be sent to the ship for surveillance and air traffic control. Within 10 NM, the high rate data link provides the required precision navigation (20 cm vertical accuracy). The F-35B/C requires an interim capability, a separate one-way data link, called the UHF Data Broadcast (UDB), which provides RelNav for the pilot out to 30 NM and supports precision approach out to 10 NM, as well as on-deck RF alignment.

JPALS brings a number of benefits to the fleet, some of which are presented below for the fixed wing pilot/LSO perspective:

? Once the pilot tunes in and the aircraft is processing the data link, he gets instant feedback that JPALS is up and running versus having to wait until flying into the ICLS/ACLS region behind the ship.

? JPALS slaves to the IFLOLS setting for nominal hook touchdown points for each cross deck pendant allowing the pilot to not only change glide slope, but even target a specific wire. For MOVLAS, JPALS uses the last commanded IFLOLS HTDP [Hook Touch Down Point] setting prior to switching to MOVLAS.

? The legacy “System Waveoff” has been eliminated, so the pilot can degrade (and uncouple as applicable) to another approach means and not view a flashing W/O with a JPALS malfunction. Protection levels are established, but the platforms and aviation community are still developing specific degrades and alert indications.

? Air Boss/LSO initiated waveoff will continue to be displayed as a waveoff to the pilot within 1 NM and on final approach (except for F-35 with UDB).

? Although the system retains the legacy requirements of Closed Deck and CATCC waveoff, with the exception of the UDB system they are now displayed as a “Discontinue Approach.” The JPALS Incremental acquisition approach includes a non-GPS based back-up system.

Landing Signal Officer Display System (LSODS) Integration
JPALS interfaces with a number of legacy systems on the ship to provide operators the required information to conduct launch and recovery operations with JPALS equipped aircraft. The F-35 UDB does not have a surveillance downlink, so it depends on other systems to provide controller and LSO display information. As briefed at the LSO OAG this year, the F-35 UDB approach to the CVN will be limited to 300 ft. and ¾ NM, achieving only 200 ft. and ½ NM with an ACLS Mode III lock-on to display ACLS final approach data to the operators. The F-35 is implementing a flight director with UDB, but does not plan to couple the flight control system on UDB approaches....

...Program Coordination
In addition to the at-sea testing onboard CVN-77, JPALS testing continues ashore at the Landing Systems Test Facility in Patuxent River, MD. Although production JPALS will begin with CVN installs in 2015, it will take time for the C-2A, E-2D, F/A-18 E/F, EA-18G, and MH-60R/S platforms to integrate JPALS. CVN-79 is expected to deploy without SPN-46, so until that time, both JPALS and SPN-46 will co-exist during the transition.

PMA213 looks forward to continue coordination with OPNAV, platform OEMs, the air traffic controller and the LSO community to field a system that meets the operator needs as the next generation precision landing system. LSO involvement is critical to success, and details of aircraft integration procedures will continue to be briefed to the fleet for feedback."

Unread postPosted: 10 Dec 2012, 20:36
by spazsinbad
How Carrier Based JPALS achieves the magic (boffins only - and I ain't one). Very long article with lots of equations and words. Be prepared. Diagrams I like.

Navigation, Interference Suppression, and Fault Monitoring in the Sea-Based Joint Precision Approach and Landing System
"Special antennas and a combination of satellite and inertial guidance data promise to overcome system faults and interference to allow safe landing of aircraft on U.S. Navy carriers at sea...."

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/ieee_pilot/a ... /hires.gif

Fig. 3. JPALS navigation signals include GPS broadcasts and a ship-based communication link.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/ieee_pilot/a ... ticle.html

Unread postPosted: 11 Dec 2012, 04:02
by marksengineer
Spaz,

Thanks for the IEEE link. From reading the article JPALS is more than just a differential GPS system as it measures the number of carrier frequency phases between the satellite and receiver. Simple concept to measure the phases like ticks on a ruler between the satellites, aircraft and ship but a complex process to make it happen. Good read!

Unread postPosted: 11 Dec 2012, 04:08
by spazsinbad
And if the satellites go down at least the UAV can find mother via direct encrypted transmissions.

Unread postPosted: 15 Feb 2013, 22:51
by spazsinbad
After some time I guess the location of PDFs change or they are no longer available. The Wallace and Grommitt PDF mentioned on the first page and at other times in this thread and/or on other threads is no longer available at: http://acast.grc.nasa.gov/wp-content/up ... allace.pdf

So it is attached (maybe searching for it on the web will be successful but whatever)....

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2013, 05:02
by spazsinbad
Field Results of a GPS/INS-Based Approach to Measuring Ship Flexure Onboard an Aircraft Carrier Sep 2005

M.G. Petovello, K. O’Keefe, G. Lachapelle and M.E. Cannon
Position, Location And Navigation (PLAN) Group | Department of Geomatics Engineering
Schulich School of Engineering | University of Calgary
"ABSTRACT
The Shipboard Relative GPS (SRGPS) component of the US Department of Defense Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) aims to deliver automatic landing capabilities to inbound aircraft aboard aircraft carriers. To accomplish this, GPS data collected on the yardarm needs to be translated to the desired touchdown point (TDP) on the flight deck. This in turn requires that all relative motion between the yardarm and the TDP (ship flexure) be properly accounted for, either via direct compensation or in the accuracy and integrity allocations. Since the magnitude of ship flexure at sea has not yet been quantified a data collection campaign was organized to, in part, allow for a direct assessment thereof. The results of this data collection campaign are presented herein and indicates that ship flexure is on the order of a few centimeters in horizontal and vertical components.

INTRODUCTION
The Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) being developed by the United States Department of Defense is intended to provide accurate and reliable guidance information to military aircraft landing on land and aircraft carriers using GPS augmented with other sensors. For land-based operations, Local Differential GPS (LDGPS) will be used, whereas Shipboard Relative GPS (SRGPS) techniques will be employed for aircraft carrier landings.

For the LDGPS case, the situation is similar to the Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS) implemented for civil aviation, with fixed reference stations generating differential GPS data to be sent to the incoming aircraft. The difference between LDGPS and LAAS is that the latter does not attempt to resolve the carrier phase ambiguities.

Although SRGPS is conceptually similar to LDGPS, the major practical difference is that the reference receivers are constantly in motion, as they are now mounted directly on the aircraft carrier. Since the reference GPS antennas cannot be mounted at the aircraft’s desired touchdown point (TDP) on the flight deck (due to operational limitations)), they are typically mounted on the ship’s yardarm. However, since the inbound aircraft requires knowledge of its position relative to the TDP, the GPS measurements need to be geometrically translated to this point. Moreover, this translation must account for all ship motion, most notably the ship’s attitude variations.

Practically, the translation of the GPS reference station data to the TDP is done using the assumed known baseline between the two points (obtained for example from a survey), knowledge of the ship’s attitude and the assumption that the ship is a rigid body. However, in the current context, the latter assumption may not be fully justified. In particular, during high dynamics such as during a turn or while in rough seas, the hull and/or mast of the ship will likely deform (ship flexure). Ultimately, this means that the baseline between the TDP and the GPS receiver is a dynamic quantity.

Since the magnitude of ship flexure has not yet been assessed, a data collection campaign onboard an aircraft carrier was conducted, in part, to address this problem. To this end, GPS and INS data was collected from multiple locations on the ship over several days. This paper presents ship flexure results obtained from data collected onboard an aircraft carrier under operational conditions. The objectives of the paper are as follows:

- Present methods of measuring the relative motion of two points (which, in the current context, is a direct indication of ship flexure);
- Identify the limitations of the above approaches in a practical sense and, where appropriate, propose solutions;
- Provide an initial quantification of aircraft carrier ship flexure at sea; and
- Determine if the estimated ship flexure correlates with ship motion.

The paper begins with an overview of the relevant methodology, including a brief review of methods used to estimate relative motion of two points. Next, the ship trip is described in detail, including the type and location of the various GPS and INS sensors. Finally, the results of the tests are presented and limitations are identified....

...Correlating Flexure and Ship Motion
Finally, an attempt was made to correlate the flexure effects with ship dynamics. The reason for this is that if a strong correlation exists, the flexure effects could, in principle, be compensated in real-time. To this end, an attempt was made to correlate flexure with roll, pitch, roll rate, pitch rate, azimuth rate, lateral acceleration and longitudinal acceleration. Interestingly, the only strong correlation was found to be between the y-axis flexure and roll or lateral acceleration of the ship (the roll and lateral acceleration are closely related). Figure 12 shows the correlation between the y-axis flexure and the lateral acceleration of the ship. As can be seen, the correlation is quite strong, with a correlation coefficient of -0.45 (45% correlation). For the May 6 data (with a higher sea state) the correlation increases to (negative) 78%, indicating that as the acceleration increases, the flexure increases accordingly. Interestingly however, the correlation with ship’s roll is rather small suggesting that perhaps the amount of ship’s roll may also be an important parameter. More investigation is required in this regard.

CONCLUSIONS
This paper set out to investigate the amount an aircraft carrier flexes under operational conditions. The paper began with a brief overview of the basic methodology for accomplishing this task, with focus given to the relevant error equations. A discussion of how to separate the various error sources from each other was also presented.

Using data collected aboard the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69), it was determined that the ship dynamics were too low to reliably estimate azimuth using an EGI. As such, a method of computing the residual EGI attitude errors was developed. Results indicated that this method was able to estimate the relative attitude errors between two EGI units to a few arc seconds. With the EGI attitude errors compensated, the ship flexure errors were then computed. The following conclusions can be drawn from this analysis:

1. Multiple antennas located on the yardarm of the ship exhibit similar short- and long-term flexure estimates.
2. The flexure in the starboard direction is larger than in the forward direction, and this is attributed to the larger variation in roll versus pitch.
3. The standard deviations of the flexure estimates are on the order of 1-2 cm and are approximately constant for all data sets, except when the sea state increases.
4. When the sea state increases, the “horizontal” (x- and y-axis) flexure estimates increase by approximately a factor of 1.6. The “down” (z-axis) flexure appears to be insensitive to sea state, suggesting that the GPS-only errors are dominant.
5. The only correlation between flexure and ship dynamics was found to be between the starboard flexure and the lateral acceleration of the ship. This correlation was found to be 45% for mild sea states and 78% for a sea state of three."

http://plan.geomatics.ucalgary.ca/paper ... S%2005.pdf (0.8Mb)

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2013, 13:23
by count_to_10
Are they really relying on GPS satellites instead of directly determining the relative positions of the carrier and aircraft? Isn't that vulnerable to jamming?

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2013, 13:45
by spazsinbad
It is worthwhile to look back through this thread and any other 'JPALS' thread where JPALS is mentioned to see how it will work for the USN or other allied aviation enabled flat decks. JPALS onboard will gather aircraft via satellite or relative direct signals DGPS or both. If the satellite is down or jammed then the onboard signals will guide them home within reason (depending on distance). UAVs will know where to look with preprogramming to get them close enough to be guided directly subsequently. These and other references are in this thread.
__________________________

PMA-213 Celebrates New GPS-Based Landing System Progress | Patuxent River, MD - Jan/24/2012
"...PMA-213 received the second JPALS EDM in October and plans to install it on all CVN, LHD and LHA class ships as part of “Increment 1A.” The system offers critical enabling technology for the CVN-78 ship class, F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter & Navy unmanned air systems, while allowing retirement of costly, radar-based systems, Lack said. JPALS-compliant aircraft will be compatible with the civil aviation, GPS-based infrastructure when fielded...."

http://www.thebaynet.com/news/index.cfm ... y_ID/25955
________________________

JPALS: Not Just LAAS in Navy Uniform
...Extraordinary Environment
But the seagoing JPALS will be a horse (or a LAAS) of a different color. One of the biggest differences will be its data links. For, as development has evolved, carrier-based JPALS has become a generic term applied to a wider data link environment than just the automatic landing portion.... In fact, the Navy’s seagoing JPALS will be the centerpiece of a dedicated, data link-based, communications, navigation and surveillance/air traffic management (CNS/ATM) system, which will be aboard each of its 12 carriers. The Navy needs such a capability to provide safety, airspace management and, of course, surveillance protection against adversaries, as the vessel moves away from the mainland and across oceans, often towards unfriendly territory.

In a way, it will be like picking up a complete FAA air route traffic control center (ARTCC) from the main-land, along with all its radars and infrastructure, and shoehorning it into an aircraft carrier. And since the carrier’s raison d’etre is to extend military air power in all weather, you could even say that the seagoing JPALS’ ultimate purpose is to thread the tip of an autolanding aircraft’s arrester hook through an imaginary 9-square foot (0.83-square meter) box centered precisely 14 feet (4.3 meters) above the pitching and rolling stern of a carrier in very low visibility, by day or night...."

http://www.aviationtoday.com/print/av/i ... 12893.html
&
http://www.navsys.com/Papers/06-09-002.pdf
____________________

A Robust GPS/INS Kinematic Integrity Algorithm for Aircraft Landing Alison Brown and Ben Mathews, NAVSYS Corporation
ABSTRACT
Next generation GPS receivers will take advantage of Spatial processing from a Controlled Reception Pattern Antenna (CRPA) and Ultra-Tightly-Coupled (UTC) and Tightly–Coupled GPS/inertial signal processing to improve their robustness to interference and their performance in a multipath environment. This introduces the potential for failure modes to be introduced into the GPS solution from the Spatial processor, GPS signals or Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs). For high integrity applications such as nonprecision approach or precision approach, the integrated GPS/Inertial receiver must be designed to perform fault detection and exclusion of any hazardously misleading information....

INTRODUCTION
The Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) Shipboard Relative GPS concept (SRGPS) is illustrated in Figure 1. The goal of the SRGPS program is to provide a GPS-based system capable of automatically landing an aircraft on a moving carrier under all sea and weather conditions considered feasible for shipboard landings....

http://www.navsys.com/Papers/06-09-002.pdf
_______________________

http://www.afceaboston.com/documents/ev ... Track1.pdf
_______________________

http://acast.grc.nasa.gov/wp-content/up ... allace.pdf

Unread postPosted: 29 Apr 2013, 04:10
by smsgtmac
spazsinbad wrote:After some time I guess the location of PDFs change or they are no longer available. The Wallace and Grommitt PDF mentioned on the first page and at other times in this thread and/or on other threads is no longer available at: http://acast.grc.nasa.gov/wp-content/up ... allace.pdf

So it is attached (maybe searching for it on the web will be successful but whatever)....


I do know that NASA recently pulled access to papers wholesale because there were fears that they had not been adequately vetted for release in the wake of the alleged Chinese spy leaving town. [ www.space.com/20355-nasa-chinese-spy-re ... abase.html]

Unread postPosted: 29 Apr 2013, 15:17
by lamoey
count_to_10 wrote:Are they really relying on GPS satellites instead of directly determining the relative positions of the carrier and aircraft? Isn't that vulnerable to jamming?


While GPS is jam resistant it is not jam proof, but then there is not likely to be any jamming source close to a carrier taking onboard aircraft, would there?

As for GPS for this kind of application you would not need to use Differential GPS. Instead you use something called RGPS (R=Relative) This is because the distance between the aircraft and the carrier will be short enough that you can assume they both are affected by exactly the same error sources and levels, so as long as you have a good raw position of both, the relative accuracy should be sub decimeter, or three inches or less. Even if they were exposed to James Bond style GPS jamming where the absolute position of the carrier is skewed miles off, the relative difference between the aircraft and the carrier would still be accurate.

P.S. I used GPS for the first time offshore in 1986, and there were only four satellites operational. That only gave us two hours a day where all four satellites were over the horizon, and even less where the geometry between the satellites an us where adequate for positioning. We did use the old USN Transit Satellite and Doppler as "primary" navigation the rest of the day.

In 1990 I was part of testing a RGPS system to position buoys towed 2-4 miles behind the vessel by way of RGPS and VHF data link to simply send the raw GPS pseudo ranges observed on the buoys to the vessel, where all the calculations took place.

In 1991 the war in Iraq saved a job offshore Nigeria where I managed the navigation aspect. The subcontractor that was supposed to generate and transmit Differential corrections from a shore station in Nigeria could not get their system to work. Fortunately for us, due to the shortage of military grade GPS receivers Pentagon had to buy a lot of civilian GPS receivers for the troops and consequently had to turn of SA (Selective Availability) for the duration of the war.

Unread postPosted: 07 May 2013, 23:26
by spazsinbad
More ACROnyms than you can stick a poke at in this many paged PDF so do not complain about the text excerpts below.... (there is an acronym index at the end of the PDF)....

Core Avionics Master Plan 2012 Appendix A-3 - Navigation 3
"...Baseline to Objective Transition Strategy (continued).
Radars are currently the primary enabler for precision approach and recovery in low ceiling, low visibility conditions. Automated hands-off fixed wing approach to the carrier deck using differential GPS has already been demonstrated using relative GPS. Insertion of this capability requires significant platform modifications. The Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) Program is developing these technologies to replace the antiquated radar Automated Carrier Landing System (ACLS) equipment that is facing obsolescence and driving high sustainment costs. This capability is being developed for rotary wing platform recovery to single spot ships, and is considered a key element of unmanned air vehicle operations at sea. JPALS is planned to replace precision approach systems at military installations and to provide a capability for all-weather recover to temporary expeditionary airfields and landing zones. The strategy is to evolve platform cockpits to provide a Digital Flight Environment (DFE) with the level of integrity to support precision navigation in all phases of flight and weather conditions.

GPS User Equipment (UE) has evolved significantly over the last decade. The latest all-in-view receiver modules incorporate Selective Availability Anti-Spoofing Module (SAASM) GPS receiver cards to prevent spoofing and enhance security of crypto keys. Additional robustness and enhancements are being achieved through the Navigation Warfare (NAVWAR) program with the integration of Controlled Reception Pattern Antennas (CRPAs) that possess significantly improved anti-jam characteristics, such as the GAS-1 and Advanced Digital Antenna Production (ADAP). The next generation of GPS UE, known as Military GPS User Equipment (MGUE), will replace legacy components and be capable of processing both the new M-Code signal and legacy GPS. The M-Code signal possesses even further improved anti-jam characteristics and will be available exclusively for military use. Additionally, MGUE integration will incorporate an enhanced security architecture which provides for layered information assurance and anti-spoofing capability. MGUE and NAVWAR development are managed by the U.S. Air Force led GPS Directorate and PMW/A-170 respectively.

Mandates and Milestones:
JPALS Ship-based Initial Operational Capability (IOC). (2017)
The US Navy is the lead for the Joint Service JPALS program, and is responsible for the development of the shipboard solution. JPALS will deployed on the newest aircraft carrier and its assigned carrier aircraft, including C-2A, E-2D, EA-18G, F/A-18E/F, F-35 and MH-60R/S.

Required Navigational Performance (RNP)–2 above FL290 in National Airspace System (NAS). (2018) RNP is a form of performance-based navigation that calls for accuracy of position location on a GPS route to be within a specified number of nautical miles (nm) of intended position. RNP compliance requires 95% fidelity of position accuracy to ensure proper containment for all modes of flight. The GPS receiver must provide Integrity using Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM), which ensures that all of the satellites being utilized to determine position are providing useful data. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) will require RNP-2 (accurate within a circle with a radius of two nm) for all operations at or above FL 290 in the NAS (similar to Continental United States – CONUS, but also includes Alaska and Hawaii) by 2018.

JPALS Land-Based IOC. (2018) The Air Force is charged with development of land-based JPALS ground stations. Differential GPS will be used to provide an additional military PPS datum reference signal via an encrypted UHF datalink, and an additional civil interoperable SPS datum reference signal via a VHF datalink or SATCOM signal. A fixed station will be installed at every DoD airfield that currently has precision approach capability. A deployable variant will be developed for remote locations....

...3. Funded Enhancements and Potential Pursuits.
Digitally Augmented Ship Approach Sequencing (JPALS). (2018)
JPALS will provide for increased ship-to-aircraft relative position accuracy to support ship recovery operations using Shipboard Relative GPS (SRGPS). After launch and during recovery operations, aircraft will utilize data-linked ship position and altitude information to establish more efficient aircraft marshalling procedures and approaches to the ship’s Expected Final Bearing (EFB). The SRGPS link between the ship and the aircraft on the EFB will enable the aircraft to perform very laterally and vertically precise approaches to the ship in all weather and all tactical conditions to minimize aircraft recovery time. Utilization of tighter patterns has already demonstrated time and fuel savings in commercial airport operations, and should provide similar benefits in CVN and multi-spot amphibious ship operations. JPALS precision navigation will require 24 channel GPS receiver upgrades and processing upgrades that enable procesing both L1/L2 PPS GPS signals. The first platform planned to utilize JPALS for marshalling will be the Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS).

Digital Airfield Sequencing (JPALS). (2018) Aircraft that are configured with JPALS will be able to immediately take advantage of improved approach sequencing when JPALS units are established at shore bases. Shore based JPALS at military air stations had planned to implement supplemental ground-based signals (Local Area Augmentation Signal – LAAS) that would utilize one-way unique military datalink information for GPS augmentation to enable precision approach capabilities, but that initiative and solution strategy has been deferred. Instead, JPALS equipped naval aircraft will perform GPS augmented precision approach procedures at civilian airfields by leveraging Satellite Based Augmentation System (SBAS) Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) signals, which will not require a datalink to receive the correction signal. Air Force is the lead for this program. USAF Mobility and Combat Commands are negotiating the necessity and prioritization of resources to enable MGUE to support this functionality, but it is still currently tracking as a part of the program of record for availability to configured users in 2018....

...D. Recovery.
1. Current Capabilities.

Current shipboard ACLS radars have critical reliability and obsolescence issues. Naval aircraft use Link 4A to conduct assisted approaches and recoveries. The most advanced tactical jets have hands off recovery capability. Helicopters do not have automated recovery. Only the largest surface vessels offer precision approach. Some aircraft employ Instrument Landing Systems (ILS) transceivers for precision approaches to equipped airfields. Most civil airfields are equipped with ILS approaches, but most Navy and Marine Corps airfields typically are not. Aircraft not equipped with ILS are limited to locations with precision radar for alternative low weather ceiling emergency divert recoveries. Receivers that work ILS frequencies must be equipped with filters to prevent FM station interference. The P-3C is the first Navy aircraft certified to fly GPS-based SIDS, STARS and RNP-0.3 approaches.

2. Advanced Research and Technology Development.
Degraded Visual Environment (DVE) Recovery. (2010-2012)
The Naval Aviation Center for Rotorcraft Advancement (NACRA) office and PMA261 (H-53 variants) are analyzing technologies and system options that can present an affordable near term solution for this capability gap. Technologies being tested in multiple Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) efforts include Laser Radar (LADAR), Millimeter Wavelength (MMW) and Passive MMW (PMMW) or other fused spectrum sensors that can “see through” airborne particles to increase SA. The challenge will be to affordably leverage limited existing on-board sensors or to design something that is small and light enough to practically integrate which does not affect flight performance margins.

3. Funded Enhancements and Potential Pursuits.
Digitally Augmented GPS-based Shipboard Recovery (JPALS). (2017)
JPALS is a joint effort with the Air Force and Army. The Navy is designated as the Lead Service and is responsible for implementation of shipboard recovery solutions (Increment 1). The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Block 5 will be the first JPALS configured platform. It will start with a temporary solution that will provide needles to the operator to enable a “JPALS assisted” approach. The interim solution will not equip the aircraft to broadcast its position in a manner that can be monitored by JPALS equipment on the ship. Legacy radar will have to be used for the shipboard monitoring of the approach. The Unmanned Carrier-Launched Aircraft Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) will be the second platform. It will be forward fit with full functionality. JPALS will also be installed on air-wing aircraft (C-2A, E-2C/D, EA18G, F/A-18E/F and MH-60 R/S) to support CVN-79 around 2021-2022. JPALS will eventually replace the ACLS on carriers, SPN-35 radars on LH Class Amphibious ships, and may replace ILS, TACAN, and Precision Approach Radar (PAR) systems at shore stations. JPALS will be interoperable with civil augmentation and FAA certifiable. Shipboard JPALS will use Differential GPS (D-GPS) to provide centimeter-level accuracy for all-weather, automated landings. D-GPS provides a SRGPS reference solution for the moving landing zone. A JPALS technology equipped F/A-18 has demonstrated fully automated recoveries to the carrier. JPALS will also enable silent operations in Emission Control (EMCON) environments.

Digitally Augmented Civil Airfield Recovery (JPALS). (2018) Every aircraft that is equipped with JPALS capability for ship operations will automatically be able to conduct civil airfield GPS precision approaches. UCLASS will be the first equipped aircraft. They will be able to use Satellite Based Augmentation Systems (SBAS) such as the FAA’s WAAS, the Indian GPS and GEO Augmented Navigation (GAGAN), the Japanese Multifunctional Satellite Based Augmentation System, or the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service (EGNOS) which was recently activated. JPALS will also be interoperable with FAA civil Ground Based Augmentation Systems (GBAS), which also uses differential GPS to enhance GPS signal correlation for improved position accuracy. JPALS adds the protected military PPS GPS signal, anti-jam and UHF datalink to military approaches but the Civil approaches will utilize the unprotected SPS signal. Civil system interoperability will enable aviators to use hundreds of additional divert airfield options. The Air Force is designated to develop and implement shore station JPALS capability. One JPALS land-based unit (Increment 2) can replace all the existing non-precision approach beacons and precision radars required for each major runway, providing increased capability for less capital investment and sustainment costs. The Army is developing portable tactical JPALS systems that will enable precision recovery in remote expeditionary locations....

...2. Advanced Research and Technology Development.
Military Space Signal and User Equipment Enhancements. (2010-2013)
Smaller GPS antennas and AE are being developed for space-constrained aircraft and small Unmanned Aerial Systems. JPALS compatible beam-steering AE is also being developed for JPALS platforms....

Appendix A-4 Cooperative Surveillance
...Mandates and Milestones:
Joint Mode 5 Initial Operational Capability (IOC). (2015)
The March 2007 Joint Requirements Oversight Council Memorandum (JROCM) 047-07 calls for Mode 5 Joint IOC in 2015 and Full Operational Capability (FOC) in 2020.

JPALS Ship-based Initial Operational Capability (IOC). (2017) The US Navy is the lead for the JPALS program, and is responsible for the development of the shipboard solution (Increment IA). JPALS will initially be deployed on the newest aircraft carrier and its assigned aircraft, including C-2, EA-18G, E-2D, F/A-18E/F, F-35 and MH-60R/S.

JPALS Land-Based IOC. (2018) The Air Force is charged with development of land-based JPALS ground stations (Increment II). Differential GPS will be used to provide an additional military PPS datum reference signal via Satellite Based Augmentation System (SBAS) Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) signals. A fixed station will be installed at every DoD airfield that currently has precision approach capability. A man-pack variant may be developed for remote locations....

...2. Advanced Research and Technology Development.
Military Collision Avoidance (Mode 5). (2011-2012)
A Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) projects is exploring utilization of TACAN Air-to-Air mode to perform aircraft collision avoidance functions within the battlespace. This utility was reportedly demonstrated by Spanish F-18 aircraft. Algorithms were developed to place a ‘range bubble’ around aircraft based upon proximity to another cooperating aircraft who was also operating on TACAN using a specific channel separation.

3. Funded Enhancements and Potential Pursuits.
Improved Ship and Shore Approach Sequencing (JPALS). (2018) F-35B and C early block deliveries
will employ a one-way JPALS data-link integration to facilitate Shipboard Relative GPS (SRGPS) aided recoveries. Block four or five will incorporate the full two-way datalink, which will enable ship controllers to manage improved marshalling for more efficient recoveries. Utilization of tighter patterns has already demonstrated time and fuel savings in commercial airport operations, and should provide similar benefits in carrier and multi-spot amphibious ship operations. For more JPALS details, see the Navigation appendix..... [excerpts relevant to JPALS above already]

Fused Sensor and Tactical Data Collaborative Combat ID (CID). (2015) The fusion server integrated into the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) hosts software that combines and compares target track information obtained from all on-board sensors, as well as from tactical information data-linked from outside sources. If multiple sensor track parameters are similar, a contact attribute can be considered more reliable than if it were derived from a single source data point. Similarly, intelligence and sensor data combinations can be used to discount parameters that may not be as reliable from a single range or condition limited sensor, or one that may be getting spoofed. Automated fusion will produce a higher confidence factor CID solution....

Appendix A-5 Flight Safety
...Shipboard Recovery Animation. (2020) The current MFOQA [Military Flight Operations Quality Assurance] program of record does not include complex analysis and software development required to enable the ability to visualize takeoffs or landings in the highly dynamic shipboard environment. MFOQA Increment 3 is planned to include enhancements that would incorporate ship position and motion into the visualization module to enable accurate portrayal of a flight during embarked operations....

...Structural Prognostics and Health Management. (2015) Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) will field Structural Prognostics and Health Management (PHM) capability in support of mission sortie generation/readiness objectives. Wirelessly downloaded parameters will include fuel state, ammunition state, expendables state, and component health conditions requiring maintenance in order to minimize turnaround time. Real time, accurate down-link of specific component conditions supports CBM [Condition Based Maintenance], which will significantly enhance readiness by enabling maintainers to move from time-scheduled removals and inspections to removing items only when required. Removing components only when they have achieved their tolerance limit of safe operations can also return significant cost avoidances by extending the lives of the parts beyond their engineering estimates, thereby reducing the costs of repairs or replacements. CBM may also result in reduced requirements for spares inventories or deployed spare support footprints...."

http://www.navair.navy.mil/pma209/_Docu ... _Final.pdf (3.3Mb)

Unread postPosted: 03 Jul 2013, 09:34
by spazsinbad
Some EMALS and JPALS news - I'll start with the latter:

Navy closes in on making landing on aircraft carrier safer 28 Jun 2013 NavAirSysCom
"Landing on an aircraft carrier is now safer thanks to the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) team from the Naval Air Traffic Management Systems Program Office (PMA-213).

JPALS is an all-weather landing system that uses a Global Positioning System and navigation systems to safely land both land- and sea-based aircraft. JPALS completed its latest round of testing aboard the USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77) in late May.

The 52-person team spent 11 days aboard the carrier testing the latest JPALS software with two F/A-18C Hornet aircraft from Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23, and an MH-60S helicopter from Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (HX) 21, based at Naval Air Station Patuxent River. A modified Beechcraft King Air flying from St. Mary’s County Airport was also used as a test bed aircraft.

“The Hornets flew 65 low approaches to touch-and-go or full-stop landings during our two weeks on CVN 77,” said Lee Mason, PMA-213’s JPALS Ship System integrated program team lead. “The King Air completed 29 low approaches. So far, we are very pleased with the results. The system is expected to achieve tremendously improved landing accuracy.”

With the completion of this two-week test period, the JPALS program transitioned into the second phase of integrated test, establishing the system requirements verification for JPALS, Mason added.

“The data generated from this two-week, at-sea period is undergoing detailed analysis by our experts. This analysis will, in turn, be used to validate and verify the system is accurate and working,” said Capt. Darrell Lack, PMA-213 program manager.

Later this summer, JPALS is scheduled to complete additional at-sea testing to further refine the verification and validation effort and enable the completion of the operational assessment of the JPALS ship system, which is needed to progress to the program’s next milestone, Lack added.

“JPALS will provide adverse weather, adverse terrain, day and night, and survivable precision approach and landing capability that supports service and multi-national interoperability,” Lack said. “It is particularly suitable for the F-35, future aircraft and unmanned air vehicle operations at sea.”"

http://www.asdnews.com/news-49978/Navy_ ... _safer.htm

Unread postPosted: 03 Jul 2013, 09:37
by spazsinbad
EMALS begins phase two aircraft launch tests 03 Jul 2013 NavAirSysCom
"The U.S. Navy successfully launched an EA-18G Growler on June 25, kicking off the second phase of manned aircraft launch tests using the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS).

The new aircraft carrier catapult system, which is replacing steam catapults beginning with the new Gerald R. Ford-class carriers, commenced aircraft compatibility testing (ACT) phase two from the land-based test site at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, N.J.

“As we move into the second phase of aircraft testing, I’m confident we’ll continue to see the breadth of EMALS’ robust design and operational capability,” said Capt. James Donnelly, program manager for Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment Program Office (PMA-251) who oversees the EMALS.

George Sulich, EMALS integrated test team lead, said this phase of testing will simulate various carrier situations, including off-center launches and planned system faults to demonstrate that the aircraft can meet end-speed and validate launch-critical reliability.

The team expects to conduct more than 300 launches this year, Sulich said.

“During ACT 2, we will launch every aircraft currently utilizing today’s carrier catapults, with the exception of the E-2C Hawkeye,” Sulich said.

The EMALS team completed the first phase of aircraft compatibility testing fall 2011 with 133 manned aircraft launches, comprising the F/A-18E Super Hornet, T-45C Goshawk, C-2A Greyhound, E-2D Advanced Hawkeye. The team also had an early opportunity to launch the F-35C Lightning II to evaluate any technical risks.

This was the first EMALS launch for the Growler, an electronic attack variant of the Block II F/A-18F Super Hornet and Navy replacement for the EA-6B Prowler. This year, the F/A-18 family of aircraft is celebrating its marks the 35th anniversary.

“We’ve now launched each of the Navy’s newest aircraft using EMALS,” Donnelly said. “The system is definitely demonstrating its ability to meet fleet requirements by expanding the launch envelope.”

EMALS is a complete carrier-based launch system. It delivers necessary higher launch energy capacity; substantial improvements in system maintenance; increased reliability and efficiency; and more accurate end-speed control. Its technologies allow for a smooth acceleration at both high and low speeds, increasing the ability to launch aircraft with less stress on the ship and its systems.

EMALS is designed to expand the operational capability of the Navy’s future carriers to include all current and future carrier air wing platforms – lightweight unmanned to heavy strike fighters."

http://www.asdnews.com/news-50038/EMALS ... _tests.htm

Unread postPosted: 03 Jul 2013, 09:39
by spazsinbad
GROWLER EMALS FIRST LAUNCH VIDEO:
"An EA-18G Growler, the electronic attack variant of the F/A-18 Super Hornet, was launched for the first time June 25 using the Navy’s new Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS), which is replacing steam catapults, beginning with the future Gerald R. Ford-class carriers."

http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... 3C975E7527

Unread postPosted: 03 Jul 2013, 10:28
by spazsinbad
I found that the NavAir Video above did not work for me no matter what I tried. Here is the same Utube version I'm guessing?

Navair - EA-18G Growler Airborne Electronic Attack Aircraft First Land-Based EMALS Launch [720p]
Published on Jul 2, 2013

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2dOhjut5vE

Unread postPosted: 03 Jul 2013, 13:41
by bigjku
spazsinbad wrote:I found that the NavAir Video above did not work for me no matter what I tried. Here is the same Utube version I'm guessing?

Navair - EA-18G Growler Airborne Electronic Attack Aircraft First Land-Based EMALS Launch [720p]
Published on Jul 2, 2013

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2dOhjut5vE


It is still very strange to see a catapult operate so silently and without the steam. But EMALS will be huge for UAV operations. Glad they seem to have put most obstacles behind them.

Unread postPosted: 10 Jul 2013, 03:15
by spazsinbad
My internet speed has gone to dialup just as I caught a glimpse of this story below from intro to this video. If anyone finds this same video or similar on internet/utube then please let me know to attempt to manually download it.

ADDITION Found it on Youtube where I can download it with download manager:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=165cQsfxNzw

VIDEO Airwaves: 9 July 2013
"On this edition of Airwaves, weather watchers keep their eyes to the sky to ensure aircrew safety during tests; plus, a "magic carpet" makes carrier landings safer for pilots; and the Navy's newest unmanned air vehicle flies high above Palmdale, Calif., during its first flight.
&
(Transcript) "A new landing system aims at making carrier landings safer.
Engineers at manned flight simulator are testing magic carpet – a landing system designed to reduce the workload of pilots and improve carrier touch-down performance. By using manned flight simulator, engineers can test the system under normal and adverse conditions, giving them a better idea of how the system will respond at sea. The goal is to reduce landing variability allowing pilots to focus more on the mission.

James Denham / Senior Engineer, Aeromechanics Division 4.3.2
“Airplanes today have very good computer systems, redundant and reliable flight control computers. We are capitalizing on those systems and then providing augmentation in the flight path access for the airplanes. So we are taking a lot of the tasks that the pilot has to do manually and letting the computer take care of those tasks and give him direct control of what he is trying to do which is fly the flight path and line up the touchdown.

In addition to increasing safety, the system is expected to save on training costs for carrier landing signal officers. Engineers are currently testing the system for use on the Hornet and F-35C."

http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... 36B1E3C033

Unread postPosted: 03 Aug 2013, 21:57
by spazsinbad
OLD NEWS but informative in some details....

STRIKE TEST NEWS Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 23 Newsletter Spring/Summer 2010
"JOINT PRECISION APPROACH AND LANDING SYSTEM (JPALS) pp 28-29
Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) is a GPS based system that will be the replacement for the current ACLS/SPN-46 system. Unlike the SPN-46 that uses radar on the boat to track an aircraft, JPALS works by comparing the GPS position of the carrier and the GPS position of the aircraft. A relative navigation (Rel Nav) solution is calculated and displayed as guidance in the cockpit. Initial tests were conducted in 2000 with an F-18 to prove that the concept worked. JPALS should IOC in 2014 and will start to be retrofitted on Hornets. H-60’s and E-2D’s should start to see it in 2017. It will be the only approach guidance on NUCAS (Navy Unmanned Combat Air System) and the F-35. Every carrier will be equipped by 2024.

How is it better? It will be GPS based and is jam resistant. Instead of an operator in CATCC having to lock up an aircraft with the SPN-46 radar, only a data link between the ship and aircraft needs to be established making the system more reliable. This link will be established when the aircraft gets within 200 miles of the carrier, not at 5 miles behind the ship prior to tip over. The linked Rel Nav solution will also act like a TACAN and give ships position out to 200 miles. The link transmission, like MIDS, uses spread spectrum transmissions so it does not give away position and can be used during EMCON conditions. Mode I approaches will also be more accurate. The SPN-46 radar loses the aircraft at the round down. Past the round down glide slope guidance is basically an average of the last few seconds of the flight path. That is why during a Mode I the hornet freezes control input commands in the last 2 seconds before touchdown. The JPALS GPS guidance will be accurate all the way to touchdown. The Air Force and Army are funding a ground based JPALS system that can be easily setup at any airfield giving the Hornet an actual precision approach besides a PAR.

How will it affect me? With no need for interaction with an operator in CATCC, JPALS may be available during Case I approaches providing better gouge through the approach turn then the ICLS. Drop locks at 3 miles should not be a problem anymore; if you have JPALS in Marshall you’ll have it on final. The pickle switch on the platform will be connected to the data link and transmitted to the aircraft providing a true “W/O” discrete in the HUD and the ability to wave off a UAV. The ships final bearing will also be automatically linked to the aircraft and instantaneously updated in the cockpit, greatly enhancing SA to which direction the ship is turning while we are trying to land.

The mechanization and cockpit displays are still in the design phase. Do we want it to look just like ACLS or ICLS? Is it going to be called needles, bullseye, or _______? Should final bearing automatically be set as a course line? Is there a better way than the old way to do business? As fleet operators and LSO’s if you have any suggestions or ideas please let us know. In a few years JPALS will be a great tool to help us get the Air Wing aboard safely."

http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcad/index ... oad&id=673 (PDF 2.8Mb)

Unread postPosted: 04 Aug 2013, 01:48
by spazsinbad
Shipboard Automated Landing Technology Innovation Program
John Kinzer Aircraft Technology Program Officer, ONR 351, 2 November 2011
"Shipboard Automated Landing Technology Innovation (SALTI)
VISION

All sea based naval aircraft, manned and unmanned, fixed wing and rotary wing, will utilize optimally automated ship launch and recovery to the operating limits of the ship / aircraft system

• Flight operations Warfighter Payoff
- Increased safety, reduction in mishaps
- More operational flexibility through expanded shipboard operating envelopes and flexible flight deck usage
- Reduced landing intervals, bolter and waveoff rate (shorter recovery periods, reduced fuel consumption)
- Increased shipboard sortie rates, reduced ship and aircraft fuel consumption, recovery tanker “give” requirements, ship and squadron personnel fatigue, etc.
- Potential for common capability with DVE and obstructed LZ ops ashore

• Aircraft / ship design and maintenance
- Reduced landing gear and related structure
- Reduced number of wires / arresting gear engines
- Reduction in ship support systems (landing aids, displays, etc)
- Reduction in inspection and repair for hard landings
- Increased fatigue life

• Flight training
- reduction in training time / cost (decrease in ship landing initial training, qualification, and currency requirements)
- indirect benefits may include reduced environmental impact and public complaints due to FCLPs (noise), cost of equipping, maintaining, and manning outlaying landing fields, etc.
&
SALTI Technical Objectives
• Precise automated approach and glideslope control
- Reduced susceptibility to wind gusts and turbulence
- Accommodation of high sea states, higher winds from all directions, degraded visual environment
- Precise, predictable touchdown: reduced scatter in sink rate, sideloads, touchdown spot, hook-to-ramp distance, centerline deviations

• HCI for manned aircraft for optimal situational awareness, control, and decision making
• Ability to operate under night, degraded visual environment, and emissions control (EMCON) conditions
• High integrity systems for naval seabased operations
- Excursion: ability to conduct VTOL ops onto ships without specialized modifications
• Optimum commonality among aircraft and ship types, and ship / shore applications
&
Technologies
- Flight Control
* Modified control laws for precision control
* Gust sensing and alleviation

- HCI and ship integration
* Ship based pilot displays
* Cockpit displays
* GCS and ship systems interface
* LSE interface

- Navigation systems
* GPS based precision landing algorithms being worked by JPALS, UCAS-D programs
* Supporting / alternate systems (ship and/or aircraft mounted)
• CVN: adapt existing systems/sensors, propose new sensors
• VTOL: EO/IR, radar, LADAR

- Deck motion prediction and compensation
* CVN, L-class, and small decks – existing algorithms adequate?
* Prediction and integration with aircraft control

• CONOPS: adjustments to take advantage of enhanced precision, efficiency, safety, envelope expansion, reduced maintenance"

http://www.defenseinnovationmarketplace ... 20Tech.pdf (0.7Mb)

Unread postPosted: 04 Aug 2013, 03:52
by spazsinbad
A Hybrid Integrity Solution for Precision Landing and Guidance April 2004
Kenn L. Gold and Alison K. Brown | NAVSYS Corporation
"Abstract
NAVSYS Corporation has designed a hybrid integrity monitoring solution for precision approach and landing in a GPS environment degraded by RF interference. The integrity solution described in this paper leverages the capabilities of next generation digital spatial processing and ultra-tightly-coupled (UTC) GPS/inertial integrated military User Equipment (UE). The design includes a spatial environment integrity monitor, a GPS/inertial RAIM solution that allows detection of small error drift rates before the blended solution can be corrupted and an integrity monitoring function embedded within the Kinematic Carrier Phase Tracking (KCPT) algorithms which provides a level of confidence on the final KCPT solution. Simulation results showing the expected performance of some aspects of this multi-level integrity monitoring approach are presented. A design for an aircraft GPS/inertial digital spatial processing receiver, the HAGR-A, is also included. This receiver, which is based on the NAVSYS Software GPS Receiver, will be used as a test bed for implementation and testing of these integrity monitoring techniques

Shipboard Relative GPS (SRGPS)
The Joint Precision Approach and Landing (JPALS) Shipboard Relative GPS Concept (SRGPS) is illustrated in Figure 1. The goal of the SRGPS program is to provide a GPS-based system capable of automatically landing an aircraft on a moving carrier under all sea and weather conditions considered feasible for shipboard landings. The presently utilized Aircraft Carrier Landing System (ACLS) is a radar-based system which was developed more than 30 years ago and has a number of limitations that make the system inadequate to meet present and future ship-based automatic landing system requirements. The goal of SRGPS is to monitor and control up to 100 aircraft simultaneously throughout a range of 200 nautical miles from the landing site. Integrity monitoring is especially important for the last 20 nm of an approach, and accuracy requirements are 30 cm 3-D 95% of the time.

The SRGPS architecture provides a precision approach and landing system capability for shipboard operations equivalent to local differential GPS systems used ashore, such as the FAA's Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS). A relative navigation approach is used for SRGPS with the "reference station" installed on a ship moving through the water and pitching, rolling, and yawing around its center of motion. In addition, the ship's touchdown point may translate up/down (heave), side to side (sway), and fore and aft (surge).

Since the shipboard landing environment is much more challenging than ashore, the SRGPS approach must use kinematic carrier phase tracking (KCPT) to achieve centimeter level positioning relative to the ship’s touchdown point. Faulty measurements, even if detected prior to transmission, impact system performance. Therefore, improvements are needed in the SRGPS shipboard reference station and signal processing to assure the continuity and integrity of the SRGPS corrections. Of particular concern are: (a) the robustness to signal blockages from the ship’s superstructure; (b) the ability to operate in the presence of multipath while maintaining the carrier-phase and pseudo-range integrity; and (c) the ability to continue operation in the presence of radio frequency (RF) interference (from both normal ship operations and jammers) in a tactical environment...."

http://www.navsys.com/papers/04-04-001.pdf (0.35Mb)

Similar / Later PDF by at least one of the authors above here on page 2 of this thread:

http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... son#204057

Unread postPosted: 04 Aug 2013, 03:57
by FlightDreamz
Interesting that the SGPGRSjpalsGraphic+text.gif still shows a F-14 Tomcat in the landing pattern (a "D" model for maybe one of the Tomcat2000 proposal's I suppose) instead of an F/A-18 or a F-35C! D@mn! I miss the Tomcats!

Unread postPosted: 06 Aug 2013, 21:32
by spazsinbad
CATAPULT DEVICES and EMALS History only EMALS excerpts (part) here below:

Launch and Recovery: From Flywheels to Magnets 05 August 2013 NAN Naval Aviation News Summer 2013
"...The Future
To paraphrase Yogi Berra, it is déjà vu all over again for the Navy. Aircraft with a wider range of sizes, weights, and launching needs are entering the fleet. The F-35 Lightning II will soon replace the venerable F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, both heavy and light unmanned aerial systems such as the X-47B and ScanEagle will occupy space on the flight deck, and a catapult is needed to operate flexibly around these aircraft’s launch requirements while continuing to increase sortie rates.

“Currently, steam catapults are capable of launching today’s carrier aircraft as well as the future F-35C Lightning II and X-47B unmanned aircraft that are not yet operational in the fleet,” said Capt. James Donnelly, program manager for the Navy’s Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment program. “EMALS is designed to launch today’s current air wing as well as all future carrier aircraft platforms in the Navy’s inventory through 2030 with reduced wind-over-the-deck requirements when compared to steam catapults, and additional capability for aircraft growth during the 50-year life of the carrier.”

To that end, the Navy is betting all their chips on EMALS.

EMALS is composed of an energy storage unit, a power conditioning system, and a closed-loop control system. The catapult will also use linear induction motors, which directly produce motion in a straight line, to allow the aircraft to launch at speeds ranging from 55 to 200 knots.

“The Navy has been considering electromagnetic technology since the World War II era,” said George Sulich, the integrated product team lead for EMALS. “It wasn’t until 1982 that a concept feasibility study determined an electromagnetic launcher could successfully be used to launch aircraft from a carrier that research and development began on technologies that have evolved into the current EMALS program.”

According to Sulich, EMALS will provide several distinct benefits over its steam predecessor, including a wider energy range that expands the carrier’s capability envelope to accommodate heavier aircraft as well as lighter unmanned air vehicles. EMALS will also allow: increased operational availability because of its electrical and electronic components; a health monitoring system that prevents the catapult from launching if something is wrong; linear motors to launch, brake, and retract the shuttle (instead of the multiple systems used on a steam catapult); and a 10-fold increase in efficiency when compared to steam catapults.

EMALS will also generate higher sortie rates, reduce overall maintenance to the system and aircraft, and require fewer Sailors to operate.

“As the steam catapult system ages, it frequently requires additional personnel to monitor a gauge or tend to maintenance issues,” said Donnelly. “EMALS will monitor its own condition and keep the operator informed of system status, providing information on, and criticality of, any compromised components as well as aid maintainers in troubleshooting down to low-level components. This will permit a significant reduction in the manpower workload required to operate and maintain the system.”...

...“Actual EMALS operation and sustainment costs are still being determined, but given the fiscal climate facing the Navy now and in the future, EMALS technologies must be affordable and reduce the total life-cycle cost over the existing systems,” he said. “These reductions in cost are directly related to the 30-percent reduction goal in the number of operators and maintainers required for the EMALS. Depot-level maintenance associated with EMALS is also expected to be reduced over the life-cycle of the carrier.”

With these tests complete, the full-scale catapult was deemed operational on 13 November 2009 at a ceremony at Lakehurst, and the system began dead-load launching shortly thereafter. On 18 December 2010 the program reached its most meaningful milestone with the historic first launch of an aircraft using an electromagnetic aircraft catapult. An F/A-18E Super Hornet piloted by Lt. Daniel Radocaj of VX-23 took to the skies of eastern New Jersey following EMALS maiden launch.

“I thought the launch went great,” said Radocaj, echoing the statements of Edward Feightner more than 50 years before. “I got excited once I was on the catapult but I went through the same procedures as on a steam catapult. The catapult stroke felt similar to a steam catapult and EMALS met all of the expectations I had.”

Since then, EMALS has launched a variety of aircraft from the older C-2A Greyhound to the F-35C, and its components are being delivered to Gerald R. Ford for installation...."

http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... o-magnets/
OR
http://nanarchive.omnitecinc.com/20102019.aspx (Navigate to 2013 for 7Mb PDF download of entire issue)

Unread postPosted: 07 Aug 2013, 02:10
by h-bomb
FlightDreamz wrote:Interesting that the SGPGRSjpalsGraphic+text.gif still shows a F-14 Tomcat in the landing pattern (a "D" model for maybe one of the Tomcat2000 proposal's I suppose) instead of an F/A-18 or a F-35C! D@mn! I miss the Tomcats!


That paper was from 2004 and the F-14 was already well on its way to pasture... I think it really shows how long this project has been in work. Some of the sources he quoted were from 2000. I would assume that the Navy may have started in the early 90's. That was when GPS was going to do everything. But between piece dividends and processing technology, it may not have been viable till the later 90's.

I have worked on a first Gen I JTIDS on an AWACS, it is a huge multi LRU monster. Similar to the Rockwell- Collins cabinet system they Navy uses on ship. By the mid 90's the Navy's E-2 were testing a full system smaller then E-3s transmitter alone.

And yes we were jealous! :D

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 22 Nov 2013, 21:27
by spazsinbad
:cheers: 'NavyDave' must have some good USN sources....

Navy Completes Initial Development of New Carrier Landing System 22 Nov 2013 Dave Majumdar
"The U.S. Navy has completed the initial development of the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS), Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) officials told USNI News.

The system is designed to aid pilots landing in inclement weather conditions and will eventually replace the current Instrument Carrier Landing System (ICLS) and the Automatic Carrier Landing System (ACLS) onboard the service’s aircraft carrier fleet.

“The current Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) effort was completed this month with the highly successful shipboard autoland testing on USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71),” NAVAIR spokeswoman Marcia Hart said in a statement provided to USNI News. The core of the JPALS technology is an extremely precise ship-relative GPS-based system which is much more accurate than the existing pilot aids onboard the carrier.

The Navy had tested the JPALS onboard the USS George Bush (CVN-77) earlier in July to verify the system’s capability to support manual landings. The latest testing onboard the Roosevelt was to demonstrate the system’s ability to support automatic “hands-off” landings on board a carrier.

For the Navy, the development of the JPALS is the huge step forward for integrating new aircraft into the carrier air wing. “Legacy systems cannot support UAS [Unmanned Air Systems], and [the Lockheed Martin Joint Strike Fighter] F-35 was designed with JPALS capabilities. JPALS Increment 1 is based on ship relative GPS technology,” Hart said.

While the initial development is now complete, the Navy still has work to do to finish all seven increments of the JPALS capability. The system will also eventually support flight operations onboard amphibious assault ships and U.S. Air Force airfields.

NAVAIR’s immediate focus however will be to continue developmental work for supporting the F-35C and unmanned aircraft onboard a carrier. JPALS is particularly important for the Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) program.

While the Northrop Grumman X-47B Unmanned Combat Air System Demonstrator (UCAS-D) uses a similar prototype ship-relative GPS-based landing system technology, it is not the same system as an operationally deployable JPALS. “The program office continues development in support of the UCLASS and F-35 programs as well as multi-platform avionics integration,” Hart wrote.

The Navy will be the first service to field the new landing system on the F-35C. “Initial JPALS fielding is scheduled in support of F-35C first deployment,” Hart wrote. “However, sequestration and continuing resolution associated budget uncertainty will likely impact projected plans.”

Eventually, the USAF and the USMC will also use the JPALS for their operations."

http://news.usni.org/2013/11/22/navy-co ... ing-system

"CAPTION: An F/A-18C Hornet, assigned to the Salty Dogs of Strike Aircraft Test Squadron (VX)23, tests the Joint Precision Approach Landing System (JPALS) aboard the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71). US Navy Photo"

http://i2.wp.com/news.usni.org/wp-conte ... =624%2C415

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 30 Nov 2013, 04:50
by spazsinbad
HOW NOT TO SETUP ACLS....

STRIKE TEST NEWS Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 23 Newsletter 2013 Issue [produced 11 Oct 2013]
Precisions Approach and Landing System (PALS) Mode I Performance and Winds LCDR Pat “ WHO?” Bookey
"You’ve probably seen us borrowing your jets during CVN flight deck certifications and watched us zorch around low and fast conducting endless Mode I approaches. Our goal is to verify that the Improved Fresnel Lens Optical Landing System (IFLOLS), SPN-41 Instrument Carrier Landing System (ICLS) and SPN-46 Automatic Carrier Landing System (ACLS) function properly, are aligned with each other and lead the pilot to a good start. We leave your ship after having ensured that the systems, specifically Mode I, are operating correctly within certification limits and available for those rare but much needed times when the pilot is otherwise incapable of getting aboard on his/her own (low visibility, IFR in the cockpit, injury, etc.) These systems, specifically the ACLS, are aging, and although we at VX-23 do our best to ensure proper functionality, degradations to their performance can be expected over time. Because we only come out every two years for verifications and there is no clear replacement for ACLS in the near future, it falls on the ship and Airwing to recognize when the system is misbehaving and report it to us so we can evaluate and fix it. Sometimes there are hardware-related problems which need to be corrected, but sometimes we field concerns from the Airwing resulting from misconceptions regarding how the system is intended to function. This year, in an effort to educate the fleet on the Mode I, we’re going to focus on wind conditions, displayed wind sources and their effect on Mode I performance.

The wind over the deck (WOD) is measured from three anemometers on the ship (FWD, STBD, and PORT). These three anemometers feed the Moriah System, which is the wind display in PriFly and the bridge that is used to drive the ship to get recovery WOD. The Moriah display from the Mini Boss station allows the different anemometers to be selected individually. The FWD anemometer is at the top of the navigation pole to the right of catapult #1. The PORT and STBD anemometers are at the top of the mast on the island on outriggers on the port and starboard sides. Some ships still have the traditional “whirlybird” on the navigation pole, but it doesn’t feed Moriah. An actual anemometer looks like a three pronged fork with no moving parts that measures the wind magnitude and direction via sonic waves. I won’t get into the details on how that works, but it’s pretty accurate. In general, for all ships we have seen that the FWD anemometer provides the most accurate measurement of the WOD in the landing area (LA). The PORT and STBD winds do not display the most accurate winds because of the numerous obstructions to “clean” air flow that exist on the mast. We have seen these sensors differ from the FWD by as much as ten degrees in direction and six knots in magnitude. Each ship is different and the errors of the mast-mounted anemometers differ. Due to these observations, we recommend that the FWD anemometer be selected from the Mini Boss Moriah display for all fixed wing recoveries to ensure the most accurate display of winds to the bridge, PriFly and the LSO platform. The FWD can be manually selected or the AUTO function chosen, which will automatically choose the FWD anemometer while the ship is turned into the wind.

How does wind factor into Mode I performance? The first important concept to understand is that the ACLS does not use wind inputs from any anemometer in its computations of aircraft guidance through the datalink. The ACLS system merely commands corrections to deviations from commanded course (final bearing) via bank angle commands and glideslope via pitch attitude commands coupled with on-speed control through the autothrottles (ATC) in the aircraft. The second concept to understand is the expected performance of Mode I in high and/or starboard winds. As wind conditions increase in magnitude beyond ~35 kts or shift to more starboard component (> 4 kts STBD), Mode I performance will degrade as the burble gets stronger. Increasing burble strength translates to larger deviations from commanded course/glideslope and therefore larger corrections from the aircraft. In the Rhino, these large deviations and corrections tend to make the jet float and bolter, while the Hornet tends to settle into early wires during Mode Is in these adverse wind conditions. These are normal Mode I reactions to these conditions, so your best bet for successful Mode I is to ensure you know the actual WOD conditions in the LA.

VX-23 Carrier Suitability has seen several cases in the past few years in which ships were using the STBD anemometer as their standard wind source during fixed wing recoveries for various reasons. On one ship, the difference in wind direction/magnitude measured from the STBD anemometer to the actual WOD in the LA was large enough to create an adverse starboard wind condition strong enough to degrade Mode I performance to the point where the ship stopped flying them because they thought something was wrong. The winds displayed on Moriah measured from the STBD anemometer showed winds right down the angle, well within normal recovery winds. This particular instance resulted in rescue detachment from VX-23 meeting the ship on deployment. After extensive testing, we could not find anything wrong with the ACLS, switched the ship back to the FWD and Mode I performance improved back to our certification standards. We are currently evaluating the system on another ship that is using the STBD due to problems with their FWD anemometer. That ship is also reporting Mode I performance degradation. While the results from the evaluation are not yet complete, we are investigating the wind issue as a possible cause for degraded Mode I performance.

We field inquiries from ships and Airwings routinely with questions regarding possible degradations in Mode I performance. One of our first troubleshooting questions will be to identify which anemometer is being used. This is just one piece of the puzzle when troubleshooting the ACLS (aircraft ATC, beacons, SPN-46 radar dishes, computers, etc) and may not be the “smoking gun” causing problems. Hopefully a little better understanding of Mode I and the effect the WOD has on its performance will help manage expectations and better prepare the pilot and LSO for the anticipated deviations in adverse wind conditions. VX-23 is always available to discuss PALS performance. If you notice a trend of questionable Mode I performance, or experience even a single unsafe Mode I, please don’t hesitate to contact us."

http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcad/index ... oad&id=767 (PDF 1.8Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 08 Dec 2013, 11:56
by spazsinbad
Electromagnetic Catapults Are Emblematic Of U.S. Navy's All-Electric Era 07 Dec 2013 William Pentland
“In November, the U.S. Navy christened the first Ford-class aircraft carrier at Newport News Shipbuilding, marking the end of the beginning of for new era of naval warfare.

The USS Gerald Ford, which weighs more than 100,000 tons and spans a length of more than 1,000 feet, is the first of the U.S. Navy’s new generation of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, which are also called supercarriers. With a price tag of $13.7 billion, the Ford-class carrier is the most expensive military vessel built in the history of the world.

Equipped with two cutting-edge nuclear reactors, the carrier will be capable of producing 250% more electric power than previous carriers.

And it will need every one of those electrons to power what is perhaps the supercarrier’s most revolutionary technology (at least among those that are unclassified) – the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS).

General Atomics, the San Diego, CA CA +1.11%-based defense contractor, pioneered the EMALS for the Ford-class aircraft carriers.

The EMALS uses a 300-foot linear induction motor (LIM) catapults airplanes off the carrier at a speed of 150 miles per hour. The LIM, which is integrated in the flight-deck structure, converts electrical current into electromagnetic forces to launch aircraft with significantly more precision than the conventional steam-powered system. The enhanced precision allows EMALS to launch more kinds of aircraft, from heavy fighter jets to light unmanned aircraft.

Of the carrier’s many technological marvels, the EMALS is perhaps the most emblematic of the Navy’s planned all-electric ships.

The whole EMALS juggernaut depends on the delivery of massive 122 megajoule-jolts of electricity to catapult planes into the sky. The jolts are so huge that the EMALS includes an elaborate energy storage system to supplement power provided by the nuclear reactors. The system stores a staggering 400 megajoules on four disk alternators.

After launching an aircraft, the alternators can be recharged in only 45 seconds. The supercarrier will be able to launch 220 sorties per day, about 25% more air missions per day than the current carriers.

China’s military is reportedly in hot pursuit of its own EMALS.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/williampent ... ctric-era/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 08 Dec 2013, 13:22
by spazsinbad

U.S. Navy Completes JPALS Ship-Based EMD Phase

Unread postPosted: 03 Jan 2014, 20:23
by spazsinbad
U.S. Navy Completes JPALS Ship-Based EMD Phase AIN Defense Perspective 03 Jan 2014 Bill Carey
"The U.S. Navy recently completed engineering and manufacturing (EMD) development of the ship-based component of the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (Jpals). The EMD phase of Jpals Increment 1A for ship systems included auto landings by F/A-18C Hornets to the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt. The Increment 1B phase calls for integrating the system on aircraft.

Jpals is a GPS-based precision approach and landing system that will help ship- and land-based aircraft land in all weather conditions, providing guidance to 200 feet decision height and half-nautical-mile visibility. It is a tri-service program with multiple increments to include Air Force and Army requirements, eventually replacing “several aging and obsolete aircraft landing systems with a family of systems that is more affordable and will function in more operational environments,” according to the Department of Defense (DoD).

The Navy conducted EMD demonstrations aboard the Roosevelt from November 9 to 19, logging approximately 30 flight test hours and 60 completed autolands to the deck using two F/A-18Cs operated by its VX-23 air test and evaluation squadron. The jets were equipped with Jpals “functionally representative” test kits.

The Jpals ship system includes multiple racks of equipment inside the ship and multiple GPS and UHF antennas on the mast, according to the Naval Air Systems Command (Navair), the contracting authority for sea-based Jpals. The system includes integrated processing, maintenance and monitoring systems and redundant UHF datalinks, inertial sensors and GPS sensors to achieve high reliability and availability. “Jpals is networked with legacy shipboard landing systems, but is capable of operating independently of those systems,” Navair said.

Arinc, which served as lead technical contractor to the Navy during technology development of the system, said Jpals will integrate with the AN/TPX-42 air traffic control console, the AN/SPN-46 automatic carrier landing system, the AN/SPN-41 instrument landing system, the landing signal officer display system, the improved Fresnel lens optical landing system, the aviation data management and control system, and the Moriah Wind System. Last year, Rockwell Collins acquired Arinc....

...Future development efforts are focused on supporting integration of Jpals with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and on improving support for unmanned aircraft systems, Navair said."


CAPTION: "The Navy’s VX-23 air test and evaluation squadron flew 60 autolands to the deck of the USS Theodore Roosevelt using the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System. (Photo: Navair)"
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... -emd-phase

http://www.ainonline.com/sites/default/ ... jpals2.jpg

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2014, 03:17
by popcorn
What's with all the decals on the Hornet?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2014, 04:30
by spazsinbad
These same decals in different places are on some of the weapon drop F-35s so that cameras recording from various angles are able to reconstruct parameters from known positions. Don't know if these decals required for JPALS but they might if side cameras are recording touchdowns for accuracy and glideslope angle, for example. I saw a pic of an F-35 with all these decals but did not save it. :doh:

VX-23 is Strike Test NAS Patuxent River, so their Hornets must be used a lot for this purpose (not just JPALS).

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2014, 05:55
by popcorn
Ahhh.. mystery solved.. :salute:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jan 2014, 14:28
by spazsinbad
I'll find a much better photo of the dotty F-35 seen recently meanwhile here is a fuzzy dotty foto:

https://d262ilb51hltx0.cloudfront.net/m ... R8kFA.jpeg

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jan 2014, 15:08
by popcorn
Even the missile is dotted.. :)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 01 Feb 2014, 11:38
by spazsinbad
NAVAIR Flight Ready: Joint Precision Approach and Landing System 29 Jan 2014 NAVAIRSYSCOM
"Engineers at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md., discuss the successful evolution of the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS). Learn more about this innovative technology from inception to the first shipboard landing on USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71)."


"TRANSCRIPT: Capt. Darrell Lack/Program Manager, PMA-213, NAVAIR Air Traffic Management Systems Program Office
Shawn Faubion/Deputy Program Manager for Landing Systems, PMA-213; Paul Sousa/Assistant Manager for Test & Evaluation, JPALS; Dave Crawford/ Lead Test Engineer, JPALS

Faubion: JPALS is a precision approach and landing system based on GPS technology. Instead of the historically radar and beacon based landing systems which the navy and marine corps are currently using. It is intended to bring a capability and flexibility that those legacy landing systems don’t offer and also an interoperability that could be used across, eventually, ship, shore, manned, unmanned, fixed and rotary wing aircraft.

Lack: JPALS in the future is primarily going to be in the F-35 B and C models for the Navy and Marine Corps and also the UCLAS Unmanned air systems. It utilizes the existing GPS constellation it brings those signals in, does mathematical computations between two assets, and aircraft and then a ship, and it calculates a touch-down point onto an aircraft carrier deck.

Crawford: There was a lot of preparation to get ready for what was our very successful period on the boat. A lot of that started back in the September, October time frame here at Pax River. We did conduct a large number of F/A-18 flights here shore based and built our way down from elevated touch downs to ultimately touchdowns to the deck here and all of that was in preparation to say we were ready to go do work on the boat.

Faubion: Patuxent River with its lab facilities allows us to demonstrate that JPALS can be integrated onto the ship in a very controlled fashion and we can demonstrate that without the risk, uncertainty and cost of actually being on the ship at the time.

Sousa: The latest at-sea testing was conducted aboard Theodore Roosevelt, CVN-71. We had two F-18 jets out there instrumented for JPALS, with the JPALS airborne system installed as well as the ship board system installed on the ship.

Lack: We had over 50 precision approaches and landings, the performance that we saw it was landing precisely where we were asking it to land, where it had been programmed to land and the pilot reports that came back it was very gentle, it was a gentle landing. It acted just like, if you will, just like the legacy systems; over all it was a very good success.

Fabuion: We’ve proven out that the ship system can provide the ability to land an air vehicle hands-off. We are going to be making some improvements over the next year or two to the JPALS ship system and to the software that’s going to be running in the air system so that it will have that degree of safety without a pilot in the loop.

Crawford: We had something that was good for us in this and that we kept it simple, we tried to use things we had done in the past to decide that we could work towards it at the ship and I think that helped us.

Sousa: It was a very pleasant experience to see, not only the system work the way it did, but the whole team, the JPALS, the program office, the test team, engineering, everybody working together along with the contractor; I think it was a very good evolution at sea. >>>out<<<"

Shown from screenshots: Instrumented / Marked JPALS Hornet and the View From the HUD - on speed (optimum AoA), on centreline and on the ball....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6q49h_dC0U


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2014, 06:41
by spazsinbad
Naval Aviation Vision 2014-2025
"...Magic Carpet
Magic Carpet is an acronym for Maritime Augmented Guidance with Integrated Controls for Carrier Approach and Recovery Precision Enabling Technologies. It is a cockpit system that makes carrier approaches and landings easier and safer for Navy and Marine Corps pilots by reducing the vulnerabilities associated with fully-automated systems that are susceptible to jamming, poor reliability, and electronic failure. Magic Carpet’s integrated direct lift improves short-term flightpath response, which is critical to final glide slope corrections prior to landing. This system is currently flown in the F-35C and being retrofitted for testing in the F/A-18E/F. The potential cost-saving impacts of Magic Carpet are significant. Millions of dollars are spent yearly on landing practices ashore and actual carrier qualifications while underway. The money saved could be repurposed to train pilots to employ the weapon systems of their aircraft, dramatically changing their priorities from landing proficiency to warfighting proficiency. Conservative estimates indicate that Magic Carpet could save tens of millions of dollars per year, which include reducing the maintenance and repairs after hard landings aboard ship...."

SOURCE: http://www.scribd.com/doc/218758281/Nav ... n#download (11Mb PDF)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 17 Apr 2014, 22:34
by spazsinbad
Navy Ford (CVN-78) Class Aircraft Carrier Program: Background and Issues for Congress
Ronald O'Rourke, Specialist in Naval Affairs 09 Apr 2014

"...JPALS [Joint Precision Approach and Landing System]
• The Navy has proposed to the USD(AT&L) Milestone Decision Authority that the program be restructured from its current, land- and sea-based, multiple-increment structure to a single increment focusing on sea-based requirements primarily supporting JSF [Joint Strike Fighter; aka F-35] and future Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike aircraft. Under this proposed restructuring scheme, there will be no retrofitting of JPALS on legacy aircraft and the Navy will need to maintain both the legacy approach and landing system and JPALS onboard each aircraft-capable ship.

JSF
• The arresting hook system remains an integration risk as the JSF development schedule leaves no time for discovering new problems. The redesigned tail hook has an increased downward force as well as sharper design that may induce greater than anticipated wear on the flight deck.

• JSF noise levels remain moderate to high risk in JSF integration and will require modified carrier flight deck procedures.

- Flight operations normally locate some flight deck personnel in areas where double hearing protection would be insufficient during F-35 operations. To partially mitigate noise concerns, the Navy will procure new hearing protection with active noise reduction for flight deck personnel.

- Projected noise levels one level below the flight deck (03 level), which includes mission planning spaces, will require at least single hearing protection that will make mission planning difficult. The Navy is working to mitigate the effects of the increased noise levels adjacent to the flight deck.

• Storage of the JSF engine is limited to the hangar bay, which will affect hangar bay operations. The impact on the JSF logistics footprint is not yet known.

• Lightning protection of JSF aircraft while on the flight deck will require the Navy to modify nitrogen carts to increase their capacity. Nitrogen is used to fill fuel tank cavities while aircraft are on the flight deck.

• JSF remains unable to share battle damage assessment and non-traditional Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance information captured on the aircraft portable memory device or cockpit voice recorder in real-time. In addition, the CVN-78 remains unable to receive and display imagery transmitted through Link 16 because of bandwidth limitations. These capability gaps were identified in DOT&E’s FY12 Annual Report. The Combatant Commanders have requested these capabilities to enhance decision-making...."

SOURCE: http://www.scribd.com/document_download ... ension=pdf (6.6Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 Apr 2014, 08:46
by spazsinbad
Two U.S. arms programs face live-or-die reviews after costs jump 18 Apr 2014 Andrea Shalal

"...a precision ship-landing system built by Raytheon Co face mandatory reviews that could lead to their cancellation after quantity reductions drove unit costs sharply higher in 2013, the Pentagon announced on Thursday....

...The cut in quantities of Raytheon's Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) came after the Army and Air Force decided to pull out of the joint program, which resulted in the need for 10 fewer shore-based training systems, the report said.

The cost increase in the JPALS program also was partly due to an extension in the development program aimed at increasing the capability of the system, and higher material costs...."

Source: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/04/1 ... II20140417

_______________________

After a while this all becomes double dutch due to sequestration effects - but the law is the law and the US Congress must be obeyed eh. IF It is not the SAR then so what it is some GAO report of recent vintage anyway....

Joint Precision Approach and Landing System Increment 1A (JPALS Inc 1A) Mar 2014 pages 85-86 (numbered)

JPALS Increment 1 is a Navy-led program to develop a GPS-based aircraft landing system to replace current radar-based systems on its ships. It is designed to provide reliable precision approach and landing capability in adverse environmental conditions and improved interoperability. Increment 1A is the ship-based system and increment 1B will integrate JPALS with sea-based aircraft. Both are needed to provide the full capability. We assessed increment 1A and made comments on increments 1B, 2, and other follow-on efforts.

JPALS Increment 1A's two critical technologies are mature and have been demonstrated in a realistic environment. Program officials reported completing baseline software development as of April 2012. The program began system-level development testing in July 2012 and sea-based testing in December 2012. The program completed 108 integrated flight tests with no major anomalies reported. Increment 1A's production decision scheduled for November 2013 was cancelled due to budget reductions, with a new date to be determined. Ship availability delays for installation and procurement changes resulted in schedule and cost breaches, respectively, of thresholds in the program's baseline. Increment 1B is scheduled to start system development in 2015. Lead responsibility for Increment 2, land-based JPALS, transferred from the Air Force to the Navy beginning in fiscal year 2014....

...Other Program Issues
The program's production decision, scheduled for November 2013, was cancelled and a new date has yet to be determined. Program officials stated that budget reductions due to sequestration eliminated funding for the low-rate initial production contract. They noted that a new date will not be scheduled until the Navy resolves this funding issue. The program previously delayed the production decision from May 2013 to November 2013 because the aircraft carrier needed to conduct ship-based integrated testing was not available for installation. As a result, the program reported a schedule breach of the acquisition program baseline.The program also extended planned production to avoid acquiring systems earlier than needed and moved the purchase of one unit from development to procurement. These changes increased procurement costs and resulted in a cost breach of a threshold set in the acquisition baseline.

System development for JPALS Increment 1B— which will integrate JPALS with sea-based aircraft— is scheduled for 2015. Program officials stated that increment 1B will be developed to provide JPALS functionality in a packaged way that allows for integration with any aircraft rather than tailoring efforts to each individual platform. Increment 2 is the land-based version of JPALS and system development is scheduled for 2015. Beginning with fiscal year 2014, lead service responsibility for JPALS Increment 2 transferred from the Air Force to the Navy.

Program officials stated that the recently conducted successful auto-land demonstrations may allow for the incorporation of capabilities planned for future increments. Incorporating auto-land and unmanned aerial vehicle capabilities into increments 1A and 1B will provide enabling technology for the Navy's future ship classes and the Unmanned Carrier- Launched Surveillance and Strike program for which JPALS was selected as the primary landing system.

Program Office Comments
In commenting on a draft of this assessment, the JPALS program office noted that it concurred with our review and that flight testing was highly successful and the system performed as intended with no significant design or performance issues identified to date. The program is working aggressively with the Navy and the Office of Secretary of Defense to resolve the cost and schedule breaches, and anticipates corrective actions will be incorporated in the fiscal year 2015 President's budget submission. The progam office also provided technical comments, which were incorporated where deemed appropriate."

Source: http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/662184.pdf (11Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 Apr 2014, 09:30
by spazsinbad
Department of Defense Selected Acquisition Reports (SARs) (As of December 31, 2013) 17 Apr 2014

"...A. Nunn-McCurdy Unit Cost Breaches for 2013...

...Critical Breaches: (Unit cost increases of 25 percent or more to the current APB or of 50 percent or more to the original APB)

Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) Increment 1A– The PAUC increased 104.3 percent and the APUC increased 129.0 percent above the current APB, due to the elimination of 10 previously required shore-based training systems. Also contributing to the unit cost increases were an extension of the development program to include capability improvements, a lower and longer procurement profile, and higher material costs."

Source: http://www.defense.gov/releases/release ... seid=16644

http://www.defense.gov/pubs/SAR_SUMMARY ... _FINAL.pdf (0.8Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2014, 09:19
by spazsinbad
OLD News with slant....

Navy Restructures JPALS To Focus On F-35, UCLASS; Scraps Plans For Increment 2 DefenseAlert - 25 Apr 2014

"The Navy has overhauled plans for its Joint Precision Approach and Landing System, reducing near-term spending spending by $1 billion, cutting procurement by 27 percent and accelerating development to support the Joint Strike Fighter and the Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike System, according to service officials...."

SOURCE: http://defensenewsstand.com/index.php?o ... Itemid=412

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2014, 22:48
by neptune
Navy to Test Electromagnetic Catapult on Carrier
by Kris Osborn on May 13, 2014

The Navy is preparing to launch the first ship-board tests of a new Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System designed to replace steam catapults and propel fighter jets and other aircraft off the deck of an aircraft carrier and into the sky over the ocean, service officials said.

The EMALS system, which uses an electromagnetic field to propel aircraft instead of the currently used steam catapult, is slated for the new Ford-class aircraft carriers. The first EMALS system has been under construction for several years aboard the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), the first in class of the new carriers expected to deliver to the Navy in 2016, Navy officials said. This summer, the Navy will start incremental testing on board the USS Ford wherein “dead loads” placed on weighted sleds are catapulted by the EMALS system into the river, said Capt. Jim Donnelly, program manager for aircraft launch and recovery equipment. “As things get connected they will increase the number of tests.

[...]

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2014/05/13/navy- ... more-22923


:)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2014, 23:05
by spazsinbad
Thanks for putting in the paragraphs 'neppie' - otherwise on the URL just a wall of HTML text - and pay 'em peanuts! :devil:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2014, 23:13
by Lieven
spazsinbad wrote:Thanks for putting in the paragraphs 'neppie' - otherwise on the URL just a wall of HTML text - and pay 'em peanuts! :devil:


Sorry, I shortened the excerpt before I noticed the URL to which is referred contains that' wall of text'. Anyway, we can just copy full articles from other sites. It's best to pick a few paragraphs to which you want to comment or which you would like to highlight.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2014, 23:24
by spazsinbad
'Lieven' seems like a "NOT" is missing from your text above?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 Jun 2014, 20:36
by spazsinbad
Navy’s newest aircraft launch system goes retro
18 Jun 2014 PEO(T) Public Affairs

"NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. — The past and future overlapped recently on a land-based test site at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey, when the near-silent armature of the U.S. Navy’s new Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) propelled an F/A-18C Hornet.

EMALS — the newest carrier catapult technology in 60 years — completed the second and final phase of aircraft compatibility testing (ACT) this spring with the first-ever launches of the legacy Hornet, that marked the 35th anniversary of its inaugural flight last year....

...“The successful manned-aircraft test launches replicated various carrier situations to demonstrate that the catapult would provide the required aircraft end-speed and to validate EMALS launch-critical reliability,” said George Sulich, EMALS integrated test team lead.

The first phase of ACT successfully ended in fall 2011 with 134 manned aircraft launches, comprising the F/A-18E Super Hornet, T-45C Goshawk, C-2A Greyhound, E-2D Advanced Hawkeye and F-35C Lightning II.

ACT phase two, which concluded April 6, included launches of the EA-18G Growler and F/A-18C Hornet, and another round of launches with the current carrier-deployed aircraft that completed ACT phase one.

The program office concluded ACT with 452 manned launches and, for the last several months, has been busy delivering the final components of the system to CVN 78...."

Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=5668

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 03 Jul 2014, 08:46
by spazsinbad
On Page 4 of this thread: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=233955&hilit=DCAP#p233955

Is the DCAP story - here is another video that perhaps explains it simply?

MIT researchers aim to improve aircraft carrier efficiency
Aug 16, 2011

"The DCAP system helps humans and computers work together to improve military operations."


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Jul 2014, 09:15
by spazsinbad
MAGIC CARPET is mentioned a few times in this thread (fewer in some others) so I thought to park it here. The MIDDLE bit has been left out (because I'm not able to copy/paste ALL of any article) so best read it at source. This middle bit is a bit muddled in my view but may sail over the heads of others. YMMV. I'll gladly explain my misgivings but there you go - mods rool man.
Flight-Control Advances Promise Big Savings
New U.S./U.K.-developed flight-control technology might make carrier landings easier
A version of this article appears in the June 30 edition of Aviation Week & Space Technology.
03 Jul 2014 Bill Sweetman | Aviation Week & Space Technology


"New flight-control and guidance technology developed by the U.S. Navy and British researchers has been shown to allow carrier fighter pilots to land more accurately and consistently, and will be applied to both the Boeing Super Hornet/Growler and the Lockheed Martin F‑35C Joint Strike Fighter.

Developers of the technology predict it will reduce the number of training landings needed to qualify pilots for carrier operations and reduce fatigue on airframes.

Magic Carpet could sharply reduce the number of FLCPs needed to keep pilots qualified for carrier ops.

In the case of the F-35C, the new system—known as Maritime Augmented Guidance with Integrated Controls for Carrier Approach and Recovery Precision Enabling Technologies, or Magic Carpet — was shown in simulator tests to reduce pilot workload from borderline-acceptable levels to “minimal,” and it will be installed for the fighter’s long-delayed carrier trials later this year. Magic Carpet has been installed and tested without any hardware changes....

...Both the basic F/A-18E/F and F-35C flight-control systems had provision for direct lift control, but the innovation in Magic Carpet is to add the Delta Path mode. In simulator tests at BAE Systems’ Warton, England, site, the workload for an F-35C carrier landing was reduced from a Cooper-Harper handling qualities rating of 6 (extensive pilot workload), to 2 (minimal pilot workload), according to a Navy document.

A second element of Magic Carpet will help pilots fly through the “burble” of turbulent air behind a moving carrier. The inertial reference system and attitude sensors can be used to provide micro-corrections before the pilot can react—responding to a 0.1g departure in as little as 0.4 sec.

Magic Carpet originated at the U.S. Naval Air Warfare Center’s aircraft division (Nawcad) at the Patuxent River, Maryland, flight-test center. Team leader James Denham, a senior engineer at Nawcad, tells Aviation Week that the idea stemmed from tests of the Qinetiq-modified Vectored-thrust Aircraft Advanced Control (VAAC) Harrier aboard the U.K.’s aircraft carrier Illustrious, aimed at developing a shipboard rolling vertical landing mode for the F-35B.

Denham proposed a system that would give other aircraft the same rate-command flight-control capability demonstrated on the VAAC Harrier, and obtained some “seed money” from the Office of Naval Research to conduct some simulation research. The results justified follow-on funds from ONR to develop control laws for the Super Hornet, leading to flight tests in 2012....

...Boeing is under contract to build Magic Carpet functions into the Super Hornet/Growler operational flight program (OFP) with the goal of making it available to the fleet in 2018. The first phase is to build a fully certifiable OFP modification, which will start tests at Patuxent River in the fall of 2014 and undergo sea trials in early 2015. That is to be followed by a second phase that adds the “anti-burble” stabilization mode head-up display symbology and integrates the air data and inertial systems more fully."

Source: http://aviationweek.com/defense/flight- ... ig-savings

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 Nov 2014, 02:39
by spazsinbad
An OLD description of JPALS - worthwhile however - predictions in text for deployment will not be correct now (see above).
SHIP SUITABILITY PRECISION APPROACH AND LANDING SYSTEM (PALS)
[VX-23 Strike Test News 2010] Lt Daniel “Butters” Radocaj

"...JOINT PRECISION APPROACH AND LANDING SYSTEM (JPALS)
Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) is a GPS based system that will be the replacement for the current ACLS/SPN-46 system. Unlike the SPN-46 that uses radar on the boat to track an aircraft, JPALS works by comparing the GPS position of the carrier and the GPS position of the aircraft. A relative navigation (Rel Nav) solution is calculated and displayed as guidance in the cockpit. Initial tests were conducted in 2000 with an F-18 to prove that the concept worked. JPALS should IOC in 2014 and will start to be retrofitted on Hornets. H-60’s and E-2D’s should start to see it in 2017. It will be the only approach guidance on NUCAS (Navy Unmanned Combat Air System) and the F-35. Every carrier will be equipped by 2024.

How is it better? It will be GPS based and is jam resistant. Instead of an operator in CATCC having to lock up an aircraft with the SPN-46 radar, only a data link between the ship and aircraft needs to be established making the system more reliable. This link will be established when the aircraft gets within 200 miles of the carrier, not at 5 miles behind the ship prior to tip over. The linked Rel Nav solution will also act like a TACAN and give ships position out to 200 miles. The link transmission, like MIDS, uses spread spectrum transmissions so it does not give away position and can be used during EMCON conditions. Mode I approaches will also be more accurate. The SPN-46 radar loses the aircraft at the round down. Past the round down glide slope guidance is basically an average of the last few seconds of the flight path. That is why during a Mode I the hornet freezes control input commands in the last 2 seconds before touchdown. The JPALS GPS guidance will be accurate all the way to touchdown. The Air Force and Army are funding a ground based JPALS system that can be easily setup at any airfield giving the Hornet an actual precision approach besides a PAR.

How will it affect me? With no need for interaction with an operator in CATCC, JPALS may be available during Case I approaches providing better gouge through the approach turn than the ICLS. Drop locks at 3 miles should not be a problem anymore; if you have JPALS in Marshall you’ll have it on final. The pickle switch on the platform will be connected to the data link and transmitted to the aircraft providing a true “W/O” discrete in the HUD and the ability to wave off a UAV. The ships final bearing will also be automatically linked to the aircraft and instantaneously updated in the cockpit, greatly enhancing SA to which direction the ship is turning while we are trying to land.

The mechanization and cockpit displays are still in the design phase. Do we want it to look just like ACLS or ICLS? Is it going to be called needles, bullseye, or _______? Should final bearing automatically be set as a course line? Is there a better way than the old way to do business? As fleet operators and LSO’s if you have any suggestions or ideas please let us know. In a few years JPALS will be a great tool to help us get the Air Wing aboard safely."

Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcad/index ... oad&id=824 (2.8Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2015, 07:18
by spazsinbad
It is EMALS time with a twist (water wize?) but anyways....
Amid Criticism, US Navy Confident in New Arresting Gear System for Next Carrier
03 Jan 2015 Christopher P. Cavas

"WASHINGTON — A host of new technologies and systems will begin to enter service when the new aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) is delivered in the first half of 2016, and for over a decade it's been a good question whether all the new whiz-bang technology will be ready in time.....

[Then lots of lahdedahs]

...GAO also raised concerns about reliability of both the EMALS and AAG systems. But certifying system reliability, Tedford pointed out, can be difficult to prove before a system is installed.

"Reliability comes from a significant number of cycles on any system, it is statistics-based," Tedford said. "So you have to have hundreds of thousands of cycles in order to achieve system reliability. And the way that reliability growth is established is, it's not just from the system installed at Lakehurst, it's in combination with the ship and the second ship of class, and the third ship of class over time. So it was never in our program, as a requirement or anything else, in order to meet threshold reliability for either system when the ship delivered, simply because it is not possible to get there statistically."

The single EMALS catapult at Lakehurst, he pointed out, "is as close as we can get to the ship-based system on land, but it is not a four-catapult, identical system to what they have on CVN 78. Plus, realize that the testing that we do has been just that — it has been developmental testing. We are trying to find faults in the system. We are trying to find where it fails. That is the point. We are not intentionally doing reliability testing, which would be part of the envelope — repetitive, the same test point over and over and over again — to build reliability. That actually is in the next phase of the test program that kicks off later this year."

Tedford admits challenges remain, but he declared confidence.

"Both of these systems work," he said. "EMALS is on a great trajectory right now, and advanced arresting gear is on a similar vector.

"We are very excited," he added."

Twister of Water graphic: http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/7626b13 ... 010514.jpg

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /21119327/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2015, 07:22
by Corsair1963
I have heard the F-35C is the easiest and safest Naval Fighter ever to bring aboard the boat.....It that true???

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2015, 07:31
by spazsinbad
Wot I have read is here: viewtopic.php?f=57&t=26634&p=281716&hilit=carefree#p281716

Starting from the 'carefree' comment and READING BACKWARDS (earlier pages) from there you will read many good comments. Why would you not pose your question on that forum thread?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2015, 16:05
by maus92
Corsair1963 wrote:I have heard the F-35C is the easiest and safest Naval Fighter ever to bring aboard the boat.....It that true???



You need a lot more than several dozen landings in calm weather to determine comparative safety - like years more - but the Navy test pilots were consistently grabbing the 3 wire with no unintentional bolters in the 1st of three sea trial periods - not too shabby. The F-35 FCS (and the imminent "Magic Carpet" software upgrade for Super Hornets) allows for dynamic "scheduling" of the flaperons to activity manage lift, which in conjunction with auto throttle(s) helps the pilot maintain optimum AoA for carrier landings. The "Magic Carpet" upgrade was developed from work on the F-35 program.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2015, 17:46
by sferrin
Waiting for, "The F-35 is flawed as it will require replacing the 3-wire more frequently than any other aircraft in history."

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2015, 19:02
by optimist
Corsair1963 wrote:I have heard the F-35C is the easiest and safest Naval Fighter ever to bring aboard the boat.....It that true???

google magic carpet, both the f18 and f35 are getting/got new flight control systems

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2015, 19:44
by spazsinbad
'optimist' said: "google magic carpet, both the f18 and f35 are getting/got new flight control systems". NOPE. :mrgreen: Just read the thread I indicated - and any others that are pointed to from that thread - which will include the very long now 'Lakehurst' thread etc. GO HERE for the 'weather forecast' on that other thread (thanks 'maus92' for the mention): viewtopic.php?f=57&t=26634&p=283705&hilit=SGOT#p283705

PROBABLY all the relevant info about the F-35C 'delta flight path' with IDLC and the SuperbHorny 'magic carpet' (for those carpet munchers :devil: ) is in the 'how to deck land' PDFs recently uploaded as indicated on the more appropriate thread indicated recently earlier but then again why bother to download it when all that info in on the threads anyway. At least in these PDFs it is all in one easily referenced place and that is what I go to when puzzled. :mrgreen:

These large PDFs can be word searched, or via the bookmarks navigated, so finding info in the plethora of info is easy. Use the latest version of Adobe Reader suitable for your OS however. And... these downloads are free.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2015, 21:05
by spazsinbad
So much for 'maus92' WIND in the Willows benign Weather phantasies. Go here for more but relevant WX windage excerpts here below from more at: viewtopic.php?f=57&t=26634&p=282114&hilit=wind#p282114 AT END of this aforementioned thread the entire article may be downloaded in PDF format (who'da thunk?).
Cats, Traps & a Rooster Tail
Dec 2014 Mark Ayton Air International

"[Cdr Shawn Kern is the Director of Test and Evaluation for F-35 Naval Variants and the senior military member within the F-35 Integrated Test Force (ITF) based at Patuxent River] He told AIR International: “Launch testing included minimum catapult end speed determination as well as performance and handling during high and low energy catapult launches and crosswind conditions at representative aircraft gross weights. Approach and recovery testing focused on aircraft performance and handling qualities during off-nominal recoveries in low, medium, high and crosswind wind conditions. Data and analysis from DT I will support the development of initial aircraft launch and recovery bulletins for F-35C carrier operations and Naval Air Training and Operating Procedures Standardisation (NATOPS) flight manual procedures. Test results from DT I will also influence follow-on developmental and operational testing required to achieve F-35C initial operational capability....

...[Lt Cdr Ted Dyckman said:] “When the weather started to deteriorate we had such confidence in how the aircraft was flying that we lowered the weather minimums to those used by the fleet. I knew that when I lowered the hook I was going to trap. That says a lot for the airplane.”...

......evaluated approaches with crosswinds behind the ship out to 7kts....

...“We also evaluated approach handling qualities in low and high wind conditions: low is 10 to 20kt, nominal is 20 to 30kt and high is in excess of 30kt. The team’s goal for DT I was to gain as much data with cross winds and various head winds to allow us to start writing our aircraft launch and recovery bulletins.”...
&
OPERATIONAL TESTER
Cdr Christian Sewell is a test pilot assigned to a detachment of Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 9 (VX-9) ‘Vampires’ from Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake in California based at Naval Air Station Patuxent River in Maryland. The unit is the US Navy’s fast jet operational test squadron. Cdr Sewell works as a liaison officer between the operational test (OT) and developmental test (DT) teams. He told AIR International: “I update the OT community (including the Joint Operational Test Team at Edwards Air Force Base, California) on the status of DT testing, current air system performance, deficiencies and developments to aid them in their OT test design and planning. Conversely, as a developmental test pilot with OT experience, I aid the DT test team [the F-35 ITF at Pax River] in identifying issues that may pose problems during operational testing before the jet reaches an OT period. The goal is to identify areas that may affect operational effectiveness and suitability early in the programme so they can be addressed, hopefully leading to successful OT periods and fleet introduction.

“Carrier suitability is extremely important to the navy’s OT community. My participation in DT I was undertaken from an operational tester and a fleet operator’s points of view to help ensure the F-35C is suitable for its intended operational environment, the aircraft carrier. Information gained from DT I will be used to help plan F-35 OT test periods embarked onboard an aircraft carrier.”...
&
ENGINEERING MASTER
Tom Briggs was designated Chief Test Engineer for development test and oversees the execution of testing and approving any required changes to the test plan or the conduct of testing from an engineering perspective.

As Chief Test Engineer, he helped prepare the ITF team (comprising more than 230 people from the F-35 ITF and the crew of the USS Nimitz) for testing at sea and helped co-ordinate the expectations of the ship’s crew as to what would be tested and how planned testing would integrate with their operations.

Tom told AIR International: “The main test points were to verify that the F-35C’s approach handling qualities were satisfactory across a variety of wind conditions; to determine its launch characteristics and performance from all four of the ship’s catapults and across a variety of wind conditions; to look at the integration of the aircraft with the ship both on the flight deck and in the hangar bay; and to test the ability of the F-35C to use the ship’s flight-related systems to perform inertial alignments, instrument approaches and basic navigation to and from the ship.

“Use of the aircraft’s sensors and its fuel dump function were also tested. Data obtained from the tests will now be analysed to support the overall verification of the F-35C against the Joint Contract Specification as well as developing the initial aircraft launch bulletins and verifying that the initial aircraft recovery bulletins are satisfactory.”..."

Source: pp 42-47 Air International December 2014

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Jan 2015, 23:51
by popcorn
Bee beats C for ease of landing. :D

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jan 2015, 00:13
by spazsinbad
Agree. STOP and LAND

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jan 2015, 01:08
by optimist
spazsinbad wrote:'optimist' said: "google magic carpet, both the f18 and f35 are getting/got new flight control systems". NOPE. :mrgreen: Just read the thread I indicated - and any others that are pointed to from that thread - which will include the very long now 'Lakehurst' thread etc. GO HERE for the 'weather forecast' on that other thread (thanks 'maus92' for the mention): viewtopic.php?f=57&t=26634&p=283705&hilit=SGOT#p283705

PROBABLY all the relevant info about the F-35C 'delta flight path' with IDLC and the SuperbHorny 'magic carpet' (for those carpet munchers :devil: ) is in the 'how to deck land' PDFs recently uploaded as indicated on the more appropriate thread indicated recently earlier but then again why bother to download it when all that info in on the threads anyway. At least in these PDFs it is all in one easily referenced place and that is what I go to when puzzled. :mrgreen:

These large PDFs can be word searched, or via the bookmarks navigated, so finding info in the plethora of info is easy. Use the latest version of Adobe Reader suitable for your OS however. And... these downloads are free.

I was being lazy and thought if they googled this site and magic carpet, they would have found your video with the new flight control system and the sim landing

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jan 2015, 01:24
by spazsinbad
You think I speke funi? Have a listen to the 'dirty hinge' (who apparently has just had a lobotomy according to his JO) 'put the thing on the thing' - forFsake! :mrgreen: Spekin Funni is an old Naval Tradition going back to the Royal Navy where it is known as 'JackSpeak'. It continued in the RAN and of course the Fleet Air Arms add their own twists. Usually one makes it up on the fly - especially if you want to swear and speak about things in 'not cleared' company - it can be taxing but fun.

:devil: Then there is 'GUMS' spekin & spelin funi - so I guess the USAF have their ways. :devil:



Then for the F-35C 'deltaFlitePath' diehards:



Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 07 Jan 2015, 04:24
by spazsinbad
I keep forgetting about the side stick myself (never used one). This F-35 side stick would take some getting used to for the' centre stick only otherwise USN' - but they'll get there - along with adjusting to the quirks of the HMDS.
Delivery of first fleet F-35C starts countdown to debut
(NAVY TIMES 08 JUL 2013) Mark D. Faram

"On the morning of June 22, Lt. Cmdr. Christopher Tabert became a part of naval aviation history....

...‘Flies Beautifully’
Tabert, a test pilot, is one of the Navy’s most experienced pilots in the JSF, with more than 130 hours of stick time to date. He was the first military pilot to fly all three F-35 variants— Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy — and was involved in the initial tests of the Navy and Marine versions at Patuxent River, Md., before reporting to VFA-101 in February.

As the Navy’s most experienced F-35 pilot, it’s his job to get the squadron’s other pilots — nearly all with 3,000-plus hours flying F/A-18s off carrier decks — up to speed as instructor pilots.

“It’s not a difficult airplane to fly,” Tabert said. “The systems and the sensors are very new and state of the art.”

One main difference between the Lightning II and previous Navy fighters is the placement of the control stick, used to steer the aircraft.

“This is the first ‘side stick’ control [carrier-based] aircraft the Navy has,” he said. “That’s a little bit different than the center-stick Hornet we came from. They did a great job aligning it and the aircraft flies beautifully.”

Another improvement, he said, is the helmet-integrated head-up display, or HUD, which gives pilots their most critical information such as speed and altitude without requiring them to look down. The F/A-18 Hornet’s HUD rests on top of the cockpit’s front panel.

Though Tabert said it took a little getting used to, having the display in the helmet “saves you time in making important decisions that in legacy airplanes you may have to take a second to look down,” he said. “It makes flying better and makes you a more lethal war fighter.”...

Source: http://hrana.org/news/2013/07/navy-jsf-arriving/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 07 Jan 2015, 15:54
by lamoey
spazsinbad wrote:I keep forgetting about the side stick myself (never used one). This F-35 side stick would take some getting used to for the' centre stick only otherwise USN' - but they'll get there - along with adjusting to the quirks of the HMDS.


Back in 83ish two USN F-4 aviators came by the F-16 I was working on in a hangar at RNoAF's Bodø AFB. They told me they were about to convert to FA-18 and wondered if they could have a "tour" of the cockpit. They both got to sit and try the leaned back seat and side stick controller. I can't remember their reaction too well, but they did do a few oh ahh's.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 07 Jan 2015, 19:26
by jbgator
Transitioning to a side stick controller is not difficult. My experience is that the more experience in a conventional aircraft the more likely issues will arise but they are minor. I always briefed a student on TR-1 (first transition ride in the two seater) about a tendency to "wave at the tower on takeoff" as we termed it. We had learned by experience that rotation with a conventional stick is accomplished by a forearm movement whereas the side stick is manipulated entirely with the wrist. As a result, an experienced aviator often pulled back and to the side with the forearm on rotation causing the jet to rotate and roll left. Some pilots got in a roll PIO as a result hence "waving at the tower". Of all my TR-1 students I only had one do it because I pre-briefed them to avoid it. He was a former F-4 IP with lots of time in the Phantom. He sorted it out fairly quickly and had no other problems with it. We did have a problem with him expecting me to change the radios for him from the back seat. He kept transmitting on the old frequency after a freq change. After flight I asked him why. He said the WSO always changed the radio. I told him he needed to learn to fly on his own now w/o a WSO to carry him. I never had a B-course student (fresh out of pilot training) have any problem with the stick, nor do I recall any issues myself when I went through the B-course. I never had any problems later when I went to fly the F-4, nor when I returned to the F-16 again two years later.

I would expect no Naval Aviators to have any problem and I think they will find, as I did, that it is a much better system.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 07 Jan 2015, 20:22
by KamenRiderBlade
Side sticks seems like such an obvious ergonomic innovation

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Jan 2015, 05:08
by spazsinbad
Whilst Awaiting JPALS the other system is being upgraded. I did not know some of the details herein:
Sierra Nevada to provide upgrade kits for carrier precision-approach landing systems
Jan 2015 John Keller MILITARY & AEROSPACE ELECTRONICS

"JOINT BASE MCGUIRE-DIX-LAKEHURST, N.J.—U.S. Navy carrier aviation experts needed upgrade kits to improve the AN/SPN-46 automatic carrier landing system. They found their solution from Sierra Nevada Corp. in Sparks, Nev.

Officials of the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, N.J., announced an $8.2 million contract to Sierra Nevada to provide as many as 16 Block III receiver upgrade kits for the AN/SPN-46.

The Block III receivers are critical components on the AN/SPN-46 shipboard-based precision approach and landing system. The AN/SPN-46 precision approach landing systems from Textron Inc. in Providence, R.I., are installed on all U.S. Navy aircraft carriers.

The AN/SPN-46 employs low-probability-of-intercept technology to decrease the probability of passive detection by hostile forces. The AN/SPN- 46 employs an X-band coherent transmitter and receiver using monopulse tracking and Doppler processing on received signals for clutter rejection and rain attenuation at an operating range of eight nautical miles.

The AN/SPN-46 precision approach landing system (PALS) includes the Textron SPN 46 (V)1 and (V)2 automatic landing systems for aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships. The system provides final approach and landing guidance for aircraft during day/night operations and adverse weather conditions.

The precision approach landing system can control as many as two aircraft simultaneously in a leapfrog pattern; each approaching aircraft being assisted by the system lands, another can be acquired.

The AN/SPN-46 radar provides a Mode 1 approach. When engaged a PALS approach provides a hands-off landing for the pilot. Pilots reportedly do not use it often, preferring not to hand off much of the aircraft’s controls to a computer but it is important for controller to be able to take control when all other systems fail...."

Source: MILITARY & AEROSPACE ELECTRONICS JANUARY 2015

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jan 2015, 19:04
by spazsinbad
The USS Gerald R. Ford and the Landing and Take-Off Launch System
26 Jan 2015 SLDinfo

"...EMALS
According to Hicks [Mr. Hicks, Construction Superintendent, CVN 78]...

...A great advantage of EMALS is the acceleration curve is very smooth.

It ramps up very smooth as opposed to a steam cat that spikes up on the front end.

The control that you have around that acceleration is virtually infinite.

And if you get half way down the cat and the system senses that you’re not getting there, it will increase power as necessary to reach end speed.

The system itself is intelligent enough to increase power as you go and increase the acceleration rate so that at the end you’re actually going 160 knots per hour or whatever you want to be at the end....

...AAG...
...“Advanced arresting gear is actually three main components starting with an electric motor, a cable drum and a water twister.

The real technological breakthrough here is this water twister.

The water twister is essentially a dead headed pump, a paddle wheel for lack of a better term. That’s the brawn of the system.

It’ll take up most of the energy.

It’ll actually pull in probably 70% or so of the energy.The cable drum itself but nothing more than a fishing reel. It just winds up the cable.

And the electric motor is essentially the brains of the system.

So if you were to catch a very light aircraft the water twister would want to rip the tail hook off. The electric motor, when light aircraft come in, will adjust the system to the appropriate measures to land the aircraft.

It’ll actually make the deceleration curve very similar to EMALs acceleration curve, and it’ll make that very smooth as well as opposed to a hydraulic ram.”

AAG Data Sheet: http://www.sldinfo.com/wp-content/uploa ... et_aag.pdf (0.5Mb)

Source: http://www.sldinfo.com/the-uss-gerald-r ... ch-system/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2015, 19:47
by spazsinbad
State of the Carrier Program [CVNs Nimitz & Ford Class] PPTX attached as PDF
17 March 2015 RADM Tom Moore, Program Executive Officer Aircraft Carriers

"...Accomplishments...
--... - Catapult installation on track (2 of 4 complete)
--... - Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG)
----... - Major components received
----... - Installation behind schedule

--...- Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS)
----... - Shipboard testing started on schedule, Aug 2014
----... - 8 of 12 motor generators energized
----... - Catapult testing started 16 Dec 2014, testing on schedule...

...Upcoming Key Events
--... - Apr 2015: EMALS shuttle movement (no load testing) begins
--... - Jun 2015: EMALS deadload Testing begins..."

Source: https://www.scribd.com/document_downloa ... nsion=pptx (7.7Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Mar 2015, 04:21
by spazsinbad
OMG! IS this an EARLY April Fool Story? Talk about Motley...
Navy Jets With Extra Fuel Can’t Be Launched Off New U.S. Carrier
27 Mar 2015 Tony Capaccio BlumBug

"...(Bloomberg) — The U.S. Navy’s top warplanes can’t be launched off its newest aircraft carrier if they’re carrying fuel tanks needed to extend their flight range because the ship’s high-tech catapults cause too much wear.

Military weapons testers view this as a deficiency that would “preclude the Navy from conducting normal operations” on the USS Gerald R. Ford until it’s corrected, said Air Force Major Eric Badger, spokesman for the Pentagon’s testing office, in an e-mail....

...The 480-gallon tanks for extended flights are carried under the wings of two models of the F/A-18, the Super Hornet fighter and the Growler jamming aircraft. The carrier’s electromagnetic launch system, made by General Atomics, puts more stress on the tanks than older steam-powered catapults, and that would cause premature damage to the planes, according to the test office and Navy documents.... :mrgreen: [GO YE MIGHTY F-35C WOT DOAN NEED DEM FUEL FANKS!] :mrgreen:

...A Sept. 5 report by the Naval Air Systems Command found that “the overstress condition will eliminate the employment of external fuel tanks” that are “an essential element” of combat loads for many Super Hornets and most Growler jammer jets.

The wing tanks and the pylons they hang from are designed to withstand twisting and yanking when an aircraft is launched, but the stresses add up over time. Given the test results, the warplanes wouldn’t be able to launch with fuel tanks, Badger said....

...Software Fix
The Navy says it will install corrective software on the launch system intended to reduce acceleration forces and will test it on board the Ford after delivery next March. The software change is intended to adjust the power exerted during launches to reduce stress on the wing tanks.

Commander Thurraya Kent, a Navy spokeswoman, said the catapult flaw didn’t cause any launches to fail during on-ground tests at the Navy’s Lakehurst, New Jersey, facility.

Navy aircraft specialists “are aware of this issue and in close coordination with structural and systems engineers” who are assessing launch system “and/or aircraft-based alternatives to address the situation,” she said.

The Navy has earmarked funds to develop corrections once a solution is determined, she said...."

Source: http://hrana.org/news/2015/03/navy-jets ... s-carrier/
&/OR/wahteva: http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/artic ... -s-carrier

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Mar 2015, 04:29
by count_to_10

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Mar 2015, 06:23
by spazsinbad
OOOPs and thanks I do not usually look at the other forums here - my bad - still won't look at other forums much but... :mrgreen:

And I like this bit from NAVY TIMES (the other artickle):
New catapults need fix to launch jets with fuel pods [PODS? Whats up with that? PODS?]
27 Mar 2015 Lance M. Bacon

"..."The Navy understands the issue, views it as low technical risk, and has a funded plan in place to fix it," he said. "The resolution of this issue is straight-forward because the Navy will leverage this inherent capability of the system to tune the catapult forces for these wing tank configurations. There is no impact to ongoing shipboard installation or shipboard testing and this will not delay any CVN 78 milestones."...

...The holdback release dynamics, which are the core of the problem, were not evident during dead load launches and were within the realm of normal discovery, officials said. The issue did not result in any failed launches and was not the result of any material, quality or manufacturing flaw within the system.

The solution requires "further tuning of the EMALS control algorithm," officials said in reporting the initial findings. Software updates will be followed by dead load launches, comparative steam catapult launches and aircraft launches at Lakehurst in fiscal 2016. The Ford will get software updates after its scheduled March 2016 delivery, but prior to operational launch and recovery of aircraft, which is set for 2017. No additional hardware or changes to equipment already installed will be required. Similarly, aircraft will not require modification ...."

Source: http://www.navytimes.com/story/military ... /70508062/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Mar 2015, 11:46
by spazsinbad
Carrier Schedule Depends On Fastener Fix [That's all she wrote]
27 Mar 2015 Michael Fabey; Aviation Week & Space Technology

"Whether the U.S. Navy keeps to the new schedule and cost estimates for the CVN 78 Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier may come down to just how well a set of redesigned fasteners for the ship’s Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) survives a new round of extremely important tests. Fasteners may seem to be a very a small thing for a $12.9 billion ship that carries its own airfield, but this particular piece of equipment anchors a system that ensures that most of the aircraft taking off from the..."

Source: http://aviationweek.com/defense/carrier ... stener-fix

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Mar 2015, 13:47
by neptune
spazsinbad wrote:.., views it as low technical risk, ... The issue did not result in any failed launches ..


yawn!..isn't this thing supposed to be "dial-a-launch"? :doh: new great technology and needs a little tuning, must be getting close to doing the "real thing" :)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Mar 2015, 13:59
by neptune
spazsinbad wrote:[quote...Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) survives a new round of extremely important tests...


..this one "AAG", is a disappointment..I had hoped it would be "dial-a-land". :( .... they are still "fooling around" with a water twister, instead of a load generator (energy recovery) to recharge the emals power supplies...tech weenies, can't live with them and can't live without them :bang:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Apr 2015, 18:14
by spazsinbad
US says would back India in buying electromagnetic launching system for aircraft carriers
04 Apr 2015 REUTERS

"WASHINGTON: The US government would support selling General Atomics' electromagnetic launching system for aircraft carriers, and other key technologies, to India, the Pentagon's chief weapons buyer told Reuters on Friday.

Defense Undersecretary Frank Kendall, who heads a joint US-India defense trade and technology effort, said he was optimistic about the two countries' efforts to cooperate on a planned aircraft carrier for India.

I'm optimistic about cooperating with them on that," Kendall told Reuters in an interview, when asked about the possibility of India acquiring the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) built by privately held General Atomics, which is based in San Diego, California.

"They're going to have to make their own decision about what technology they want, but I don't see any fundamental obstacles to them acquiring some of our carrier technologies, if they want them," he said.

India wants to use state-of-the-art US technology to boost the range and potency of a planned aircraft carrier, in a move that would deepen cooperation between both countries and counter China's military influence in the region.

General Atomics, which has also proposed selling the system to Brazil, says selling the system to foreign countries could help lower the cost of installing the system on the new Gerald R. Ford class of US Navy aircraft carriers being built by Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc.

The new system helps jets launch off a flat deck at a faster rate and with less fatigue to the aircraft...."

Source: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 802617.cms

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 09 Apr 2015, 07:41
by spazsinbad
Thanks to 'bring_it_on' we have the JPALS excerpt below as described with relevant 2 pages from the main PDF.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Systems Engineering FY 2014 Annual Report
Joint Precision Approach and Landing System, Increment 1A (JPALS Inc 1A)

March 2015 DoD Systems Engineering

"...Executive Summary: JPALS Inc 1A is an ACAT ID program in the Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction phase that will provide a Global Positioning System (GPS-based precision approach and landing capability for JPALS-equipped manned aircraft at sea. The program experienced a critical Nunn-McCurdy (NM) breach and was recertified in June 2014; DASD(SE) confirmed the NM root cause was not technical and assessed that the technical plans and management processes are adequate to support the restructured program. Efforts to complete the development, trade studies, and risk reduction efforts are on track to begin in FY 2015.

Mission and System Description: The JPALS will safeguard the future precision approach and landing capability for any JPALS-equipped aircraft (e.g., F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS)) during operations at sea in virtually any weather condition. The restructured program will provide the continued development, integration, installation, and test on sea-based JPALS on all large-deck ships....

...Performance - Based on a February 2014 Inc 1A System Verification Review (SVR)-like event, all four Inc 1A KPPs and five KSAs remain on track to complete Navy, Commander Operational Test and Evaluation Force Letter of Observation (LOO). The Inc 1A completed the shipboard portion of the operational Assessment in December 2013. The contractor successfully completed a proof of concept demonstration of the auto-land capability with 70 hands-free precision approaches onboard CVN 71. This demonstration greatly reduced the risk for the auto-land capability for the restructured JPALS program....

...Integration - The Inc 1A program completed shipboard integration on CVN 77. The program reduced integration risk with the use of the duplicate string of shipboard infrastructure (equipment and network) in the landing system test facility at Patuxent River Naval Air Station. Derived requirements for F-35 and UCLASS integration are pending completion of the trade studies.

Conclusion: The JPALS risk reduction efforts to support the F-35 and UCLASS are on track to begin in FY 2015. DASD(SE) assesses the program plans and processes as adequate to support the JPALS program."

Source: https://www.scribd.com/doc/261315401/SE-FY14-Report

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 14 Apr 2015, 21:47
by spazsinbad
Flight Researchers Seek Answers to Bad Weather
01 Mar 2015 Sandra Jontz

"Technologies could keep aircraft operating in bad environments on combat missions.

As scientists sleuth to enhance U.S. military air mission capabilities through automation and alternative technologies, some in the Office of Naval Research want to find ways for aircraft — manned or unmanned — to operate in even the worst kinds of weather. Along with working on aircraft that would operate without a Global Positioning System, radar or even pilots, the experts are exploring how these vehicles could function in the most unfavorable conditions — particularly as they navigate the complex maritime role unique to the U.S. Navy of landing aircraft on moving ships....

...In October, for example, when Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby, USN, was asked what kind of weather kept the United States from flying sorties to hit targets in the air campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), he offered journalists a terse reply: “Bad.” Adverse weather historically has hampered combat missions, restricting aircraft from taking to the skies or impeding the collection of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) data and communications. In today’s world of advanced technology, where the United States, with its all-weather bombers and GPS-guided munitions, has air superiority over other nations, weather remains an inescapable Achilles’ heel.

While GPSs have revolutionized the way the military moves and fights, they do have limitations. GPS signals do not work underground or underwater, for example, and they can be degraded significantly during solar storms. The technology is susceptible to blocking and jamming. As such, GPSs are not the military’s sole source of positioning, navigation and timing data, and radar can leave a radiation trail that can act like crosshairs on a target to an enemy force....

...The ONR contracted Pennsylvania-based Near Earth Autonomy to conduct sensor modeling and testing under its Sea-Based Automated Launch and Recovery System (SALRS) program for robust ship-relative navigation in degraded conditions. The 18-month effort nearing completion tests varying sensors for development of PS-RN capabilities applicable to autonomous landing and recovery operations in demanding environments, Kinzer says. “The program is looking at testing sensors in the naval environment that includes fog, snow, rain, hot, cold, humidity—all those different conditions. We’re testing a group of relevant sensors in those conditions to establish a capability baseline,” he says. The Navy wants superlative navigational tools that would allow aircraft, both manned and unmanned, to establish their position relative to a ship deck and successfully land on the moving target without the aid of a GPS, says Near Earth Autonomy CEO Sanjiv Singh. The company is testing varying kinds of sensors, from electro-optical to the three infrared spectral bands, radio transponders, radar and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) systems. “We are trying to figure out what’s possible,” Singh says. Inclement weather with reduced visibility could prove to be a limitation of the imaging technology, Kinzer points out. “One of the shortcomings, of course, of imaging devices is getting through weather. Fog and rain and snow are going to interfere with both infrared and electro-optics. The question is what kind of capability can we have using those systems in different kinds of weather? That’s one of the big questions for us in the testing that we’re doing.” It still is too early in the research stage for scientists to come to any conclusions as to whether the sensor technology might serve as a feasible alternative to GPS and radar, Singh says. The company built a 16-by-16-foot mock ship that moves exactly as a floating ship would and can simulate the pitches, rolls and heaves of ship flight decks....

...The tumultuous effects of weather can wreak havoc inside the cockpit as much as they can on the outside, says Lt. Col. Chris Kibble, USAF, combat air forces, ISR branch chief. “Sometimes, weather can cause pilots to lose situational awareness. It doesn’t take a sandstorm or tornado to do that. It can be very benign weather that the pilot is flying in and just, well, your brain can play tricks on you,” explains Col. Kibble, who would like to see increased research on better ways pilots can avert cockpit disorientation. One day, Col. Mundie says, he also would like to see development of an aircraft that could operate at low and high altitudes and be able to continue into space—all in one aircraft, all in one system. “I think that would be an amazing plus for the Air Force, space force and cyber force, all combined into one system,” he says. “I think it would be exactly the way the Air Force would want to go and fits in exactly with the key missions of the Air Force.”"

Source: http://www.afcea.org/content/?q=node/14077

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2015, 23:32
by neptune
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... of-411862/

AUVSI: Future UCLASS requirements pose questions on worth of X-47B

Beth Stevenson

.The future of the two X-47B demonstrators also remains unclear. As it stands, funding is exhausted, with the navy having spent some $1.5 billion on their development. .., .programme manager for unmanned combat air systems at Northop Grumman, says there is still testing that could be carried out to keep the capability relevant until the UCLASS is brought into service in around 2023. ... “The aircraft are at the peak of efficiency at the moment, and the more things we can learn the better off we will be.” .. says that possible future testing, should more funds become available, would include sensor integration testing, concert flights around an aircraft carrier, and integrating the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System.

While the aircraft are technically navy property, Northrop could take the aircraft and carry out its own testing. “We would be willing to take the aircraft back before we see them chomped up or buried in the ground,” he says, noting that it could approach the US Air Force regarding testing. “The navy has been making history with these, and we stand ready to go and do anything else that is required,” . notes.

Wow!, they did that without JPALS,...hmmmn....the F-35C made 124-0 traps, without JPALS....wonder what they can do with JPALS (differential GPS) ?? less the wonderful attribute of Air Traffic Control, etc..... :)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 May 2015, 23:36
by spazsinbad
You would have to read the X-47B thread to know that a version of JPALS for the X-47B was installed on the carriers, that operated the aircraft, was used. Perhaps the reference was to the 'final' version of JPALS that will be used by the Super Hornet and F-35B/Cs. Then there would be only one version of JPALS to rool them all in use. Go to the F-35 and X-47B thread below:

viewtopic.php?f=55&t=20468 Search using 'JPALS' to view three pages of hits.

The F-35C has a pilot to use the controls and be aided by IDLC & Delta Flight Path Tech (magic carpet) and the landing aids (IFLOLS) to get aboard - JPALS not required for visual landings. X-47B is a robot carrying out an automatic landing with precision as we know. A version of JPALS OK for the X-47B is required for robot operation to the deck.

JPALS will allow aircraft so fitted to start their return to the carrier from 200 nm out without giving away either them or the ship. As the aircraft get closer then the precision of JPALS increases such that an auto landing to the deck, with precision, in all weathers (there would be limits to ship movement no doubt) for all aircraft so fitted, will be possible. AFAIK JPALS is not operational yet - still in test phase - but a version was tested OK for the X-47B - this has been made clear in the thread noted above. Searching those search results with 'PGPS' we get this gem:
"...[2012] Block 2 testing will also see the X-47B testing its Precision GPS (PGPS) navigation system, taking the first ever autonomous catapult shots and autonomous arrested landings at Pax River...." viewtopic.php?f=55&t=20468&p=251988&hilit=JPALS+PGPS#p251988

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 May 2015, 13:10
by spazsinbad
Future USS Gerald R. Ford successfully tests new electromagnetic launch system
13 May 2015 Matt Knight

"GERALD R. FORD,
Today marks a significant and successful milestone in our test program and in our push to deliver GERALD R. FORD to the operational Navy.

Catapult two launched a series of no-load test launches of the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) that clearly demonstrates the first shipboard operation of the system at launch representative speeds. We remain on track to start launching “dead loads” (sleds) in to the James River in about 2 weeks. The tests were conducted throughout the day at varying speeds and distances, culminating in full length & full speed shots.

This event is significant as it reflects the extraordinary engineering rigor and technical advances of this system. . . .a system designed by General Atomics and installed to exacting standards by Newport News Shipbuilding (NNS). Testing is being conducted with representatives of General Atomics, NNS, Naval Air Systems Command, Supervisor of Shipbuilding Newport News and GERALD R. FORD.

Our Air Department has taken operational control of EMALS for the test program. LT Sergio Ibarra (our first “shooter”) launched the first no load today!

Congratulations to the Air Department for this successful test and for the pride in ownership for every aspect of this test program! For GERALD R. FORD … We are one step closer to delivery!

V/R,
John F. Meier, CAPT, USN Commanding Officer PCU Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78)"
VIDEO: https://www.facebook.com/USSGeraldRFord ... =2&theater

Photo: https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 6010_o.jpg

Source: http://wtkr.com/2015/05/13/257157/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 18 May 2015, 06:22
by spazsinbad
The 'deadloads' may be seen coloured RED in the picture at the end of the posts on previous page.
US Navy Announces Successful Test of Electromagnetic Catapult EMALS on CVN 78 Ford class
16 May 2015 NavyRecognition

"...The recent test shots, known as "no-loads" because no aircraft or other loads were attached to the launching shuttle, successfully demonstrated the integrated catapult system. Using electromagnetic technology, the system delivers substantial improvements in system maintenance, increased reliability and efficiency, higher-launch energy capacity, and more accurate end-speed control, with a smooth acceleration at both high and low speeds. By allowing linear acceleration over time, electromagnetic catapults also place less stress on the aircraft....

...During the tests, generators within the ship produced an electric pulse, which was passed through power conditioning electronics to linear motors just below the flight deck surface. This energy allowed for the linear motors to propel the launching shuttle down the catapult track in excess of 180 knots before bringing the shuttle to a stop at the end of the track.

The next phase of EMALS testing, scheduled for this summer, will involve launching "dead-loads" off of the bow of CVN 78 into the James River. "Dead-loads" are large, wheeled, steel vessels weighing up to 80,000 pounds to simulate the weight of actual aircraft. The dead-loads will be launched from each catapult using a specific test sequence to verify that the catapult and its components are operating satisfactorily...."

Source: http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.ph ... class.html


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 May 2015, 08:07
by popcorn
...higher-launch energy capacity, and more accurate end-speed control, with a smooth acceleration at both high and low speeds. By allowing linear acceleration over time, electromagnetic catapults also place less stress on the aircraft....

No jerking...does this mean the issue re stressing EFTs during launch is resolved?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 May 2015, 08:30
by spazsinbad
AFAIK it was made clear that an update to the software controlling the launch was what was required - and probably needed to be tested. The quote below is from previous page on this thread:
Navy Jets With Extra Fuel Can’t Be Launched Off New U.S. Carrier
27 Mar 2015 Tony Capaccio BlumBug

"...Software Fix
The Navy says it will install corrective software on the launch system intended to reduce acceleration forces and will test it on board the Ford after delivery next March. The software change is intended to adjust the power exerted during launches to reduce stress on the wing tanks.

Commander Thurraya Kent, a Navy spokeswoman, said the catapult flaw didn’t cause any launches to fail during on-ground tests at the Navy’s Lakehurst, New Jersey, facility.

Navy aircraft specialists “are aware of this issue and in close coordination with structural and systems engineers” who are assessing launch system “and/or aircraft-based alternatives to address the situation,” she said.

The Navy has earmarked funds to develop corrections once a solution is determined, she said...."

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/artic ... -s-carrier

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 May 2015, 19:22
by spazsinbad
Former elder President Bush sending down a DEADload aboard PCU Bush some time ago now:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... _Unit_(PCU)_George_H.W._Bush_(CVN_77),_during_a_catapult_test_ceremony.jpg

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 May 2015, 02:39
by spazsinbad
First - the good news - then the not so good but should be OK - IF... AND... would the 'cable shock absorbers' be the flat 'impact' pad - not the round sheave - as seen in the photo below from: http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/ ... 24-057.JPG
PEO Carriers: Advanced Arresting Gear Delays Won’t Stop Ford From Delivering On Time
28 May 2015 Megan Eckstein

"The program executive officer for aircraft carriers told USNI News he is confident the carrier USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) will deliver on time despite delays in the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) program....

...The other new system on the flight deck, the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) “is probably one of the best news stories in the program,” Moore said. The Navy finished no-load tests on Catapult 2, including 22 shots in one day, and “it worked like a champ.”

Catapult 2 is set for dead-load testing next month, which involves catapulting large, wheeled, steel vessels weighing up to 80,000 pounds off the front of the ship to simulate the weight of an actual aircraft.

Catapult 1 will follow shortly behind, with no-load testing next week. Construction on Catapults 3 and 4 will wrap up soon so testing can begin shortly afterwards, Moore said....

...Rear Adm. Tom Moore said Thursday that the AAG setbacks created about four to six weeks of schedule pressure to the ship, but he is striving to make up that time. Moore said in March that the General Atomics-built component had a design flaw, but the solution that has been implemented seems to be working well, he told USNI News.

“They put a winch, if you will, at the end of the water twister to rotate the entire assembly so they can wrap the cable around the purchase cable drum. That’s worked fine,” he said.

Most of the arresting system has been installed, and shipbuilders are now adding the final section, the cable shock absorbers – which Moore said are very large and go in a confined space. Newport News Shipbuilding is installing the cable shock absorbers now, at the same time workers put the non-skid coating on the flight deck, which Moore called “a kind of a ballet” to do simultaneously.

Moore said in March that the improved AAG design would have to be tested at Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division Lakehurst, but for scheduling reasons he couldn’t postpone installation while awaiting the test results.

“If Lakehurst uncovers something on the system that has to be fixed, the risk I’m taking is I’m installing it and then I have to go back and fix something that’s all ready installed, it’s more challenging. Really at this point, I don’t have a choice,” he said in March...."

Source: http://news.usni.org/2015/05/28/peo-car ... ng-on-time

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 May 2015, 02:58
by spazsinbad
PHOTO: http://cencio4.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/f-18.jpg
"...“Impact pads are made up of several sections of polyurethane pads laid side by side and secured within an outer steel frame. The frame is both welded and bolted to the flight deck inboard of each of the deck sheaves at an approximate 45 degrees forward facing angle. The bolted section of the frame is removable in order to replace worn impact pads as needed. Upon initial arrestment by an aircraft the terminal will impact on the pads instead of the steel deck, minimizing damage to the fittings, purchase cable, and crossdeck pendants.”...

Source: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... 10_ch3.pdf (2Mb)

& from: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... 10_ch3.pdf (2Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 May 2015, 06:09
by spazsinbad
Who said the CATbird was a useless piece of waste? Here ya go... & a LONG STORY about EMAL maintainers at this URL:

Sailors ready for launch aboard Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78): http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=5938
Collaborative efforts yield essential data, reduce risk during early CATBird JPALS testing
28 May 2015 PEO(T) Public Affairs

"NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. – Teamwork between government and industry teams advanced the Navy’s capability to recover aircraft in all weather conditions — a vital solution aimed at protecting people and equipment while enhancing the flexibility, power projection, and strike capabilities of carrier air wings.

The F-35 Cooperative Avionics Test Bed (CATBird), a modified Boeing 737-330, accomplished initial connectivity and datalink testing between the F-35 Lightning II and a Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) test facility at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland in 2014.

Over the past three months, the Landing Systems Test Facility also hosted CATBird to prepare for the second developmental test (DT-II) ship trials of the F-35C Lightning II scheduled for later this year.

“Initial testing with the JPALS ship system was very successful and met F-35 Lightning II primary test objectives,” said Lt. Cmdr. Chris Taylor, co-lead for the JPALS Integrated Product Team at the Naval Air Traffic Management Systems (PMA-213) program office. “Follow-on testing in April and May was also successful in capturing essential data that will deliver F-35 UDB risk reduction to developmental testing with the JPALS ship system.”

A key feature of the former commercial airliner is its ability to transport a team of test engineers in its flying laboratory specially equipped to integrate, test, and validate mission systems avionics for the F-35 Lightning II. The use of CATBird enables the team to test mission systems in a dynamic environment and apply real-time modifications the same day or even hours after a test flight.

At present, CATBird is supporting the development of software scheduled for release this year. The software is part of the Block 3F software build for upcoming F-35B/C developmental and operational tests.

The F-35 is currently integrating the UHF Data Broadcast (UDB) radio with the JPALS ship system as an interim solution during development of an auto-land capability into the JPALS ship system. This capability will allow the Navy to recover aircraft in all-weather conditions by removing human error from the carrier landing process.

To date, UDB tests have been a success due to the collaboration between PMA-213 and industry partners, Taylor noted."

Photo: "The F-35 Cooperative Avionics Test Bed (CATBird) supports software development for upcoming F-35B/C developmental and operational tests, including the elements of the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS). When fully implemented, JPALS will benefit carrier-based air traffic control by enabling automatic carrier landings (auto-land), enhancing aircraft position reporting, and increasing Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN) functionality. (U.S. Navy photo courtesy of Lockheed Martin)" http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/ ... 35-web.jpg

Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=5937

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Jun 2015, 14:16
by spazsinbad

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jun 2015, 18:29
by spazsinbad
Here go the deadweights via EMALS & FORD - photos by e-mail.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 08 Jun 2015, 10:14
by spazsinbad
EMALS dead load testing begins aboard PCU Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78)
Published on Jun 5, 2015 U.S. Navy

"NEWPORT NEWS, Va. (June 5, 2015) U.S. Navy Sailors, civilian employees and contractors observed a "dead-load" test of the new electromagnetic aircraft launching system (EMALS) aboard Pre-Commissioning Unit Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78). The weighted sled was launched into the James River where it was recovered for additional test launches. (U.S. Navy video/Released)"


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Jun 2015, 11:19
by spazsinbad
Flight Crew: 55 Years of Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment
Published on Jun 15, 2015 NAVAIRSYSCOM

"Naval aviation would not be what it is today without aircraft launch and recovery equipment (ALRE) technology. And ALRE would not be what it is today without Modesto Zacharczenko, a former NAVAIR employee who dedicated more than 50 years of his life to the field. Now serving as deputy director for Aviation and program executive officer for Aircraft Carriers, "Zach" looks back on the successes and challenges behind the ALRE system and how the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System will change our future fleet"


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Jun 2015, 13:01
by spazsinbad
Navy: EMALS, AAG Will Give Designers More Options for Future Carrier Aircraft [MORE AT THE FLING!}
16 Jun 2015 Megan Eckstein

"...“Typically in our manned aircraft designs, you have to build an airplane that fits within the operating envelopes of the Mk 7 arresting gear and the Mk 13 catapults. So you kind of start with an operating envelope that gets you sort of a design of aircraft like we have now – F-18 Super Hornet, Growler, Joint Strike Fighter,” he said.

“The aircraft are structured that way, they’re strengthened … you build weight and structure into the airplanes to accommodate the violence of the arrested landing. With the Advanced Arresting Gear and the ability to land an airplane – it’s still a controlled crash, but relatively more softly, and to launch it relatively more softly, and so a graduated kind of force as the airplane goes up – you can now start to do things with aircraft design that you couldn’t do before. It might allow us some more margin in weight, in size, and in structure and capability.”

Manazir said industry often wants to marinize existing designs for aircraft, weapons and more so they can operate at sea. But he said adapting aircraft designs for carrier use goes beyond typical marine concerns, and reinforcing the frame to survive catapult launches and trap landings can add so much weight that the payload capacity shrinks, or can rule out design concepts altogether.

“Some of the concepts that are out there with structure and with outer mold line and size, the advanced technology of our AAG and EMALS is going to allow us to kind of open the envelope,” he said.

Ultimately, this new freedom of design may make the most difference with unmanned vehicles that may not take on the same shape and weight as manned aircraft. Manazir said the Navy’s carrier airwing of 2025 will include Super Hornets, Growlers, F-35s and the Unmanned Carrier-Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) aircraft. But in 2040, the flight deck will look drastically different.

“As I look to about 2040, when I think about what we generically call strike fighters – which are the F-18 E and F and the F-35C off the carrier, covered by the EA-18G Growler – when I think about strike fighters operating in a heavy electromagnetic spectrum and I look forward to those airframes, what I see in 2040 is F-35C as the legacy airplane, a UCLASS airframe which is probably up to Increment 2 or 3 by then, and then a FA-XX, which could be manned, unmanned or optionally manned.”

He said the Navy started initial analytical work on FA-XX in conjunction with the Air Force’s early work on their F-X future fighter. But he believes FA-XX will be a family of systems with at least some unmanned capability, and the relative freedom AAG and EMALS bring to engineers may allow for more innovation than would be possible with the legacy launch and recovery systems."

Source: http://news.usni.org/2015/06/16/navy-em ... r-aircraft

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Jun 2015, 22:03
by spazsinbad
A long screed about the EMALS and issues around testing recently with only a few bits excerpted below so go to URL for more.... AND... :devil: I like the PITCHA becuz it is the only time someone would be pumping the air to see a splash off of de catadepault. :mrgreen:
First Public EMALS Test Delayed Due to ‘Communication-Type Issues’ Among Components
16 Jun 2015 Megan Eckstein

"NEWPORT NEWS, Va. – The Navy’s Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) encountered problems Tuesday morning prior to a round of testing in front of media, but Navy and industry officials say the problem is minor and part of the testing process....

...On Monday, the ship’s crew, along with shipbuilder Newport News Shipbuilding and EMALS manufacturer General Atomics, conducted 10 dead load tests on Catapult 2, with 15 launches in total since June 5. Today was supposed to mark the start of testing on Catapult 1, which experienced the failure.

Newport News Shipbuilding President Matt Mulherin told reporters that EMALS would perform 20 more tests over at least 20 more days, and he said he was confident the system would perform well.

“I think the real key that everybody’s got to understand is, this is why we do this,” he said. “This is new technology, this is why we’re out here doing this testing program is to prove the reliability and to prove that the system works as designed and as required by specs. I have no doubt that we’ll get it there, but today at this time, at 10:00 on Tuesday morning, isn’t going to be the day when this happens.”...

...Scott Forney, president of General Atomics’ Electromagnetic Systems Group, said he was confident the system would be up and running shortly and able to successfully complete the test program this month.

“We’ve already successfully tested 452 airplanes and 3,400 dead loads at the Lakehurst land-based facility, which is the same as this system,” he said. “So it’s unfortunate timing.”

EMALS testing resumed on Ford later Tuesday.

Meier, the ship’s CO, said his crew had already taken operational control of the EMALS system and were writing the schoolhouse curriculum as they learned more about the system. He said installing and learning the EMALS system had been a positive experience for the crew....

...He said the Navy doesn’t have thorough data yet, but the service has a “pretty strong theoretical belief” that the service life of aircraft will be extended by using EMALS instead of the legacy Mk 13 steam catapult. EMALS has a linear acceleration curve – whereas the steam catapult has a front-loaded acceleration that thrusts the aircraft forward under great pressure, the EMALS starts off a bit slower but still reaches the same end speed with less stress on the airframes.

“It can reduce the stress on the aircraft. It can launch aircraft that aren’t even on the drawing books today that are lighter or heavier,” he said, echoing comments from Navy director of air warfare Rear Adm. Michael Manazir on Monday. “And it can also launch them under different or varying wind conditions, so it’s going to give us more operational flexibility than we have today with the current steam catapult system.”

Currently, aircraft carriers have to adjust course to ensure the planes can launch into the right wind conditions, meaning a carrier in a combat area may need to stop or turn around rather than proceeding on course to accommodate the needs of the launch system.

The Navy and industry team will finish the Catapult 1 and 2 dead load testing in the next few weeks. Catapults 3 and 4 are still under construction and will begin testing once complete. Live load testing – launching actual aircraft – will take place next summer."

PHOTO: "Dead load launched from Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) during EMALS testing. HII Photo"
http://i0.wp.com/news.usni.org/wp-conte ... 59-297.jpg


Source: http://news.usni.org/2015/06/16/first-p ... components

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 17 Jun 2015, 20:28
by spazsinbad
The GOOD video is FIRST - GO DEEPsix with the DEADweight! :mrgreen:
Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) Catapult Demonstration
Published on Jun 16, 2015 The Virginian-Pilot

"Demonstration of the Electromagnetic Launch System (EMALS) on the aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78). (Courtesy video of HUNTINGTON INGALLS INDUSTRIES)"


USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) tests EMALS
Published on Jun 16, 2015 U.S. Navy

"NEWPORT News, Va. (June 15, 2015) Pre-commissioing Unit Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) conducts dead-load testing of the The Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) . (U.S. Navy video/Released)

Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS)

The Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) is a complete carrier-based launch system designed for CVN 78 and all future Gerald R. Ford-class carriers. The launching system is designed to expand the operational capability of the Navy’s future carriers. The mission and function of EMALS remains the same as traditional steam catapult; however, it employs entirely different technologies. EMALS uses stored kinetic energy and solid-state electrical power conversion. This technology permits a high degree of computer control, monitoring and automation. The system will also provide the capability for launching all current and future carrier air wing platforms – lightweight unmanned to heavy strike fighters.

EMALS delivers: • Necessary higher launch energy capacity • Substantial improvements in system weight, volume and maintenance • Increased reliability and efficiency • More accurate end-speed control

EMALS is funded by the CVN 21 program and will be forward fit only for U.S. Ford-class carriers, beginning with Gerald R Ford (CVN 78).

Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment (ALRE) engineers, logisticians and program analysts at NAWCAD Lakehurst have provided integral EMALS support since EMALS’ inception in 1982. The team at Lakehurst provides EMALS life-cycle acquisition management in support of the ALRE Program Office (PMA 251) to include program management, systems engineering, financial analysis, logistics and test and evaluation.

Furthermore, Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst is home to a land-based, ship-representative EMALS, allowing for the testing of hardware and software aspects of the system."


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 18 Jun 2015, 03:20
by spazsinbad
IF YA GOTTA GO - GoPro - GO NAVAL AIR!
Pres. Ford's Daughter Tests New Carrier Catapult
Published on Jun 17, 2015 Huntington Ingalls Industries

“Ship's sponsor Susan Ford Bales visited Newport News to see progress on the aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) and participate in a June 16 demonstration of the new electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS). During the demonstration, she gave the signal to fire the catapult, with two weighted sleds being launched off the carrier around 1:00 p.m.”


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2015, 23:14
by spazsinbad
Me Like:
Navy’s new aircraft launch system tested on future carrier CVN 78
30 Jun 2015 PEO(T) Public Affairs

"...Puakea [CAFSU] said. “We have to remember that in terms of EMALS, everything we are doing is brand new. This is the only place on the planet where electromagnetics are going to launch tactical aircraft off a carrier."..."

Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=5984

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 Aug 2015, 02:42
by spazsinbad
Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS)
06 Aug 2015 U.S. Navy [Same video 12.5Mb here: http://www.navy.mil/media/multimedia/EM ... 062015.mp4 ]

"The Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) is a complete carrier-based launch system designed for CVN 78 and all future Gerald R. Ford-class carriers. The launching system is designed to expand the operational capability of the Navy’s future carriers. The mission and function of EMALS remains the same as traditional steam catapult; however, it employs entirely different technologies. EMALS uses stored kinetic energy and solid-state electrical power conversion. This technology permits a high degree of computer control, monitoring and automation. The system will also provide the capability for launching all current and future carrier air wing platforms – lightweight unmanned to heavy strike fighters.

EMALS delivers: • Necessary higher launch energy capacity • Substantial improvements in system weight, volume and maintenance • Increased reliability and efficiency • More accurate end-speed control

EMALS is funded by the CVN 21 program and will be forward fit only for U.S. Ford-class carriers, beginning with Gerald R Ford (CVN 78).

Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment (ALRE) engineers, logisticians and program analysts at NAWCAD Lakehurst have provided integral EMALS support since EMALS’ inception in 1982. The team at Lakehurst provides EMALS life-cycle acquisition management in support of the ALRE Program Office (PMA 251) to include program management, systems engineering, financial analysis, logistics and test and evaluation.

Furthermore, Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst is home to a land-based, ship-representative EMALS, allowing for the testing of hardware and software aspects of the system. (U.S. Navy video by Austin Rooney/Released)"


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Aug 2015, 05:02
by spazsinbad
Something for the future perhaps?
Navy chooses laser navigation for [MANNED &] unmanned aircraft from ADSYS
AUGUST 2015 MILITARY & AEROSPACE ELECTRONICS

“U.S. Navy shipboard unmanned aviation experts needed navigation and landing capabilities for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in areas where RF and GPS signals are jammed or disrupted. They found their solution from ADSYS Controls Inc. in Irvine, Calif.

ADSYS is working with the Naval Air Systems Command at Patuxent River Naval Air Station, Md., to develop the Laser-Aided Recovery System (LARS) for precision 3D navigation and landing capabilities for ships and land sites where RF jamming is in effect.

ADSYS is working under terms of a Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) phase-two agreement with Naval Air Systems Command on current LARS development, says James Garrett, director of business development for ADSYS.

The LARS airborne receiver offers low size, weight, and power consumption (SWaP), which makes it suitable for placement on manned and unmanned fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters. It uses eye-safe lasers to broadcast navigation signals to several aircraft at the same time. The system’s eye-safe laser helps it resist electronic jamming, and helps the system operate stealthily with low probability of intercept in hostile conditions.

The LARS laser communications uplink allows for system reconfiguration, vehicle de-confliction, and flexible user-vehicle command for system updates or to adapt to changing conditions." http://www.adsyscontrols.com

Source: AUGUST 2015 MILITARY & AEROSPACE ELECTRONICS Magazine

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Sep 2015, 19:58
by spazsinbad
Back in 2011 according to the report at this URL in this thread [ viewtopic.php?f=22&t=25712&p=274723&hilit=JPALS#p274723 ] JPALS was being installed for more than the F-35C - perhaps this info was edited out of the story below excerpted. Anyway overall the article gives what seems to me to be a good historical look at precision approaches. My era (described in this thread somewhere: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=25712&p=274727&hilit=JPALS+Melbourne#p274727 ) had the portable GCA equipment (similar to that shown in photo below) but as described earlier. Anyway - on with the show....
On Glide Path, On Course Past, Present and Future
22 Sep 2014 Capt. Brett Easler and Cmdr. Bruce Herman, USN (Ret.)

"...During the summer of 1994, both the CNO and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force approved a joint Mission Need Statement, which identified the requirement for a rapidly deployable, adverse weather and terrain, day/night, survivable and interoperable precision approach landing capability (PALC) system. The subsequent analysis of alternatives, updated in November 2005, recommended differential global positioning system technology as the preferred solution, which is now known as the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS).

Until March 2013, JPALS was envisioned as the single solution for meeting the PALC requirement for all service branches in any operating environment, eliminating the requirement for multiple and/or varying PAL systems. JPALS Increment 1 was developed for sea-based application, and has completed initial sea-based testing while successfully conducting more than 70 auto-land approaches with pin-point accuracy using a modified F/A-18C Hornet. JPALS will become part of the ATC suite on aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships in support of the F-35B/C Lightning II by the end of the decade.

Given the current fiscal environment, the Director, Air Warfare (OPNAV N98), ordered an extensive evaluation of the DoN PALC roadmap. The evaluation, performed by OPNAV N980A and the Naval Air Traffic Management Systems program office, reviewed multiple courses of action to ensure all-weather landing capability continues in support of Naval Aviation, while closing the interoperability gaps experienced under the current family of systems used to satisfy the DoN PALC requirement.

In June 2013, the Navy Resources and Requirements Review Board directed the continuing development of JPALS for aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships and installation of ILS ashore through sundown of PAR by 2030, when ILS aircraft integration is scheduled for completion. As a part of the roadmap, existing AN/FPN-63 PAR systems ashore will receive upgrades to ensure service life until transition to the ILS is complete. A landing system upgrade program was also initiated to enhance the availability and sustainment of both the AN/SPN-46 and AN/SPN-35 sea-based precision radars.

FUTURE
We are at decision height and the PALC roadmap for Naval Aviation is “on glide path, on course” to replace PAR ashore with instrumented capability in the cockpit. The long-standing tradition of “Airman Timmy and Lance Corporal Jimmy” in the pilot’s headset giving course corrections and trend information will cross landing threshold one last time in the next decade.

So what’s the bottom line? Carriers will have AN/SPN-46 for currently configured aircraft and JPALS for the F-35C, while amphibious assault ships will have AN/SPN-35 for currently configured aircraft and JPALS for the F-35B. Both aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships will continue to use AN/SPN-41 (Bullseye) as a backup and have the talk-down approach available if all else fails. Ashore, the AN/FPN-63 will sunset when the fielding plans for ILS air station installations and the aircraft avionics upgrades are complete. The introduction of JPALS and establishing ILS as the primary PALC will be the foundation for future aircraft avionics development and integration.

Until the PALC roadmap meets full operational capability, the GCA will be available until all aircraft within the Navy and Marine Corps inventory are capable of an unassisted instrument approach using a cockpit needles display.

This is an age of instant history when the startling innovations of yesterday become the anachronisms of today. Perhaps no place is this more apparent than in Naval Aviation. After more than 70 years of service with thousands of saves recorded in both civil and military records alike, it is time to bid farewell to a legend: a landing system that safely brought home Panthers, Banshees, Skyraiders, Cougars, Furies, Phantoms, Corsairs, Traders, Trackers, Tracers, Tomcats, Neptunes, Orions, Aries, Hawkeyes, Hornets, Seahawks, Vikings, Prowlers and Growlers in zero-zero conditions. As the era of GCA ashore concludes and the comforting phrases “approaching glidepath, begin descent” or “over landing threshold, on course” are no longer heard in headsets, the next-generation PALC systems will continue the Navy and Marine Corps ATC tradition of bringing our aircrew back safely."

PHOTO & Caption: http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... glide1.jpg "AN/MPN-1 mobile ground-controlled approach radar systems were integral precision landing equipment for air traffic controllers during World War II and into the 1950s. (Photo courtesy of Cmdr. Bruce Herman, USN (Ret.))"


Source: http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... on-course/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 09 Sep 2015, 23:01
by tincansailor
[quote="spazsinbad"]Back in 2011 according to the report at this URL in this thread [ viewtopic.php?f=22&t=25712&p=274723&hilit=JPALS#p274723 ] JPALS was being installed for more than the F-35C - perhaps this info was edited out of the story below excerpted. Anyway overall the article gives what seems to me to be a good historical look at precision approaches. My era (described in this thread somewhere: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=25712&p=274727&hilit=JPALS+Melbourne#p274727 ) had the portable GCA equipment (similar to that shown in photo below) but as described earlier. Anyway - on with the show....
[quote]On Glide Path, On Course Past, Present and Future
22 Sep 2014 Capt. Brett Easler and Cmdr. Bruce Herman, USN (Ret.)

"...During the summer of 1994, both the CNO and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force approved a joint Mission Need Statement, which identified the requirement for a rapidly deployable, adverse weather and terrain, day/night, survivable and interoperable precision approach landing capability (PALC) system. The subsequent analysis of alternatives, updated in November 2005, recommended differential global positioning system technology as the preferred solution, which is now known as the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS).

Very interesting. I thought JPALS was initiated because the carrier based landing radar couldn't properly track the F-35C. Can it? Of course we can't know the classified RCS of the F-35C, but I thought it must be really low if it couldn't be tracked 2nm from the ship.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 09 Sep 2015, 23:32
by spazsinbad
This thread (now long and old) has a lot of information about JPALS - JPALS info on other threads may be found by searching using 'JPALS'. Earlier info makes it clear that JPALS is necessary because current precision radar cannot find it accurately for F-35C precision approaches to CVNs (wheels down or not). JPALS provides much more than that though. JPALS allows the equipped aircraft to return without need for any other comms or radar help. The precision of JPALS for carrier approach success was demonstrated very well by the X-47B series of startlingly accurate arrests on CVNs. The follow-on to X-47B - UCLASS - will require JPALS also.

Here is just one example of the info available from the URL provided above - searching forum using JPALS will find more.
JPALS: Not Just LAAS in Navy Uniform
01 Oct 2002

"...Extraordinary Environment
But the seagoing JPALS will be a horse (or a LAAS) of a different color. One of the biggest differences will be its data links. For, as development has evolved, carrier-based JPALS has become a generic term applied to a wider data link environment than just the automatic landing portion.... In fact, the Navy’s seagoing JPALS will be the centerpiece of a dedicated, data link-based, communications, navigation and surveillance/air traffic management (CNS/ATM) system, which will be aboard each of its 12 carriers. The Navy needs such a capability to provide safety, airspace management and, of course, surveillance protection against adversaries, as the vessel moves away from the mainland and across oceans, often towards unfriendly territory.

In a way, it will be like picking up a complete FAA air route traffic control center (ARTCC) from the main-land, along with all its radars and infrastructure, and shoehorning it into an aircraft carrier. And since the carrier’s raison d’etre is to extend military air power in all weather, you could even say that the seagoing JPALS’ ultimate purpose is to thread the tip of an auto-landing aircraft’s arrester hook through an imaginary 9-square foot (0.83-square meter) box centered precisely 14 feet (4.3 meters) above the pitching and rolling stern of a carrier in very low visibility, by day or night...."

Source: http://www.aviationtoday.com/print/av/i ... 12893.html

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 10 Sep 2015, 08:25
by tincansailor
[quote="spazsinbad"]This thread (now long and old) has a lot of information about JPALS - JPALS info on other threads may be found by searching using 'JPALS'. Earlier info makes it clear that JPALS is necessary because current precision radar cannot find it accurately for F-35C precision approaches to CVNs (wheels down or not). JPALS provides much more than that though. JPALS allows the equipped aircraft to return without need for any other comms or radar help. The precision of JPALS for carrier approach success was demonstrated very well by the X-47B series of startlingly accurate arrests on CVNs. The follow-on to X-47B - UCLASS - will require JPALS also.

Thanks for the info spazsinbad that's what I thought I read. To me that suggests getting a lock on an F-35 from the 10-20 mile range will be very hard. I guess you could fire a active radar missile without a lock on and hope you get lucky. If you have a data link for updates form the launching aircraft your odds go up, but not by a lot. Do we know if the Russians or Chinese have that capability?

In my obsession about the F-35 I didn't think about the new autonomous drones. I Didn't know they had JPALS on the test carrier for the X-47B? I guess in the next 20 years a carrier air group should have about 20 drones for SAR and attack. The Navy needs to catch up to the USAF regarding both drones and stealth. They are moving ahead with submarine drones, and the navy has other advantages. There was an old joke about inter-service rivalry. The air force argues for it own ground troops, (Airborne) the army argues for it own air force, (Fixed wing) and the navy sits back and smiles because it has both. God I'm dating myself. That joke was from 1947. And no I wasn't even born in 1947.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 10 Sep 2015, 08:34
by spazsinbad
Now hear this - no smoking no smoking no smoking - I was born late 1948 -- missed it by that much...

Yes the CVNs which hosted the flight ops of the X-47Bs had an early form of JPALS installed that was OK for the robot (whilst human suitable JPALS is still under test etc.). JPALS for the ROBOT was so good that even SecNav stood with the LSOs for that first arrest - I was impressed. There is the 'X-47B thread' here with a bunch of info about all of that also:

Start: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=20468

FINISH: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=20468&start=735

Probably best to read backwards from the finish - but whatever suits your interest. Great info from test LSOs in it.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 10 Sep 2015, 08:48
by neptune
tincansailor wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:This thread (now long and old) has a lot of information about JPALS - JPALS info on other threads may be found by searching using 'JPALS'. Earlier info makes it clear that JPALS is necessary because current precision radar cannot find it accurately for F-35C precision approaches to CVNs (wheels down or not). JPALS provides much more than that though. JPALS allows the equipped aircraft to return without need for any other comms or radar help. The precision of JPALS for carrier approach success was demonstrated very well by the X-47B series of startlingly accurate arrests on CVNs. The follow-on to X-47B - UCLASS - will require JPALS also.

Thanks for the info spazsinbad that's what I thought I read. To me that suggests getting a lock on an F-35 from the 10-20 mile range will be very hard. I guess you could fire a active radar missile without a lock on and hope you get lucky. If you have a data link for updates form the launching aircraft your odds go up, but not by a lot. Do we know if the Russians or Chinese have that capability?

In my obsession about the F-35 I didn't think about the new autonomous drones. I Didn't know they had JPALS on the test carrier for the X-47B? I guess in the next 20 years a carrier air group should have about 20 drones for SAR and attack. The Navy needs to catch up to the USAF regarding both drones and stealth. They are moving ahead with submarine drones, and the navy has other advantages. There was an old joke about inter-service rivalry. The air force argues for it own ground troops, (Airborne) the army argues for it own air force, (Fixed wing) and the navy sits back and smiles because it has both. God I'm dating myself. That joke was from 1947. And no I wasn't even born in 1947.


...out of town... JPALS is coming to the "tin cans" for R/S but "auto landing" is waiting on the Army's "fly-by-wire".

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 10 Sep 2015, 08:57
by neptune
spazsinbad wrote:Now hear this - no smoking no smoking no smoking - I was born late 1948 -- missed it by that much...

Yes the CVNs which hosted the flight ops of the X-47Bs had an early form of JPALS installed that was OK for the robot (whilst human suitable JPALS is still under test etc.). JPALS for the ROBOT was so good that even SecNav stood with the LSOs for that first arrest - I was impressed. There is the 'X-47B thread' here with a bunch of info about all of that also:

Start: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=20468

FINISH: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=20468&start=735

Probably best to read backwards from the finish - but whatever suits your interest. Great info from test LSOs in it.


...there was a time, we lived for "the smoking lamp is lit".."light 'em if you got 'em"..no more....well, rarely an occasional celebratory cigar. :)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2015, 07:03
by tincansailor
neptune wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:Now hear this - no smoking no smoking no smoking - I was born late 1948 -- missed it by that much...

Yes the CVNs which hosted the flight ops of the X-47Bs had an early form of JPALS installed that was OK for the robot (whilst human suitable JPALS is still under test etc.). JPALS for the ROBOT was so good that even SecNav stood with the LSOs for that first arrest - I was impressed. There is the 'X-47B thread' here with a bunch of info about all of that also:

Start: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=20468

FINISH: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=20468&start=735

Probably best to read backwards from the finish - but whatever suits your interest. Great info from test LSOs in it.


...there was a time, we lived for "the smoking lamp is lit".."light 'em if you got 'em"..no more....well, rarely an occasional celebratory cigar. :)


Thanks to both spazsinbad & neptune for the info, and for making an old squid feel welcome. I was born in 1959 spazxinbad, but don't feel bad, I'm sure your in better shape them I am. Interesting about small ship born drones. My old ship was a Leahy class CG. We had a flight deck rated for the smaller choppers of the 60s, by my time we could only Hiffer them. I was on the crash crew. I'm sure we could have put a small launch system on the flight deck, and rig a collapsible arresting wire, or crash net. Todays Burke class DDG's could do the same in the space over the hanger bays.

Back to the future. I'm sure you know In WWII Heavy Cruisers & Battleships carried float planes launched by rocket catapults for recon & spot for shell fall. I love the idea of a surface ship being able to do it's own OTH search with a LO small drone. Better to risk a small drone then a Seahawk. The army has drones with wing spans of a few feet that a man can launch by throwing it. I'm sure the navy can go a little bigger to about 10' wing span with TV and IR sensors, and maybe even a small radar unit.

My biggest concern with being dependent on drones is the other side taking them over by a stronger signal, which seems to be how Iran captured an RQ-170 back in 2011. The military requested permission to retake the drone with a special forces team, or bomb it to keep it out of Iran's hands. Obama refused because he said that would be an act of aggression. The overflight itself was an act of aggression, we lost a lot of tech that day. A few days later he completed our humiliation by politely asking Iran if they would give us our drone back. The last 7 years have been like a bad dream.

Perhaps this question is better suited for the X-47B thread but I don't understand why our drones don't use encrypted command communications? How can someone just take them over? I read a news story during the Russian invasion of Crimea. A Russian army unit visually detected an MQ-9 and used a radio beam to send it crashing to the ground. It seemed they just turned it off. Russia seems way behind us in drone tech but were giving them too many samples.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2015, 13:03
by popcorn
tincansailor wrote: I love the idea of a surface ship being able to do it's own OTH search with a LO small drone.


They're working on it.
http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articl ... -tern.html

The ultimate goal for a TERN UAV and launch system to enable persistent intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) and strike capabilities with payloads as large as 600 pounds while operating at ranges as long as 900 nautical miles from a host vessel.
The TERN system should be able to operate from several relatively small ship types in rough seas, including the 2,784-ton Independence-class littoral combat ship (LCS), which is 418 feet long and 104 feet wide, with a large aft-located flight deck. Other ships of interest are amphibious transport docks, dock landing ships, and Military Sealift Command cargo ships.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2015, 16:44
by jetnerd
spazsinbad wrote:Yes the CVNs which hosted the flight ops of the X-47Bs had an early form of JPALS installed that was OK for the robot (whilst human suitable JPALS is still under test etc.). JPALS for the ROBOT was so good that even SecNav stood with the LSOs for that first arrest - I was impressed. \


If JPALS is that good for UAV's, would it be practical to eventually develop a Global Hawk-sized UAV could work for HMS Queen Elizabeth for AEWC duty vs. the planned AW101-based platform, and for any other carriers without a catapault system? My idea being that removing the mass / volume required for a manned platform might keep the platform small enough to do so, yet allow comparable capability of an E-2 (operating radius/altitude/endurance/radar power.)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2015, 21:18
by spazsinbad
The question of how to recover the unmanned platform becomes an issue. F-35Bs perhaps may runny land using SRVL method on CVFs - however that is not the regular method - which will be vertical land. How will the robot land and what is the wingspan (amongst other questions)?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2015, 22:31
by jetnerd
spazsinbad wrote:The question of how to recover the unmanned platform becomes an issue. F-35Bs perhaps may runny land using SRVL method on CVFs - however that is not the regular method - which will be vertical land. How will the robot land and what is the wingspan (amongst other questions)?


Granted the Global Hawk has a huge wingspan and is almost as large as some fighters. MQ-9 on the other hand is much smaller, has a listed range of 1000nm, 50Kft ceiling and a stall speed of 54 knots (I do not know if that's at landing weight, etc). But with that order of magnitude of landing/takeoff speed (under 100kt), coupled with 20kt WOD, I wonder if unassisted or boosted takeoffs and landing into something like the barricade net makes CVF ops possible. [Edit: and furthermore, within that size platform, is it possible to mount a powerful enough radar for it to be meaningful]

I am obviously spitballing here and also off-topic (barring the JPALS aspect), but I always thought the CVFs deserved a more capable AEW&C asset.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 11 Sep 2015, 22:35
by spazsinbad
By 'barricade' do you refer to a conventional style USN 'barricade' or a 'fly-in' net of some kind? The robot will have to survive this 'catch' with no damage - time after time - no?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2015, 01:46
by spazsinbad
However the 'sea CVF' MQ-9 lands it is likely best done robotically via JPALS as demonstrated by X-47B. Getting that done with testing etc. will be some development. Perhaps once this aspect is enabled along with CVF landing system cleared then an upgraded MQ-9 (what is wingspan? - I see it is 66 feet - how is this for CVF?) might be a consideration as per:
General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper

"... Pilots traveling with the Reaper will use the ground control station to launch and land the aircraft, while most of the flying will be done by US-based pilots.

Testbed and upgrades

In January 2012, General Atomics released a new trailing arm design for the Reaper's main landing gear; benefits include a 30%+ increase in landing weight capacity, a 12% increase in gross takeoff weight (10,500 lb vs. 11,700 lb), a maintenance-free shock absorber (eliminating the need for nitrogen pressurization), a fully rejected takeoff brake system at a gross maximum weight of 11,700 lb, and provisions for automatic takeoff and landing capability and Anti-lock Brake System (ABS) field upgrades. In April 2012, General Atomics announced possible upgrades to USAF Reapers, including two extra 100 gallons fuel pods under the wings, and new heavy-weight landing gear, to increase endurance to 37 hours. The wingspan can also be increased to 88 ft, increasing endurance to 42 hours. The USAF has bought 38 Reaper Extended Range (ER) versions, carrying external fuel tanks, the heavy-weight landing gear, a new fuel management system which ensures fuel and thermal balance among external tank, wing, and fuselage fuel sources, and an Alcohol Water Injection (AWI) system to shorten the required runway takeoff length; these features increase endurance from 27 to 33–35 hours. General Atomics internally funded the wingspan increase....

...General Atomics is also considering equipping the MQ-9 with Link 16 to allow it to pass targeting coordinates and position information to other aircraft.

During a U.S. Navy exercise in August 2014, General Atomics demonstrated its Lynx multi-mode radar's synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and maritime wide-area search (MWAS) modes on a King Air 350 surrogate for the Reaper. The Lynx showed it could support maritime operations in littoral environments by detecting mine-like-objects and small vessels like fast boats, sailboats, and fishing boats, and link the radar's data to the Navy’s Intelligence Carry-On Program (ICOP) data link system. The company's purpose for supporting the exercise was to demonstrate the Reaper's relevancy in a maritime surveillance role by delivering near-real-time, all-weather, day/night Lynx radar and EO/IR imagery.

In June 2015, a study by the USAF's Scientific Advisory Board identified several improvements for operating the Reaper in contested airspace; adding readily available sensors, weapons, and threat detection and countermeasures could increase situational awareness and enable riskier deployments. Suggestions included a radar warning receiver to know when it's being targeted, air-to-air and miniature air-to-ground weapons, manned-unmanned teaming, multi-UAV control, automatic take-offs and landings, and precision navigation and timing systems to fly in GPS-denied areas. Another idea was redesigned ground control stations with user-friendly video game-like controllers and touchscreen maps to access data without overwhelming operators.

A typical MQ-9 system consists of multiple aircraft, ground control station, communications equipment, maintenance spares, and personnel. A military crew comprises a pilot, sensor operator, and Mission Intelligence Coordinator. The aircraft is powered by a 950 hp turboprop, with a maximum speed of about 260 knots (300 miles per hour or 483 km per hour) and a cruising speed of 150-170 knots (278 to 315 km/hour). With a 66 ft (20 m) wingspan, and a maximum payload of 3,800 lb (1,700 kg), the MQ-9 can be armed with a variety of weaponry, including Hellfire missiles and 500-lb laser-guided bomb units. The Reaper has a range of 1,000 nmi (1,150 mi; 1,850 km)[wiki: dubious – discuss] and an operational altitude of 50,000 ft (15,000 m), which makes it especially useful for long-term loitering operations, both for surveillance and support of ground troops...."

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_A ... Q-9_Reaper

F-35B specs: Wingspan: 35 feet

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 20 Sep 2015, 17:43
by spazsinbad
Back to JPALS for the F-35s.... and a Hankie CARUSO graphic for the old hot rod STEAM groovers - now EMALers.... :mrgreen:
2015 Strike Test News VX-23
2015 VX-23 LT Chris “TJ” Karapostoles

"...F-35C JPALS
The Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) will equip the F-35 with a precision and non-precision approach capability at the ship as well as a means of aligning the Inertial Navigation System (INS) without a cable — similar to Radio Frequency (RF) alignments in legacy aircraft.

Pilots will primarily rely on JPALS during night-time and inclement weather carrier landing operations. The PAX ITF has tested both the alignment and non-precision capability of JPALS at the field. The F-35C completed the first non-precision JPALS approaches in August. The system worked as designed, providing stable TACAN-like course guidance as well as automatic final bearing indication. The PAX ITF will test the alignments and non-precision approach capability during the F-35C’s second phase of Developmental Test (DT-II) aboard a CVN this fall."

Source: http://issuu.com/nawcad_pao/docs/striketest2015_single (PDF 3.6Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 20 Sep 2015, 18:40
by spazsinbad
Another tidbit which confirms that JPALS is for the F-35B/Cs & UCLASS - for the moment - money problems I guess....
2015 STRIKE TEST NEWS
2015 VX-23 LT William “Magic Legs” Dann

"Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS)
The Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) is an all-weather precision approach guidance system designed to support both land and sea-based instrument approaches using the Global Positioning System (GPS). The system will be designed to provide approach guidance to both the F-35B/C Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) and the Unmanned Carrier Launched Airborne Surveillance and Strike (UCLASS) program. For the JSF, it will provide the capability to conduct coupled landings with a decision height and altitude of 200 ft and ½ nmi. This is the same capability currently provided by the radar based AN/SPN-46 Automatic Carrier Landing System (ACLS) system.

The UCLASS will need the additional capability to conduct 0 ft and 0 nmi landings on the ship as it is an unmanned platform. Fall of 2015 will see the F/A-18 and C-12 aircraft used as surrogate test platforms to test JPALS functionality for both JSF and UCLASS onboard the USS DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER (CVN 69). JPALS is not currently slated for any aircraft other than JSF or UCLASS.

Source: http://issuu.com/nawcad_pao/docs/striketest2015_single (PDF 3.6Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Sep 2015, 22:10
by tritonprime
Business | Wed Sep 23, 2015 4:00pm EDT
Related: Aerospace & Defense
"U.S. Navy's F-35 test to include new helmet, full weapons load"
FORT WORTH, Texas | By Andrea Shalal

Source:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/ ... 7F20150923

The U.S. Navy's next round of carrier testing of the Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) F-35C stealth fighter jet will include new helmets and jets fully loaded with internal weapons, a company official told Reuters.

During the tests, scheduled for the first two weeks of October, two F-35s will also test the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS), an all-weather, GPS-guided landing system being designed by Raytheon Co (RTN.N), Lockheed's F-35 program manager, Lorraine Martin, said in an interview. She spoke after a ceremony for the rollout of the first of the 52 F-35s that Norway will buy.

Martin said the second round of testing is a milestone for the jet, which has wider wings than Air Force and Marine Corps versions, holds more fuel, and is designed to be catapulted off the deck of an aircraft carrier, and then land, using a special hook and heavy arresting gear.

"We're really pleased with the momentum that we've got with the Navy," she said. "If you talk to the Navy's aviators, they know the aircraft has incredible importance for their ability to do what they need to do from the ship around the world."

Lockheed is building three models of the supersonic jet for the U.S. military and nine other countries: Britain, Australia, Norway, Italy, Turkey, the Netherlands, Israel, Japan and South Korea. Denmark and Canada are also considering orders.

The Pentagon plans to spend $391 billion to develop and produce 2,457 planes over the next few decades.

Total procurement is now slated to reach 3,150, but could rise, Martin told reporters this week.

She said the U.S. government is providing information about the aircraft to other countries, identified by sources familiar with the program as Singapore, Belgium, Switzerland, Poland, Finland and Spain.

The U.S. Marine Corps in July became the first service to declare an initial squadron of its F-35B jets ready for combat, with the Air Force due to follow suit next August.

The U.S. Navy, which carried out the first round of at-sea testing on the USS Nimitz last November, plans to have an initial squadron of jets ready for combat by late 2018 or early 2019.

Martin said the jets' performance during the first round of carrier testing had helped build confidence in the program.

This time, one Lockheed and three government pilots will be using the jet's improved Generation-3 helmet, which is already being used for testing on land. They will fly with a full store of internal weapons and full fuel tanks to test the jet's performance at higher weights. There are no plans to fire the weapons, officials said.

U.S. defense officials said the tests would also include catapult takeoffs with after-burner power, more night approaches and landings, engine runs for maintainers and other parameters aimed at creating conditions that are more similar to combat.

They said the tests would not include a portable version of the F-35's complex, computer-based logistics system, with the data required to be relayed via communications links instead.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Sep 2015, 22:54
by spazsinbad
Thanks. I'll put a link to this F-35C DT-II test info here: viewtopic.php?f=57&t=28046

F-35C DT-II TESTING CVN thread in the millstone subsection which includes 'test flights'.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 30 Sep 2015, 16:57
by spazsinbad
Carrier Ford crew preps for delivery after sea trial delay
26 Sep 2015 Lance M. Bacon

"ABOARD THE FUTURE CARRIER GERALD R. FORD, NEWPORT NEWS, Va. — The decision to delay sea trials for this supercarrier was a matter of cost versus calendar, and money won out.

Shipboard tests that cover hundreds of programs are close to 50 percent complete. The beleaguered Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System was successfully tested on bow catapults in June; waist catapults will be tested in November....

...‘A whole new world’
Ford has a steep learning curve. Some procedures worked out in an engineer’s office years ago have not panned out in the real world. As they find the fix, sailors also have to learn the ins and outs of leap-ahead technologies.

“On a legacy catapult, if you have a ‘suspend,’ you know it’s going to be within a handful of things,” said Cmdr. Ed Plott, Ford’s air boss. “Everybody understands instantaneously what that is and how long it’s going to take to fix. For us, we have to work through the problem and then figure out what specific events it effects. The more that we learn about the system, the better understanding we have, the more effective we will be making those decisions.”

Plott calls his khaki leadership “the A-Team,” and said they are “legends” within the launch and recovery community. But walk through the department and it is easy to see that all ranks recognize a responsibility to gain and share institutional knowledge. In fact, many have created their own “A” Schools to bring new crew members up to speed.

Operations are much the same on the flight deck, but downstairs it is a different world. On one hand, the end of the steam era means maintenance is not as hot, dirty, or smelly, and doesn’t take as many people. That is good news for Aviation Boatswain’s Mate (Launch/Recovery) 1st Class (AW) Jernelle Smith, who has managed shots and traps for 12 years.

“It is easier to manage these catapults than the legacy” ones, she said. “It takes fewer man-hours, which means people will be able to get a lot more sleep. We don’t have to stay up all night doing maintenance after being on the flight deck for 12 hours.”

But the change also brings challenges.

“With a legacy ship, we already had a path on everything we did. Here, we don’t have that,” said Chief Aviation Boatswain’s Mate (AW/SW) Christopher Boone, an 18-year vet entering his third year aboard Ford. “Below these decks, things are different. We have to think outside of the box. It is a whole new way of thinking and training, a whole new way of launching and recovering aircraft.”...

Source: http://www.navytimes.com/story/military ... /72774398/ & http://hrana.org/news/2015/09/carrier-f ... rial-dela/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 10 Dec 2015, 19:56
by spazsinbad
On page 9 of this thread: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=288627&hilit=India+EMALS#p288627 there is info about EMALS for INDIA. Here is some more info:
Jet Engine Technology a Top Priority in India-US Talks
10 Dec 2015 Vivek Raghuvanshi

"...Another priority is cooperation on development of an electro-magnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS) for the proposed Indigenous aircraft carrier INS Vishal, the MoD source added.

India and the US are already discussing cooperation in jet engine EMALS system for the carrier under the India-US Defense Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI), a forum set by the two countries to identify defense projects that could be taken up under joint development.

The DTTI forum officials in three of their meetings have discussed the possibility of cooperation in jet engine technology, the MoD source added.

Another joint working group under DTTI is discussing the possibility of cooperation in aircraft carrier technology and has held four rounds of meetings, the source added.

The US has already offered India an EMALS for the deck of its proposed homegrown carrier, capable of launching fifth generation fighter aircraft and airborne early warning aircraft.

Currently Indian aircraft carriers have ski jump assisted take-off systems.

India, Russia and China operate carriers using the less advanced short take-off launch system. With an EMALS-equipped launch system, India's naval strike fighters would encounter less strain on their airframes and be able to conduct sorties faster.

However, analysts are not sure if joint cooperation in high-tech projects between India and US can take off in the near future.

"It is too early to expect co-development and co-production of advanced weapons systems and the two countries will have to begin with low end weapon technologies to learn how the DTTI will work on the ground," said Nitin Mehta, a defense analyst here."

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /76979974/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Apr 2016, 13:33
by spazsinbad
AAG is back in the news NAVAIR:
AAG traps Super Hornet, marks program milestone
31 Mar 2016 PEO(T) Public Affairs NavAir

"The Navy’s Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) program reaches a milestone with the first recovery of a manned aircraft, an F/A-18E Super Hornet, March 31 at the Runway Arrested Landing Site (RALS) at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in N.J. The aircraft performed additional roll-ins, at speeds up to 105 knots, enabling the AAG test team to assess the system’s response and compare it with data from earlier developmental testing, which used aircraft-representative dead-load vehicles. The AAG is concurrently being installed and tested aboard the future Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) in Newport News, Va. The system provides the capability to recover a broader range of carrier-based aircraft while reducing manning and maintenance requirements. “This historic event is the next step toward validating AAG’s performance and is the direct result of the diligent efforts from a dedicated and innovative team,” said Capt. Steve Tedford, program manager of the Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment program office (PMA 251). U.S. Navy Photo"

PHOTO: http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/ ... 0FINAL.jpg

Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=6221

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Apr 2016, 03:53
by spazsinbad
:devil: Moron or more on - take your pic - or whatever.... AAG is getting good to go... :roll: :mrgreen:
Super Hornet Catches Wire on Advanced Arresting Gear in First Manned Aircraft Test
04 Apr 2016 Sam LaGroan

"...The facility in New Jersey had arrested simulated dead loads and jet cars ahead of the first manned arrested landing with the Super Hornet from Naval Strike Aircraft Test Squadron 23 (VX-23) on March 31, according to a General Atomics statement. “More than 1,200 successful dead load arrestments have been completed at the Jet Car Test Site in Lakehurst, New Jersey,” stated Dean Key with General Atomics said in the statement. “Now, with the arrestment of aircraft, we take an important step in verifying the dynamic controls and system performance as a whole.”

The AAG underwent an extensive redesign in 2013 that delayed the testing schedule by two years, Navy officials disclosed in 2015.

“We are about two years behind where we should be up at Lakehurst in terms of having the systems installed and testing it with real aircraft,” Rear Adm Tom Moore said last year. “I have to get equipment installed… and concurrently with that I have to get Lakehurst to start testing the upgraded system.”

In October, the Naval Air Systems Command said that after the redesign of the AAG, the service said it will only have to deal with software fixes on the Ford and no major other hardware improvements.

“We feel confident we can deliver hardware to the ship without having to go back and redesign or remove and replace anything we’ve delivered to the ship,” Rear Adm. Donald Gaddis, Program Executive Officer for Tactical Aircraft said in an October hearing.

The tests will inform a series of recovery bulletins for the aircraft that will operate on the Ford-class.

“The plan right now is to do these recovery bulletins in incremental steps,” he said. “We’ll start with the Super Hornet E/F, then we’ll go to the F-18C and then we’ll go to the E2 [Hawkeye] and C-2 [Greyhound]. And our plan is to do all those type/model/series and get all those recovery bulletins done before we hand it over to [the director of operational test and evaluation.”..." [WOTNO F-35C?]

Photo & Caption: https://i1.wp.com/news.usni.org/wp-cont ... 03/aag.jpg "An artist’s conception of an installed Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) on a U.S. carrier. General Atomics Image"


Source: https://news.usni.org/2016/04/04/super- ... craft-test

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Apr 2016, 18:22
by neptune
[quote="spazsinbad"]:...The AAG underwent an extensive redesign in 2013 that delayed the testing schedule by two years[/b], Navy officials disclosed in 2015.....In October, the Naval Air Systems Command said that after the redesign of the AAG, the service said it will only have to deal with software fixes on the Ford and no major other hardware improvements.
...

...."extensive redesign" and "only have to deal with software fixes".....as long as it works... :)

side note: JPALS is to be integrated into the AAG to provide dynamic data linked from the landing a/c. Dynamic data includes the a/c number (ID), a/c weight, consumables (status of remaining fuel, weapons, etc.)weight, airspeed, all calculated as "hook load" and last but not least ...the eta. The above is calculated as the loads for the 3 or 4 wire (c.d.p.) AAG controls.

...eventually I hope to see the landing energy of the AAG, recovered electrically and added back into the ship power systems (EMALs??) :)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 05 Apr 2016, 21:48
by spazsinbad
Flight Crew: Aircraft Launch & Recovery Equipment Test Division: Lakehurst, N.J.
NAVAIRSYSCOM Published on Oct 1, 2015

"Sailors assigned to Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division's workforce in Lakehurst, N.J., support the fleet by developing, testing and training on aircraft launch and recovery equipment and aircraft support equipment."



Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 17 May 2016, 14:34
by spazsinbad
First the good news and then the less good news....
"...Though AAG testing is running behind schedule and the data set is limited, Meyer said test data on EMALS has shown the system to be more reliable than predicted."

Advanced Arresting Gear Tests Delayed But Little Operational Impact Expected
17 May 2016 Megan Eckstein

"NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. – The Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) test schedule for aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) was pushed back again, but the delay may cause little impact thanks to a slew of post-delivery test requirements for the first-in-class ship, the CVN-78 class program manager told USNI News.

Manned aircraft just began arrested landings on a ground-based AAG runway system in New Jersey on March 31, Capt. Chris Meyer said Monday at the Navy League’s Sea-Air-Space Exposition 2016, and the first manned airplanes will not be cleared to land on Ford until November....

...the rest of Ford is 98 percent complete, AAG is still being installed on the ship. The Navy intended to install the improved AAG on the ship and conduct land-based tests at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, N.J., concurrently to help buy back lost time. Though the delays with AAG continue, Meyer said it was possible that the new pushed-back schedule would have no operational impact....

...“It’s important to remember that we’re not going to start on day 1 on the ship launching and recovering fleet aircraft,” he said of the ship shakedown. Because the island on the flight deck is shaped and located differently than is the island on Nimitz-class carriers, the Navy still needs to understand how that will shape the wind patterns for flight deck operations. The very first at-sea period for the ship after its delivery will support rotary wing dynamic interface testing, Meyer said. The carrier will then conduct air traffic control certifications with its new radar systems, and will eventually bring out test squadrons to conduct the first manned launches on the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) and manned arrested landings on the ship with AAG.

Meanwhile, manned AAG testing in New Jersey will continue, with the Navy testing F/A-18E-F Super Hornets first. By November the engineers will issue an Aircraft Recovery Bulletin for the Super Hornets, allowing them to begin landing on the aircraft carrier.

“So by the time we’re ready to do fleet aircraft, all of this will have sorted itself out,” Meyer said, noting that a November start to Super Hornet flight deck operations will work fine given the rest of the post-delivery events.

The engineers in New Jersey will then test the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye and eventually the legacy F/A-18C-D Hornets.

“I’m pretty confident two of those are going to finish before shakedown is done,” Meyer told USNI News. “The very last one, F-18C-D, there’s some risk that might bump out a little bit. We’ll just have to keep watching it, but pretty close.”

Program Executive Officer for Aircraft Carriers Rear Adm. Tom Moore said in October that having only one type of airplane to work with during the shakedown would be okay because “the catapults and arresting gear are agnostic to what type of planes land on them. … It doesn’t matter to me how many different type/model/series, I just need planes for launching and recovering during the six-month period between delivery and before I take it in for the post-shakedown availability.”

Still, Meyer said he hoped to receive Aircraft Recovery Bulletins for the two remaining aircraft types before the end of shakedown so as not to affect crew training.

“You want the ship to be able to train with the full air wing, so if that recovery bulletin is not done then that’s one plane in the air wing that you couldn’t train with on Day 1,” Meyer told USNI News. “But it’s a two-year (training) period, so if it’s Day 2 that’s not necessarily the worst thing.”..."

Source: https://news.usni.org/2016/05/17/advanc ... t-expected

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 24 May 2016, 19:28
by spazsinbad
Navy May Back Away From Advanced Arresting Gear for Ford Carriers
24 May 2016 Sam LaGrone

"The Navy could consider using a different system to catch incoming aircraft on its next generation of Gerald R. Ford-class (CVN-78) of aircraft carriers after the costs for the General Atomics-built Advanced Arresting Gear have more than doubled, USNI News has learned.

The troubled AAG system has lagged years behind the rest of the next generation components included on the Ford-class, Navy officials have said over the last year.

In the report the Senate Armed Services Committee released with its proposed Fiscal Year 2017 defense authorization bill, the SASC laid out a pattern of cost increases from about a $476 million in costs for research development and acquisition in 2009 for four systems to a 2016 cost estimate of $1.4 billion – about a 130 percent increase when adjusted for inflation.

Based on the cost increase, the SASC bill is pushing for a top-down review of the program by the Office of the Secretary of Defense to take a second look at AAG and recertify its need for the Ford-class.

Ultimately, USNI News understands, the goal is to have the planned AAG systems on the ships that follow carrier Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) – John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) and Enterprise (CVN-80) – replaced with a more traditional but enhanced version of the current Mk-7 MOD 3 arresting gear.

Publically the service is still committed to AAG for the Fords.... [NO LONGER PUBLIC MY FRIEND!]

...“The Advanced Arresting Gear has become a model for how not to do acquisition of needed technology,” a senior Navy official told USNI News on Tuesday. “Exactly how we move forward is still being worked out.”...

...While a Mk-7 configuration may be in play for the follow-ons to Ford, the lead ship will be outfitted with the AAG configuration, currently being installed on the carrier.

The promise of the AAG and the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) on the other end of Ford was to allow the carrier to launch and recover aircraft that weren’t built to the high tolerances of the current arrested landing and catapult systems and expand the types of aircraft that can make an arrested land on a carrier.

“Typically in our manned aircraft designs, you have to build an airplane that fits within the operating envelope of the Mk-7 arresting gear and the Mk-13 catapults. So you kind of start with an operating envelope that gets you sort of a design of aircraft like we have now – F-18 Super Hornet, Growler, Joint Strike Fighter,” Rear Adm. Michael Manazir, the Navy’s director air warfare told reporters last year.

“The aircraft are structured that way, they’re strengthened … you build weight and structure into the airplanes to accommodate the violence of the arrested landing. With the Advanced Arresting Gear and the ability to land an airplane – it’s still a controlled crash, but relatively more softly, and to launch it relatively more softly, and so a graduated kind of force as the airplane goes up – you can now start to do things with aircraft design that you couldn’t do before. It might allow us some more margin in weight, in size, and in structure and capability.”

On the other end of the flight deck, the General Atomics EMALS is performing much better in testing on Ford and at Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) test facility at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, in Lakehurst, N.J."

Source: https://news.usni.org/2016/05/24/19801

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 May 2016, 01:40
by nutshell
I've read that half of the power generated from the two 300MW nuclear powerplants of a Ford class carrier is used for the EMAL, is that true?

What is the point of having SO MUCH electrical power (like, 3 times or something more then a Nimitz) ? Are the Navy going to use some crazy laser gun on these carriers?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 May 2016, 04:02
by spazsinbad
On page 6 of this thread there is this info below: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=263235&hilit=power+Pentland#p263235
Electromagnetic Catapults Are Emblematic Of U.S. Navy's All-Electric Era
07 Dec 2013 William Pentland

"...The whole EMALS juggernaut depends on the delivery of massive 122 megajoule-jolts of electricity to catapult planes into the sky. The jolts are so huge that the EMALS includes an elaborate energy storage system to supplement power provided by the nuclear reactors. The system stores a staggering 400 megajoules on four disk alternators.

After launching an aircraft, the alternators can be recharged in only 45 seconds. The supercarrier will be able to launch 220 sorties per day, about 25% more air missions per day than the current carriers...."

Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/williampent ... ctric-era/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 Jun 2016, 05:41
by spazsinbad
See previous page for report that EMALS is better on Ford testing so far: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=339226&hilit=EMALS#p339226
Arresting gear on Ford-class carriers under scrutiny
13 Jun 2016 By Hugh Lessig

"...Besides cost, [AAG] performance is also an issue. The committee notes "persistent delays in software development" that prompted the Navy to lower requirements for the AAG and eliminate a measure that it be back-fitted onto Nimitz-class ships.

In early 2015, the Navy considered using the current Nimitz-class system, called the Mark 7, on the upcoming Kennedy. It backed off.

The Navy "decided to continue with AAG, in part because the installation of the Mark 7 was estimated to cost $87 million more than AAG," the report states. "This appears to be a shortsighted decision given the extraordinary and continuing development delays and cost growth, including more than $500 million since this decision was made in February 2015."

The committee's report is the latest in a series of publicly stated concerns about AAG.

In November 2014, the Government Accountability Office report noted failures in land-based testing and the potential for delays if the system already installed on the Gerald R. Ford had to be modified.

In March 2015, then-Rear Adm. Thomas Moore said the system was about two years behind schedule due to problems discovered in testing that led to further work and redesign. At the time, Moore was the Navy's program executive officer for carriers. Now Vice Adm. Moore is the head of Naval Sea Systems Command, a post he formally assumed Friday.

In October, a Pentagon official told Congress that testing on AAG had not yet accumulated meaningful data, yet it was already installed on Ford.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., a member of the Armed Services panel, said a big challenge with the Ford-class program stems from introducing many new components all at once, instead of phasing in new systems over a series of ships. That decision was made some years ago.

As for AAG, he said there is no margin for error.

"I'm very aware of it," he said, "and I've had discussions with people at the shipyard about it."

He said the redesigned AAG "can't work 95 percent of the time. That's got to work 100 or 1,000 percent of the time. That is an area of real concern for the Navy. It's a concern for the shipyard and it's a concern for the committee."

Referring to committee's call for a full review, Kaine said, "We want the Secretary of Defense to basically give us a candid assessment of this, because we've got other ships under contract that are being designed. We want to make sure we are not putting our aviators at risk."

Source: http://www.dailypress.com/news/military ... story.html

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 14 Jun 2016, 01:12
by wolfpak
FWIW 138 megajoules is equal to .038 megawatt hours. Per Wiki:"In physics, power is the rate of doing work. It is the amount of energy consumed per unit time. Having no direction, it is a scalar quantity. In the SI system, the unit of power is the joule per second (J/s), known as the watt in honour of James Watt, the eighteenth-century developer of the steam engine. Another common and traditional measure is horsepower (comparing to the power of a horse). Being the rate of work, the equation for power can be written:

P = W t "

So the power required to launch an aircraft on a catapult takes roughly 1.33% of that generated by a 300MW reactor in one hour.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 14 Jun 2016, 01:20
by spazsinbad
Whatever the numbers - what is your point please? See details at top of this page.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2016, 02:43
by spazsinbad
Navair Clips: AAG Traps First Fly-In
NAVAIRSYSCOM 14 Oct 2016

"Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) completes its first fly-in recovery of an F/A-18E Super Hornet at the Runway Arrested Landing Site in Lakehurst, New Jersey, Oct. 13 [2016]. Conducted as part of AAG performance testing, this event follows more than 200 roll-in arrestments completed since late March. "This milestone test event demonstrates AAG's capability, and signifies a big step forward in getting the system ready for duty onboard the Navy's newest aircraft carrier, [Pre-commissioning Unit Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78)]," said Capt. Stephen Tedford, Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment program manager."

Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... A8B5F03DBB


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2016, 03:45
by KamenRiderBlade
I'm glad the AAG is starting to be on track.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2016, 03:53
by popcorn
IIRC one of the issues with the AAG is not that it doesn't work. Rather that it is going to require a lot more maintenance than originally projected so anticipated savings won't meet expectations.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2016, 03:54
by KamenRiderBlade
So at worst, the life cycle cost will equal the old Hydraulic system?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2016, 04:11
by neptune
KamenRiderBlade wrote:So at worst, the life cycle cost will equal the old Hydraulic system?


....or now that it is computer controlled, the data steam from JPALS can be linked to automate and balance the energy consumption of the water turbines with the load of the a/c energy. Sadly, that wasted energy is yet to be captured by a generator and stored to a capacitor bank.
:(

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2016, 12:52
by spazsinbad
AAG traps first fly-in
14 Oct 2016 PEO(T) Public Affairs

"NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. -- Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) completes a first-of-its-kind recovery of an F/A-18E Super Hornet at the Runway Arrested Landing Site in Lakehurst, N.J., Oct. 13. This event, conducted as part of AAG performance testing with the Super Hornet, follows more than 200 roll-in arrestments completed at the site since late March. The AAG test team conducted more than 1,300 dead-load arrestments on the Navy’s newest aircraft recovery system before involving manned aircraft.

“This milestone test event demonstrates AAG’s capability and signifies a big step forward in getting the system ready for duty on board the Navy’s newest aircraft carrier,” said Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment (PMA-251) program manager Capt. Stephen Tedford.

While roll-in and fly-in arrestments are essentially the same to the AAG system, conducting both types of traps enables the test team to ensure all operational conditions that the system will experience are tested. At the completion of AAG performance testing, an Aircraft Recovery Bulletin will be generated, allowing system testing with manned aircraft aboard Pre-Commissioning Unit Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) to progress."

Photo:"Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) completes a first-of-its-kind recovery of an Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23-assigned F/A-18E Super Hornet at the Runway Arrested Landing Site in Lakehurst, N.J., Oct. 13. (U.S. Navy photo)" http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/ ... 0image.JPG (5.8Mb)
&
http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/ ... ame391.jpg (0.75Mb)


Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=6383

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 20 Oct 2016, 12:45
by spazsinbad
Sad to see the SupaDupa Hornet being cut out of JPALS. Anyhoo it blasts ahead for F-35B/Cs and STINGRAY whatever....
JPALS to Guide F-35, MQ-25 to Shipboard Landings
19 Oct 2016 RICHARD R. BURGESS

"ARLINGTON, Va. — The Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) being developed by Raytheon will be guiding the F-35 Lightning II strike fighter to shipboard landings as early as 2018 and, in the future, will be doing the same for the MQ-25 carrier-based refueling unmanned aerial vehicle.

The JPALS is scheduled to achieve early operational capability on two amphibious assault ships in 2018 and initial operational capability in mid-2020, Mark Maselli, JPALS deputy program manager, Raytheon Intelligence, Information and Services., told Seapower Oct. 18.

JPALS uses differential Global Positioning System (GPS) signals to guide an aircraft to the deck of a ship with a precision difficult to achieve under control of a human pilot in any kind of weather and in darkness. With triangular data links between the aircraft, ship and satellite continuously transmitting faster than a second, the ship’s positions are recalculated continuously as the aircraft approaches. The aircraft is not reliant on a ship’s radars and beacons.

The JPALS will be used by both the F-35B and F-35C variants of the Lightning II and be part of the Block 3 software version on the aircraft. There are no additional avionics components for the F-35, just a portion of the F-35’s mission software.

JPALS has been tested in a Navy F/A-18 Hornet strike fighter, including taking the aircraft to carrier landings, said Bob Delorge, vice president of Transportation and Support Services at Raytheon’s Intelligence, Information and Services business, told Seapower. The F/A-18 made 38 landings on a carrier with JPALS. Raytheon has tested JPALS for 40,000 hours over the development program so far.

The original concept was for JPALS to take the aircraft down to 200 feet in altitude before the pilot resumed control. Under the current program, Raytheon will develop the capability for the aircraft — piloted or unmanned — to be guided all the way to the deck.

“The goal here is that the pilots [are] going to have a huge increase in confidence knowing that they’re going to return from a mission regardless of conditions that they’re coming back into,” Delorge said.

Under the concept, a signal is broadcast to the aircraft from the ship when the aircraft is 200 nautical miles away. The aircraft logs into the JPALS system at the 60-nautical-mile mark and starts two-way communication with the ship, Maselli said. The ship is receiving GPS data and accounting for pitch and roll of the ship in the sea. The aircraft also is receiving GPS data and sending it to the ship, which calculates relative position. At the 10-nautical mile mark the data transmission speed becomes multiple updates per second, with more data as well.

The hardened JPALS has anti-jamming and anti-spoofing security features, Maselli said.

The original vision for JPALS including retrofitting the Navy’s carrier aircraft fleet, but the current program is limited to moving forward with the F-35 and the MQ-25 and any subsequent aircraft types, Maselli said.

The Navy in September awarded to Raytheon $255 million for the development and production readiness of JPALS. Exercise of all options would bring the contract value to $270 million."

Source: http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20161019-jpals.html

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2016, 05:39
by spazsinbad
Always good to know that USAF has got yur back JPALS - PALS indeed.... :devil: USAF WILL need AUTOland to get onboard! :devil:
Raytheon Advances JPALS Landing System for F-35B/Cs
20 Oct 2016 Bill Carey

"...On September 21, the Naval Air Systems Command (Navair) awarded Raytheon a $254.5 million contract to continue work on eight JPALS engineering development models (EDMs) and deliver two additional EDMs to support early operational capability requirements for the Marine Corps F-35B and Navy F-35C. The contract also calls for Raytheon to develop initial operational requirements for MQ-25 autoland.

JPALS is a differential GPS-based precision landing system that guides aircraft to carriers and amphibious assault ships in all weather conditions and in surface conditions to sea state 5 using an encrypted, jam-proof datalink. The system makes use of software and receiver hardware on the aircraft and an array of GPS sensors, mast-mounted antennas and processing/datalink equipment racks on the ship. The Navy plans to declare early operational capability on two amphibious assault ships in 2018 to support Marine Corps F-35Bs, Raytheon executives said. Initial operational capability is planned in 2020.

Navair awarded Raytheon a contract in July 2008 to develop the original eight EDMs, for what was then called Increment 1 of the program; a second increment was to develop a land-based capability for the Air Force. In late 2013, the Navy conducted a series of test landings to the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt using two F/A-18C Hornets fitted with “functionality representative” avionics kits. The Air Force eventually withdrew from the JPALS program, leading to a breach of Nunn-McCurdy Act cost threshholds in 2014 and delaying the effort, executives said.

The existing eight EDMs are distributed among different locations, with two at a Raytheon laboratory in Fullerton, Calif., one at the Patuxent River, Md., Naval Air Station and the remainder on amphibious assault ships and CVN-class aircraft carriers.

All three F-35 models will have JPALS capability embedded in Block 3F software, the final software release under the F-35 system development and demonstration program. But Air Force F-35As are not covered under Raytheon’s contract. “This ties in with the Navy’s investment on the F-35,” said Robert Delorge, Raytheon vice president for transportation and support services."

Source: http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... m-f-35b/cs

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2016, 12:46
by spazsinbad
A few more details such as 20cm accuracy (almost 8 inches) & I like the VAGUE last paragraph....
Rockwell Collins awarded $67 million contract to complete subsystem development for Navy’s next generation precision landing system
20 Oct 2016 Rockwell Collins PR

"...“The JPALS system provides a new level of safety for carrier-based pilots that will help them accomplish their challenging missions,” said Troy Brunk, vice president and general manager for Communication, Navigation and Electronic Warfare Solutions at Rockwell Collins. “The accuracy provided by the system — supported by our datalink and GPS subsystems — was proven during carrier trials using combat aircraft.”

During flight trials, F/A-18C Hornets from the “Salty Dogs” of Strike Aircraft Test Squadron (VX- 23) successfully made more than 60 touch-and-go landings on the USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71). In all, JPALS guided the Hornets to a “hands-off-the-stick” 3-wire landing to within approximately 20 centimeter accuracy.

“JPALS is clearly a safety and readiness- enhancing, game- changing capability which will extend the life of carrier- based aircraft, as well as allow the Navy to focus training on warfighting, rather than take-offs and landings,” added Brunk....

...Rockwell Collins has been a major supplier to this program since it began in 2008. This latest contract phase will help the JPALS program complete development and prepare for production of the Navy’s current and future fleet, including the F-35."

Source: http://www.rockwellcollins.com/Data/New ... JPALS.aspx

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Nov 2016, 23:31
by popcorn
Some positive vibes re AAG.

https://news.usni.org/2016/11/02/navsea ... ws-promise

NAVSEA: Ford Carrier Advanced Arresting Gear Testing Shows Promise

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The troubled General Atomics Advanced Arresting Gear program is doing well in its delayed testing program on land and on carrier Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78), the head of Naval Sea Systems Command told reporters on Wednesday.

Last month, Naval Air Systems Command successfully landed an F/A-18E Super Hornet at its land-based test facility in Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, in Lakehurst, N.J. 12 times in a day with no problems in a little-publicized test and shipboard testing of the AAG system on Ford is doing well, said Vice Adm. Tom Moore...

“When that ship delivers we’ll be ready to land aircraft on AAG. I think 78 is doing much better and I think we’ll have a fully functional system,” Moore said.
“I don’t want to presuppose any decision but I believe if the system functions the way it does on 78 — and given where we are on CVN 79 and the construction of the ship — that it’s a very strong and viable path forward for us.”

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 03 Nov 2016, 09:37
by spazsinbad
NAVSEA Commander: Ford Commissioning Decision by Year’s End; CVN 79 on Track
02 Nov 2016 RICHARD R. BURGESS

"...Moore said that testing of the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System is complete and that testing of the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) is about 56 percent complete. He said good progress is being made with the land-based AAG test site at Naval Air Warfare Center Lakehurst Division in New Jersey.

“We’re had the first 12 aircraft land into AAG,” he said. “We thought that would take a week. We did it in a day.”..."

Source: http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20161102-cvn.html

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Dec 2016, 09:22
by spazsinbad
LM F-35 GM Weekly Update
17 Nov 2016 Jeff Babione

"On board the USS America (LHA-6), the team continues to expand the F-35B envelope for the fleet to utilize during deployments. The Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) is an important feature the team successfully tested during this at-sea period. The JPALS system works on both the F-35B and the F-35C, enabling the jet to synchronize speeds with the ship, in the F-35B’s case, an amphibious assault ship.

In October 2015, the team first tested this same technology to land aboard the USS Eisenhower (CVN 69) with the F-35C model. The difference is the F-35B matches the speed and trajectory of the ship exactly to not only land on board, but to hover in parallel position, allowing the pilot to transition the F-35B over the deck and then execute a vertical landing. This innovative technology not only makes it easier for pilots to accomplish a vertical landing onboard a ship moving at speeds of up to 30 knots, but also makes pilot training much easier for young fleet pilots to safely land...."

Source: https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... _17_16.pdf (0.7Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 11 Dec 2016, 21:36
by spazsinbad
JPALS to Guide F-35, MQ-25 To Shipboard Landings
Dec 2016 SEAPOWER Magazine

"BACKGROUND
The Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) is designed by Raytheon to guide aircraft to precision landings on an aircraft carrier or amphibious assault ship in any environment. The program, initially joint, now is Navy-sponsored.

SCOPE
The JPALS was envisioned for back-fit into existing carrier aircraft, but now is focused on the F-35B/C Lightning II joint strike fighter and MQ-25A Stingray unmanned carrier aerial refueling system. The JPALS is expected to equip all production versions of the aircraft as well as other future carrier aircraft.

TIMELINE
The Navy in September awarded Raytheon $255 million for the development and production readiness of JPALS. Rockwell Collins received a $67 million, six-year contract in October from Raytheon to complete the development of JPALS navigation and communication subsystems. JPALS is scheduled to achieve early operational capability in 2018. A decision
for low-rate initial production is expected in 2019. Initial operational capability is scheduled for mid-2020....

...JPALS uses differential GPS [Global Positioning System] signals to guide an aircraft to the deck of a ship with precision in any kind of weather and in darkness. With data links between the aircraft, ship and satellite continuously transmitting faster than a second, the ship’s positions are recalculated continuously as the aircraft approaches. The aircraft is not reliant on a ship’s radars and beacons.

Under the concept, a signal is broadcast to the aircraft from the ship when the aircraft is 200 nautical miles away. The aircraft logs into the JPALS system at the 60-nautical-mile mark and starts two-way communication with the ship that is accounting for pitch, roll and heave.

At the 10-nautical mile mark, the data transmission speed becomes multiple updates per second, with more data as well. The data link has anti-jam and anti-spoofing capabilities built into it to make it secure.

The original concept was for JPALS to take the aircraft down to 200 feet in altitude before the pilot resumed control. Under the current program, Raytheon will develop the capability for the aircraft — piloted or unmanned — to be guided all the way to the deck.

JPALS has been tested in a Navy F/A-18 Hornet strike fighter, including taking the aircraft to carrier landings. The F/A-18 made 38 landings on a carrier with JPALS. Raytheon has tested JPALS for 40,000 hours over the development program so far.

The goal is that the pilots are going to have a huge increase in confidence knowing that they’re going to return from a mission regardless of conditions that they’re coming back into. This is a mature solution set that we’re putting out there."

Source: http://www.seapower-digital.com/seapowe ... pg=48#pg48

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 12 Dec 2016, 02:42
by neptune
spazsinbad wrote:[....
.. (JPALS) is designed by Raytheon to [b]guide aircraft to precision landings on an aircraft carrier or amphibious assault ship in any environment..

..The JPALS was envisioned for back-fit into existing carrier aircraft, but now is focused on the F-35B/C Lightning II joint strike fighter and MQ-25A Stingray unmanned carrier aerial refueling system. The JPALS is expected to equip all production versions of the aircraft as well as other future carrier aircraft...]


"Sea-Based JPALS is an all-weather, all-mission GPS-based landing system that provides landing guidance for carrier-based fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, and features anti-jam protection for operating in electronic warfare (EW) environments."

..as a precision differential GPS based system, one might anticipate those JPAL aircraft using a JPAL feature to assist automating inflight refueling (unloading a tired/ exhausted pilot).....IMHO... (add a little extra JPAL stuff in the tanker)....
:)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 12 Dec 2016, 02:52
by spazsinbad
Two methods were used by X-47B - as described.... viewtopic.php?f=55&t=20468&p=300952&hilit=refuel#p300952
X-47B Passes Unmanned Refueling Test
Summer 2015 [or 29 Jul 2015] Jeff Newman [NAN] Naval Aviation News

"...The chief difference between a manned and unmanned refueling, McLean said, comes in accounting for the constant bobbing motion of the drogue—which resembles a badminton shuttlecock—as it trails behind the tanker.

Whereas human pilots can instinctively anticipate the drogue’s movement, the X-47B has cameras that track the basket and perform calculations to predict where it will be at the moment of connection.

“The drogue bounces around in space, so a pilot can make tiny little corrections in real time, whereas the X-47B is doing a whole bunch of computations and essentially sets up a time and space where it thinks the basket is going, and if the basket is bouncing up and down, that can be difficult,” McLean said.

The plane uses GPS to approach the tanker until it is about 20 feet from the drogue, at which point the optical system takes over, McLean said.

Like any aircraft, the X-47B also produces a thin, forward pulse of air known as a “bow wave,” which can move the basket just as the probe is approaching, similar to a speeding car pushing falling snowflakes over its hood.

“That’s why it’s such a huge achievement, because of all those unknowns, and when you’re talking about inches of precision required, any bump the tanker hits only magnifies movement for the basket, like the whip of a tail,” McLean said.

Another challenge is that, with its probe out on the right wing, the X-47B has to fly with a focus on keeping that part of the plane stable while refueling. While landing on a carrier, the X-47B can keep its center mass steady as in normal flight.

The first day of testing was spent calibrating how the drogue would react to the X-47B’s bow wave. The team programmed the aircraft to approach the basket from a certain position, but found that the bow wave moved the basket up and to the right far enough that the X-47B could not chase it. So they offset the approach up and to the right by one foot, and achieved a successful plug on their last attempt of day one.

“The next day we went back and we nailed it because we’d figured out where the plane should be positioned to make the basket predictable and it was pretty much automatic,” McLean said. Before the optical system takes over for the fine movements of the basket, the plane is flying by GPS at a relative position to the tanker, so we had to figure out how high up and down the plane should start that approach to reduce the bow wave’s effect.”

McLean contrasted the refueling of an X-47B with that of an F/A-18, which has its probe far back enough on the nose that pilots are able to easily anticipate the plane pushing the basket up. “It’s a very predictable movement. We basically know where the basket is going to move,” he added.

Turbulence remains mid-air refueling challenge

McLean said the team had three objectives during testing: three successful plugs, to stay connected for five minutes, and ultimately transfer 3,000 pounds of fuel. It accomplished the first two goals during the second day, and wrapped up the third in short order on day three.

“It didn’t last very long,” McLean said of the third day of testing. “Pretty straightforward. It was quick because it was successful right away.” “Pretty straightforward” only applies when the refueling is conducted amid clear skies and the That’s the challenge for manned refueling too, is the motion of the basket.basket is affected by minimal turbulence.

“It is predictable, but the challenging variable is turbulence,” McLean said. “If there’s turbulence, then the unmanned refueling becomes much, much harder. I think that is something that with more testing they could improve the system, but I think it’s always going to be a challenge. ”..."

Source: http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... ling-test/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Dec 2016, 09:31
by spazsinbad

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Dec 2016, 13:19
by Dragon029
Some guys at the University of Sydney pulled this off in principle with hobby / research UAVs about a month prior to Northrop; their video shows a process that would be very similar to that which the X-47B followed.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQrVQ-wpUfM

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 22 Dec 2016, 02:28
by popcorn
Not looking good. A peek behind the paywall will be appreciated.

http://aviationweek.com/awindefense/us- ... ncellation

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2016, 10:16
by spazsinbad
Over on another thread this JPALS 'history' PDF was attached by 'Marauder2048' viewtopic.php?f=22&t=52467&p=358719&hilit=JPALS#p358719 - so it is referenced here with download link. It was good to see clear reference to which platforms will host JPALS now:

download/file.php?id=23983 (PDF 1.1Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2016, 20:00
by neurotech
spazsinbad wrote:Over on another thread this JPALS 'history' PDF was attached by 'Marauder2048' viewtopic.php?f=22&t=52467&p=358719&hilit=JPALS#p358719 - so it is referenced here with download link. It was good to see clear reference to which platforms will host JPALS now:

download/file.php?id=23983 (PDF 1.1Mb)

I just love how RAND turns everything into complicated BS to prove whatever guesses they come up with. How many Nunn-McCurdy breaches occur because of expanded paperwork to justify the cost overruns, causing even larger cost overruns?

What doesn't seem clear in the PDF is that most Naval Air Stations use Precision Approach Radar, and ILS isn't used on tactical Navy jets. From a technical point of view, the F/A-18 already supports modular "landing systems", and has since the F/A-18 first went into service. One dramatic example was when an F/A-18E almost had to ditch in the St. Louis river because of issues with PAR and seeing the runway at decision altitude. The jet landed on fumes. These kind of incidents are an ongoing issue. I can't imagine NAVAIR suddenly requiring ILS on fleet jets, because of JPALS installation on military airfields.


Installing JPALS at NAS would be far cheaper than maintaining PAR for the fleet jets, once they all have JPALS capability. The JPALS program office should just tell the FAA to pull their heads out of their sixes, and accept civilian degraded JPALS (aka LAAS) without the fuss. It isn't like the FAA requires jets to land within a 40x20 spot on an carrier, good weather or bad.

Then again, maybe somebody remind tell the FAA that major mishaps (eg. ramp strike/pilot ejects) during carrier landings are very rare. A perfectly good civilian jet coming in low, and crashing just short of the runway, is a more frequent occurrence. Asiana 214, and an Air Canada E170 did something similar, among others.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jan 2017, 02:18
by popcorn
It looks like the Navy's optimism was justified and the AAG will live on in future Ford-class CVNs.

http://www.stripes.com/news/us/navy-sta ... s-1.450430

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jan 2017, 02:26
by spazsinbad
Thanks 'popcorn' there are a few stories around saying the same thing ACCURATELY. AP needs to employ grown ups to rewrite press releases. For gorsake - from AP Stars & Stripes above:
"...Benefits of the new landing gear include more reliability and less maintenance.

The landing gear problems have helped delay delivery of the USS Gerald R. Ford, the first of the Navy's new class of aircraft carriers...."


REAL DEAL from the PROs: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=6465

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 15:15
by maus92
"Magic Carpet" has been renamed "PLM" and being deployed ahead of schedule:

"F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler pilots across the fleet are conducting pre-deployment workups using the Navy’s revolutionary aircraft carrier landing software—Magic Carpet—with great success and several years ahead of schedule..."

"Last fall, air wings began training with Magic Carpet—the Maritime Augmented Guidance with Integrated Controls for Carrier Approach and Recovery Precision Enabling Technologies—and Landing Signal Officers (LSOs) are witnessing improved performance at a much lower pilot workload.

Renamed Precision Landing Modes (PLM) by aircrew, it provides improved safety, efficiency and success rates in recovering fixed-wing aircraft on board aircraft carriers while easing pilot workload, improves overall boarding rates, creates the potential to reduce tanker requirements and improves Naval Aviation’s effectiveness...."

"“PLM is probably the biggest advancement to carrier aviation since the IFLOLS was installed,” Moreno said. Deployed on all carriers by 2004, IFLOLS—the improved Fresnel lens optical landing system—is a stack of 12 light cells, which produce a single ball-shaped image used by carrier pilots to determine the glideslope as they approach the carrier to land."

http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... ic-carpet/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 19:05
by spazsinbad
Oh 'maus92' you really should come here more often to read the navy stuff, at least search before posting if you bin away.

Saving grace of the online same article as in the PDF attached here is the photo of the MAGII trainer, so go here:

viewtopic.php?f=57&t=15767&p=364575&hilit=Precision+Landing+Modes#p364575

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Mar 2017, 23:14
by maus92
spazsinbad wrote:Oh 'maus92' you really should come here more often to read the navy stuff, at least search before posting if you bin away.

Saving grace of the online same article as in the PDF attached here is the photo of the MAGII trainer, so go here:

viewtopic.php?f=57&t=15767&p=364575&hilit=Precision+Landing+Modes#p364575


I searched "Magic Carpet" and posted in the very first forum topic on the list - investing any more effort isn't worth the time. Anyway, not sure why a workup with F/A-18E/Fs on the Bush and other CVNs relates to the topic you posted under ("F-35C Lands at Lakehurst For Testing.")

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 24 Mar 2017, 07:50
by spazsinbad
Thanks for confirmation of laziness. That thread cited has a long history thread of info about the MAGII Soup on the Carpet. But of course if one never reads anything here that would be news to them. So keep reading only the first post found - a headline reader own goal I reckon. Where this thread title is 'EMALS & JPALS for the JSF' I do not see HORNET.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 11 May 2017, 23:17
by spazsinbad
The President of USofA should STFU! 'bout USN. What a freakin' clown - it is too complicated for tiny brains - enough said.
President Trump Wants Gerald Ford Carriers to Use ‘Goddamned Steam’ Catapults Instead of ‘No Good’ Electromagnetic Launchers
11 May 2017 Sam LaGrone and Megan Eckstein

"...The following is the excerpt from the Time magazine interview on the subject of the Ford-class carriers.

On the future USS Ford-class carriers

You know the catapult is quite important. So I said what is this? Sir, this is our digital catapult system. He said well, we’re going to this because we wanted to keep up with modern [technology]. I said you don’t use steam anymore for catapult? No sir. I said, “Ah, how is it working?” “Sir, not good. Not good. Doesn’t have the power. You know the steam is just brutal. You see that sucker going and steam’s going all over the place, there’s planes thrown in the air.”

It sounded bad to me. Digital. They have digital. What is digital? And it’s very complicated, you have to be Albert Einstein to figure it out. And I said–and now they want to buy more aircraft carriers. I said what system are you going to be–”Sir, we’re staying with digital.” I said no you’re not. You going to goddamned steam, the digital costs hundreds of millions of dollars more money and it’s no good."


"EMALS is already installed on Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78), and in 2015 the Navy began buying materials for EMALS on the follow-on John F. Kennedy (CVN-79). In January, the service awarded a $527 million contract to General Atomics for EMALS on the third Ford-class carrier, Enterprise (CVN-80).

While early EMALS development was challenging for the service and slipped in cost and schedule, the Navy has been a vocal supporter of the launching system in the last several years....

...From the transcript published by Time, it’s unclear with whom Trump spoke about the EMALS system and when....

...With EMALS, though, the electromagnetic field creates a smoother acceleration and doesn’t subject the aircraft to steam. Along with the new AAG, which refines how it stops an airplane based on its weight, “what it also does is open up … the envelope for lower-weight aircraft. So as we start exploring where we’re heading with unmanned aircraft, it gives us a lot of flexibility from a warfighting standpoint that the (legacy system) doesn’t,” Moore said.

“You can now start to do things with aircraft design that you couldn’t do before. It might allow us some more margin in weight, in size, and in structure and capability,” Manazir added...."

Source: https://news.usni.org/2017/05/11/presid ... -launchers

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 11 May 2017, 23:21
by popcorn
LOL. So has anyone ever asked the question.. "why not stick with steam"? LOL


https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... rs/526386/

Trump Wants ‘Goddamned Steam,’ Not Digital Catapults on Aircraft Carriers

I said, “You don’t use steam anymore for catapult?” “No sir.” I said, “Ah, how is it working?” “Sir, not good. Not good. Doesn’t have the power. You know the steam is just brutal. You see that sucker going and steam’s going all over the place, there’s planes thrown in the air.”

It sounded bad to me. Digital. They have digital. What is digital? And it’s very complicated, you have to be Albert Einstein to figure it out. And I said—and now they want to buy more aircraft carriers. I said, “What system are you going to be—” “Sir, we’re staying with digital.” I said, “No you’re not. You going to goddamned steam, the digital costs hundreds of millions of dollars more money and it’s no good.”

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 12 May 2017, 01:23
by rheonomic
You know the catapult is quite important. So I said what is this? Sir, this is our digital catapult system. He said well, we’re going to this because we wanted to keep up with modern [technology]. I said you don’t use steam anymore for catapult? No sir. I said, “Ah, how is it working?” “Sir, not good. Not good. Doesn’t have the power. You know the steam is just brutal. You see that sucker going and steam’s going all over the place, there’s planes thrown in the air.”

It sounded bad to me. Digital. They have digital. What is digital? And it’s very complicated, you have to be Albert Einstein to figure it out. And I said–and now they want to buy more aircraft carriers. I said what system are you going to be–”Sir, we’re staying with digital.” I said no you’re not. You going to goddamned steam, the digital costs hundreds of millions of dollars more money and it’s no good.



Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 May 2017, 01:59
by spazsinbad

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Jun 2017, 23:42
by spazsinbad
MV-22 Ospreys Could Be Next to Get F-35’s Precision Landing System
21 Jun 2017 Hope Hodge Seck

"SALON DU BOURGET, Paris — The system that helps the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter achieve safe and precise landings in any weather could be coming next to the Marine Corps’ prized tiltrotor MV-22 Osprey.

The Raytheon-built Joint Precision Approach and Landing Systems, or JPALS, is a GPS-based system that triangulates between an aircraft and pieces of hardware on a ship or landing zone to create a cyber link as far as 200 nautical miles out.

The shipboard software can interact with the plane to assist in landings and navigate through challenges that might render other aircraft unable to operate, such as severe weather or an environment in which communications are jammed.

JPALS capability is embedded in all three F-35 variants as part of the Joint Strike Fighter’s 3F software block, although the Air Force has not opted to pursue the capability for its F-35A conventional landing variant.

By 2018, the Navy plans to install JPALS hardware on two amphibious assault ships, the Essex and the Wasp, just in time for the ships to depart on ocean deployments with a contingent of F-35s aboard for the first time.

Meanwhile, Raytheon is eyeing its next potential customer.

“The Osprey, it’s in their requirements that they want to make that happen,” Bob Delorge, Raytheon’s vice president for Transportation and Support services, told Military.com in an interview here at the Paris Air Show on Tuesday. “It makes a lot of sense in terms of the Marines. We’re looking at where do you go now from an expeditionary point of view, how do you get that on board.”...

...To accommodate JPALS for Ospreys, which take off and land on amphibious ships, Delorge said Raytheon is working to shrink down the hardware the system requires. Today, that’s about four cabinets’ worth of computer equipment, plus dinner plate-sized GPS devices. “You can probably shrink down to something smaller, try to get expeditionary with the Marines,” he said.

If the Marine Corps or the Navy pursues JPALS for Ospreys, fielding would still likely be years out, Delorge said. But the Osprey isn’t the only aircraft Raytheon has in its sights for JPALS. The company is also hoping to attract international buyers.

“The conversations that we have had with the Navy is, how do we now start thinking about international,” Delorge said. “When you talk to the captain, a big part of what he’s thinking through is interoperability. There are very few missions where the U.S. is operating by itself. As you put out F-35s, you want to ensure you have that interoperability.”"

Source: https://www.defensetech.org/2017/06/21/ ... ng-system/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 22 Jun 2017, 08:06
by neptune
spazsinbad wrote:
MV-22 Ospreys Could Be Next to Get F-35’s Precision Landing System... JPALS, is a GPS-based system that triangulates between an aircraft and pieces of hardware on a ship or landing zone to create a cyber link as far as 200 nautical miles out. The shipboard software can interact with the plane to assist in landings and navigate through challenges that might render other aircraft unable to operate, such as severe weather or an environment in which communications are jammed. ......


.....with JPALS the Corp will be able to bring the vertical landing fleet (H-1 to H-53) to any ship (LHA to LCS) from 200 miles out to a 1 ft. by 1 ft. landing accuracy in all weather. A mobile JPALS could bring a F-35B in to a temporary FOB ( "a bush near you" ) for rearming/ refueling in any weather by dropping off a Humvee (H-53/ MV-22) with the mobile JPALS mounted on the rear deck. ...thus bringing expeditionary to Marine aviation where it is needed.
:)

,,,,I've heard recently the Brits are considering JPALS for the new QE... :wink:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 22 Jun 2017, 08:21
by spazsinbad
Read all about JPALS for CVFs here: viewtopic.php?f=58&t=15969&p=369859&hilit=precision#p369859

Back in 2005 the VAAC Harrier carried out an automatic vertical landing during formative years of JPALS/F-35B CLAWS.

http://aviationweek.com/awin/qinetiq-re ... ip-landing


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 22 Jun 2017, 09:17
by spazsinbad
Go here & close your eyes for an experience 'wot it is like to NIGHT CATAPULT' :devil: I'll guess it is in USofA?

False (REAL CLIMB on roller coaster) Illusion Explanation: http://www.pilotfriend.com/aeromed/medi ... _climb.htm

Catapult Video ROLLER COASTER:
https://www.sciencechannel.com/tv-shows ... 86625021=1

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Jun 2017, 07:03
by spazsinbad
ON page four of this thread there is a bunch o'stuff about OUIJA Boards so I'll stuff it here. Search on OUIJA for more scary bits o'info. viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=233955&hilit=OUIJA#p233955
Old School Meets New School: Flight Deck Ouija Boards Go Digital
15 Jun 2017 Warren Duffie ONR

"ARLINGTON, Va.—The flight decks of aviation-capable vessels like aircraft carriers bustle with noise and danger—screaming jets, snapping steel cables and powerful tractors and forklifts. Planning and orchestrating this high-octane dance requires precision and accuracy from those responsible for directing deck traffic.

To make the jobs of aircraft handlers easier, the Office of Naval Research’s (ONR) TechSolutions program has sponsored the development of the Deployable Ship Integration Multitouch System—DSIMS, for short.

DSIMS is a mobile software package that features a digital, touchscreen image of a ship’s flight deck or hangar bay, and can be used on a laptop or desktop computer. It enables aircraft handlers to change flight deck configurations anywhere on the ship, plan operations before deployment, and share information digitally with other DSIMS users for improved collaboration.

“This interactive, computerized system is a leap forward for naval aviation,” said ONR Command Master Chief Matt Matteson. “It’s a fairly straightforward technological solution that brings with it tremendous functionality and saves time.”

To track the movements of aircraft and equipment on the flight deck, handlers currently use a tool informally called a “Ouija board”—a waist-high, six-feet-long physical replica of the deck. Located in the ship’s flight deck control center, the board is covered with toy-like plastic models of aircraft, each marked with colored thumbtacks to designate maintenance, fuel or flight status.

The Ouija board’s design has barely changed since World War II. Despite its effectiveness, however, it does have limitations. For example, if aircraft handlers need to plan for upcoming or unexpected scenarios—bad weather or a surprise VIP visit—they must do so while underway, and change the Ouija board back to its original layout after completing the planning session.

By contrast, DSIMS can help plan such situations months before a ship leaves port. When playing out various flight deck situations—called “evolutions”—on the DSIMS touchscreen, participants can use their fingertips or a computer mouse to move around digital aircraft, to show which aircraft need to be in which location and where crates and other equipment should be positioned.

There also are special screen modules denoting aircraft fueling needs, maintenance requests and availability for flight. Each evolution can be saved and recalled during operations, or used for briefings and training.

“DSIMS allows for planning of future evolutions,” said Tim Zieser, an engineer at Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, New Jersey. “It also enables aircraft handling officers to create briefs that can be used to inform the chain of command, and train their people before a complex evolution, so everyone is on the same page.”

Zieser recently demonstrated DSIMS at Lakehurst’s Carrier Analysis Lab for Sailors and Marines from the USS Iwo Jima (LHD-7), before the amphibious assault ship deployed.

“The technology is fantastic,” said Lt. Timothy Sullivan, stationed aboard the Iwo Jima. “It lets us make time-critical decisions today, so we don’t have to months from now, over the Ouija board on the ship. It will save us man hours down the road as we execute the mission.”

DSIMS originated in 2016, when a request from Commander, Naval Air Forces, was sent to ONR’s TechSolutions program for a digital, mobile version of the Ouija board. TechSolutions is ONR’s rapid-response science and technology program that develops prototype technologies to address problems voiced by Sailors and Marines, usually within 12-18 months.

Later this year, TechSolutions will deliver a prototype DSIMS for testing and evaluation on several ships, including the Iwo Jima. Zieser and his team hope to see the system issued throughout the fleet next year."

Photo: https://www.dvidshub.net/image/3478647/ ... stem-dsims “170516-N-PO203-009 LAKEHURST, N.J. (May. 16, 2017) Lt. Timothy Sullivan assigned to the amphibious assault ship USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7), tries out the Office of Naval Research (ONR) TechSoultions-sponsored Deployable Ship Integration Multitouch System (DSIMS) located in the Carrier Analysis Lab at Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, during predeployment planning. DSIMS is a mobile software package that features a digital, touchscreen image of a ship's flight deck or hangar bay and enables aircraft handlers using a laptop or LCD screen to adjust various configurations from anywhere on the ship, plan operations before deployment and share that information with other DSIMS users. (U.S. Navy photo by John F. Williams/Released)” https://www.dvidshub.net/download/image/3478647


Source: https://www.dvidshub.net/news/238075/ol ... o-digital#


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2017, 12:45
by spazsinbad
This article seems like OLD NEWS to me but hey - whatever....
USN reveals source of EMALS mechanical issues
25 Jun 2017 Anika Torruella

"The General Atomics-built Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) installed on the first-of-class nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Gerald R Ford (CVN 78) is being "fine-tuned" to overcome a vibrational issue associated with optimising the launch and recovery of different aircraft appropriate for their configuration, Acting Secretary of the US Navy (USN) Sean Stackley stated at a congressional hearing on 16 June 2017.

"What we're going through right now is developing the bulletin for launch and recovery of the various type, model, series aircraft in the fleet that will be operating off of the carrier," Stackley said.

EMALS is intended to enable a higher degree of computer control, more accurate end-speed control, and smoother acceleration when launching carrier-based fixed-wing aircraft, such as F/A-18E/F Hornets and Super Hornets, EA-18G Growlers, and C-2A Greyhounds. It is also intended to be able to adapt to future carrier air-wing platforms, such as lightweight unmanned systems or future heavy strike aircraft.

US lawmakers noted that the issue with the new catapult system had been previously described as a problem with "its ability to launch aircraft – particularly aircraft that have all their fuel tanks in place".

"We started [at the test site in Lakehurst, New Jersey], where we have the land-based system, and they basically start slow and build up in terms of launching and recovering the aircraft," Stackley said. "In that process, with F-18s with fuel tanks attached, vibration was detected. And so now what they're doing is going back through the software and adjusting the system to remove that vibration."

"Today they're renewing that testing at Lakehurst in advance of when we'll first do launch and recovery operations on the Ford, later [in mid- to late-2017]," Stackley said...."

Source: http://www.janes.com/article/71747/usn- ... cal-issues

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jul 2017, 11:55
by spazsinbad



Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 06 Jul 2017, 12:36
by spazsinbad

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 26 Jul 2017, 06:01
by spazsinbad
Navy validates software fix for EMALS
25 Jul 2017 Lee Hudson

"The Navy recently validated a software fix for the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System, despite negative comments about the program from President Trump. Following a review in April 2014 of aircraft instrumentation data, a problem was discovered after testing. The testers found holdback release dynamics exceeded current fleet allowances during launches of these aircraft configured with wing-mounted external fuel tanks.

"We were confident since the day that the issue was uncovered that it was solvable," EMALS integrated program team lead George Sulich said in a July 24 statement. The final step of testing the fix with instrumented aircraft launches was delayed a year because of competing test priorities, according to a service statement.

"The subsequent software will be incorporated on board CVN-78 to support shipboard launches of F/A-18s with EFTs in 2019, following the ship's Post Shakedown Availability," the statement reads...."

Source: https://insidedefense.com/insider/navy- ... -fix-emals

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 26 Jul 2017, 06:22
by spazsinbad
Navy’s new launch system eliminates concerns with latest testing
24 Jul 2017 PEO(T) Public Affairs

"NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. – The Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) team completed testing at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey, early this summer, validating a software fix that will ensure safe launches.

A total of 71 EMALS launches were conducted by the EMALS Team and the Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23 to confirm F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler outfitted with wing-mounted, 480-gallon external fuel tanks (EFTs) can launch without exceeding stress limits on the aircraft.

The post-test review of aircraft instrumentation data, following the manned aircraft testing, indicates that software control algorithm updates have corrected the issue....

...“We were confident since the day that the issue was uncovered that it was solvable,” said George Sulich, EMALS integrated program team lead. “The beauty of the system is that issues such as these can be accomplished with software updates instead of major hardware changes to machinery.”

He explained that the EMALS team promptly planned a resolution for further tuning of the system’s control algorithm, which would reduce the loads on the EFTs to within established operational limits. All design, development, software coding, laboratory testing and dead-load testing, using weighted, aircraft-representative sleds, was completed in 2015.

Since several other software updates had occurred since the fix was originally established, in April of this year, the team loaded the software build intended to correct the deficiency and conducted an additional 152 dead-load launches at the System Functional Demonstration Site to support flight test readiness.

The final step of testing the fix with instrumented aircraft launches was delayed a year due to competing test priorities, but is now complete. The subsequent software will be incorporated on board CVN 78 to support shipboard launches of F/A-18s with EFTs in 2019, following the ship’s Post Shakedown Availability...."

Photo: "The Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System test team readies an instrumented F/A-18E Super Hornet for launch at the System Function Demonstration Site at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey, in June. (U.S. Navy Photo)" http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/ ... 0_0032.jpg (4.1Mb)
&
"An instrumented F/A-18E Super Hornet is launched from the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System during testing at the System Function Demonstration Site at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey, in June. (U.S. Navy Photo)" http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/ ... 4_0024.jpg (3.2Mb)


Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=6596

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 26 Jul 2017, 08:38
by popcorn
So "digital" catapults are now OK? :doh:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Jul 2017, 23:50
by spazsinbad
EMALS Fix Finalized To Reduce Stress Put On Heaviest Airplanes During Ford-Class Carrier Launch
28 Jul 2017 Megan Eckstein

"...The EMALS team found during April 2014 testing that airplanes carrying full 480-gallon wing-mounted external fuel tanks were experiencing a great amount of stress on the airframe.

“During certain launches with full wing-mounted external fuel tanks, the system was exceeding acceptable load levels within the wings of the aircraft during the initial release of the launch sequence. … This presented a risk to the fatigue life of the aircraft. It was not a risk to the ship or to the EMALS system,” NAVAIR spokesman Rob Koon told USNI News. “If this had gone unaddressed, it would have limited the F/A-18E/F from performing certain missions aboard CVN-78, and impacted the ship’s ability to conduct its planned Operational Test schedule.”...

...The software fix will now allow EMALS to handle the upper limit of its workload – the heaviest planes, Super Hornets and EA-18G Growlers with full external fuel tanks – without exceeding stress limits on the airplanes. Koon said that the problem did not hinder any testing on EMALS so far – all airplanes launched successfully – but rather the concern was the wellbeing of the airplanes over time....

...The software fix will be uploaded to the EMALS aboard Ford in 2019, when the ship goes in for its post-shakedown availability. That shipyard availability is the first opportunity to update the EMALS software without disrupting ship operations, Koon said, and presents no risk to the ship or any airplanes by waiting.

“There is no urgency to apply the fix, as shipboard launches of F/A-18s with [external fuel tanks] will not be conducted until 2019, following CVN-78’s Post Shakedown Availability,” Koon said. “There will be no impact because the aircraft launched prior to that time will not have [external fuel tanks]. [Post-shakedown availability] is the next availability for incorporating the software updates aboard CVN-78 without disrupting its upcoming test schedule.”"

Source: https://news.usni.org/2017/07/28/emals- ... ier-launch

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jul 2017, 07:46
by spazsinbad
VIDEO: USS Gerald R. Ford Conducts First Arrested Landing, Catapult Launch
28 Jul 2017 Sam LaGrone

"...The recovery of the F/A-18F Super Hornet from the Navy’s Air Test and Evaluation Squadron VX- 23 occurred at 3:10 P.M. EST off the coast of Virginia. Lt. Cmdr. Jamie “Coach” Struck’s Super Hornet hit the number two wire on the Advanced Arresting Gear [AAG] systems and then launched a little more than an hour later using the ship’s electromagnetic launch system (EMALS)....

USN statement:..."The software-controlled AAG is a modular, integrated system that consists of energy absorbers, power conditioning equipment and digital controls, with architecture that provides built-in test and diagnostics, resulting in lower maintenance and manpower requirements. AAG is designed to provide higher reliability and safety margins, as well as to allow for the arrestment of a greater range of aircraft and reduce the fatigue impact load to the aircraft.

The mission and function of EMALS remains the same as the traditional steam catapult; however, it employs entirely different technologies. It delivers necessary higher-launch energy capacity, improvements in system maintenance, increased reliability and efficiency, and more accurate end-speed control and smooth acceleration. EMALS is designed to expand the operational capability of the Navy’s future carriers to include all current and future planned carrier aircraft – from lightweight unmanned aircraft to heavy strike fighters...."


Animated GIF EMALS: HOTLINK NOT ALLOWED


Source: https://news.usni.org/2017/07/28/video- ... ult-launch



Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jul 2017, 14:20
by sdkf251
Thanks Spaz! Great video and info. No steam in the catapult, is something really new to see from
the Ford! (Although I must admit, steam does make better movie making effects. :D )

The deck profile is really very different from old super carrier videos and pictures. It really seems like
a flat top! Reminds me of the very small towers of the old Japanese Hiryu class.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 30 Jul 2017, 21:43
by spazsinbad
VX-23 Super Hornet First Arrest on target wire No.2 of three AAG Advanced Arresting Gear - YEEHAH! E-mail quot:
"Second Rhino was already on deck - via crane at Norfolk - so that is trap had to be aborted they could still go for the catshot."

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 31 Jul 2017, 05:04
by spazsinbad
Aircraft launch, recovery historic firsts aboard USS Ford
29 Jul 2017 PEO(T) Public Affairs

"...The newly commissioned ship’s Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) and Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch Systems (EMALS) figured prominently in the flight operations, which comprised four arrestments and four launches.

These were performed during this limited risk reduction testing, while approximately 75 of each will be performed during Aircraft Compatibility Testing this fall, and hundreds more during the ship’s ISE periods leading up to her Post-Shakedown Availability (PSA)....

...The intent of the brief underway period, referred to as Independent Steaming Event (ISE) Alpha, was to seize an available opportunity to exercise the new systems, explained Cmdr. Pete Arrobio, Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment (ALRE) Program Office (PMA-251) deputy program manager for EMALS and AAG....

...While this is an important milestone for the program, there is still work ahead for the team, Arrobio added. Further testing to expand AAG’s Aircraft Recovery Bulletin, supporting the arrestment of all the aircraft types in the Ford-class’ full air wing, continues at two land-based test sites on Joint Base McGuire-Dix Lakehurst, New Jersey, and Sailors continue to receive operations and maintenance training for the two systems...."

Photo:"The Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) launched an F/A-18E/F Super Hornet from on board USS Gerald R. Ford July 29, marking a naval aviation first. (U.S. Navy Photo)" http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/ ... aunch1.jpg


Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=6600

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 31 Jul 2017, 18:49
by sferrin
spazsinbad wrote:VX-23 Super Hornet First Arrest on target wire No.2 of three AAG Advanced Arresting Gear - YEEHAH! E-mail quot:
"Second Rhino was already on deck - via crane at Norfolk - so that is trap had to be aborted they could still go for the catshot."


Man, look at all that rust:

Rust.jpg


Compared to China's new carrier:

8cdcd42c54981ac451c60f.jpg


And yeah, I get it, it's cosmetic. Still, shows an attention to detail and pride for one's ship.

You see it a lot on US military aircraft these days too. Just look beat to absolute hell. (Of course I guess that happens after years of budgets cut to the bone and beyond.)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 31 Jul 2017, 19:00
by neptune
sferrin wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:VX-23 Super Hornet First Arrest on target wire No.2 of three AAG Advanced Arresting Gear - YEEHAH! E-mail quot:
"Second Rhino was already on deck - via crane at Norfolk - so that is trap had to be aborted they could still go for the catshot."


Man, look at all that rust:

Rust.jpg


Compared to China's new carrier:

8cdcd42c54981ac451c60f.jpg


And yeah, I get it, it's cosmetic. Still, shows an attention to detail and pride for one's ship.

1/1 vs 1/11?

How about the sterling quality of the chow line?
:)


You see it a lot on US military aircraft these days too. Just look beat to absolute hell. (Of course I guess that happens after years of budgets cut to the bone and beyond.)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2017, 20:38
by spazsinbad
First fighter jet launch and landing on new USS Ford was “almost like a scene from ‘Top Gun’”
02 Aug 2017 Courtney Mabeus

"...With all eyes on him, Struck said, the pressure of being the first to test both systems while flying a multi-million-dollar fighter jet made sleep the night before “hard to come by.”

Struck completed four launches and landings, or “traps,” catching each of the Ford’s three arresting cables while it operated off the coast. He did so while using a relatively new flight control software meant to simplify carrier landings, called “Magic Carpet.” Testing with manual approaches is expected later in the fall, Struck said.

Struck said he noticed few differences while landing using the AAGs, which use energy-absorbing water turbines. But catapulting from the Ford’s deck was smoother than with the previous steam-based system, which could get “kind of violent.” “There’s all that steam, all that energy built up,” Struck said.

The tests were completed without the fighter’s 480-gallon external fuel tanks, which limits its range. Naval Air Systems Command announced last month that it has developed a fix that will be installed on the Ford in 2019, about two years before its anticipated first deployment.

Data from Friday’s tests will be analyzed to determine risk, reliability and maintenance issues, said Capt. Rick McCormack, the Ford’s commanding officer. That’s something that’s still in its infancy, he added.

While Struck may be the Ford’s most visible symbol of its latest milestone, sailors who have spent years learning and practicing with the new launch and recovery systems said the tests validated all that work. Video released by the Navy shows sailors pumping their fists in the air and flashing thumbs-ups after Friday’s firsts.

“There was so much energy in the air that when the aircraft first arrested, it was almost like a scene from ‘Top Gun’ at the end where everybody was pumping their hands – they’re getting really excited,” Petty Officer 1st Class Jeremy Stoecklein said. Below deck, where Stoecklein was working on EMALS, was a mix of nerves, excitement and anxiety. After feeling the aircraft catapult from the deck for the first time, “everybody hugged and shook hands and were yelling with excitement,” he said. “After that, it was just, ‘Let’s do it again. Let’s do it again,’” said Stoecklein.

Petty Officer 1st Class Reginald Leonard was above deck, retracting the AAG’s cables. After 13 years spent working on arresting gear, the last four of which have been on the Ford, he’s glad to leave behind the grease and hydraulic fluid. Watching AAGs come to life was like “building your house from the bottom up, and actually get to get in it, live in it and see it work,” Leonard said."

Source: http://hrana.org/news/2017/08/first-fig ... m-top-gun/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Aug 2017, 21:11
by spazsinbad

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Aug 2017, 22:03
by spazsinbad

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 09 Aug 2017, 03:40
by spazsinbad
Earlier there was an indication of the FORD slightly rusty flight deck (can anyone see that at some point the deck will be resurfaced with non-skid paint again - other threads detail this process along with what a 'used deck' looks like sometimes.

PDF reference for pic of a 'used deck' is not available: https://www.corrdefense.org/Academia%20 ... onSkid.pdf

Couple of forum refs here: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=12631&p=272773&hilit=CharlesTricou+LongLifeNonSkid#p272773
&
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27345&p=292939&hilit=CharlesTricou+LongLifeNonSkid#p292939
for:
download/file.php?id=19020 OR download/file.php?id=20932&mode=view
"170808-N-KB401-139 ATLANTIC OCEAN (Aug. 8, 2017) Left to right, Royal Navy Duke-class frigate HMS Iron Duke (F 234), Royal Navy Duke-class frigate HMS Westminster (F 237), Royal Norwegian Navy frigate Helge Ingstad (F 313), Royal Navy aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth (R08), guided-missile destroyer USS Donald Cook (DDG 75), Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77), and guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea (CG 58) sail in formation during exercise Saxon Warrior 2017, Aug.8. Saxon Warrior is a United States and United Kingdom co-hosted carrier strike group exercise that demonstrates interoperability and capability to respond to crises and deter potential threats. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Michael B. Zingaro/Released) Read more at http://alert5.com/#MwejCqiUCAKFezJG.99
http://alert5.com/wp-content/uploads/20 ... 7b97_o.jpg

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 09 Aug 2017, 04:39
by spazsinbad
Rust not too bad on this CVN about to be rejuvenated somewhat. I guess CO is at top of photo just starting the high jump?
“Capt. Paul D. Spedero Jr., commanding officer of the aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69), jumps from an aircraft elevator during a swim call on Aug. 2, just before the carrier headed to the shipyard for a six-month maintenance availability. US Navy photo.” https://news.usni.org/wp-content/upload ... 77-021.jpg

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 09 Aug 2017, 05:30
by rheonomic
I'm relatively ignorant on naval matters; when is the Ford supposed to get its air wing? Wiki suggests 2020 for it to go operational, which seems really long to me.

Glad to see EMALS and AAR working well.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 09 Aug 2017, 06:14
by spazsinbad
Probably a date for the air wing embarkation is not on any calendar. There are many issues to overcome in the next few years for FORD first in class - here are some reasons: [think of time taken to get F-35s up to speed - then years unravel]

Latest GAO report: https://news.usni.org/2017/06/20/docume ... rogram-2-2
America's New $16 Billion Aircraft Carrier Is Still Far From Ready [USNI News would have good stuff also]
24 Jul 2017 Gary Wetzel and Jalopnik

"...The second report that was released earlier this month by the Government Accountability Office, or GAO, on Navy Shipbuilding was another harsh rebuke of the Navy's decision to accept the Ford "from the shipbuilder in incomplete condition."

As it stands now, according to the GAO, the Navy will spend at least an additional $US779 million to complete construction of the ship and conduct tests that are required to validate the design. The GAO also echoed the earlier report in addressing the fact that the carrier will not have the necessary certifications to conduct aviation operations, navigation and cybersecurity protection and added that upon delivery the Ford will have "significant incomplete construction" where work on 367 compartments was deferred. These compartments include crew berthing, food service areas and bathrooms.... [then follows a long list of travails - read original reports cited for more]

...One day in the future the carrier may very well represent the technological leap the Navy originally envisioned, but that time is many years down the road and perhaps another billion dollars in cost."

Source: https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/07/amer ... rom-ready/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 09 Aug 2017, 16:38
by tincansailor
I'm surprised to see all that rust. It looks pretty shabby. 1st division is falling down on the job. I know in recent years budgets have been cut, and maintenance deferred. Rust never sleeps. You have to keep on top of this. I hear that ships like the Perry Class frigates were left to rust out. I remember back in the 70s seeing old destroyers from the 50s that took on water because of the rust. A hull can corrode faster then you would think. This is no joke. Spend some money on red lead, paint, and some none skid before it's too late.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 10 Aug 2017, 21:35
by spazsinbad
Post here for factoid about 22 USN JPALS installations in last paragraph - rest of article about CVFs will go in that thread.
Here is the HUFF from NOT THE HUFFington POST: viewtopic.php?f=58&t=15969&p=373438&hilit=huffs#p373438
'No decision' on Raytheon GPS landing system aboard Brit aircraft carriers
22 Jun 2017 Gareth Corfield

"...A rather old webpage [see quote below] from the Federation of American Scientists explains in not-so-complex language how the AN/SPN-41 set works. It’s basically a navalised Instrument Landing System that broadcasts a glideslope along with azimuth information for arriving aircraft. The cockpit display consists of two needles, and once the pilot centres them both, he’s on the right path.

AN/SPN-41 "The Transmitting Set AN/SPN-41A is an electronic landing aid that provides proper flight path data to an approaching aircraft as the aircraft flies into range of ownship radar landing system or into visual contact with ownship optical landing system. The AN/SPN-41A has two separate transmitters (azimuth and elevation) with individual antennas used for sector scanning. The azimuth transmitter is installed on the ship's stern at the centerline of, and slightly below the landing deck runway; while the elevation transmitter is located above the flight deck in the vicinity of the after end of the island to provide the glide slope signal. The AN/SPN-41A uses one-way transmission, ship to air, to a receiver in the aircraft where the angular information is displayed on a cross-pointer indicator. With the vertical needle for azimuth guidance and the horizontal needle for vertical guidance, the aircraft becomes perfectly aligned with the runway centerline, on a standard glide path to the ship's deck, when both needles are precisely centered. Though not technically a radar system, the AN/SPN-41A operates utilizing pulse mode in the Ku-band. AN/SPN-41 and AN-SPN-41A systems are installed aboard CV, CVN, LHA, and LHD class ships. The AN/ARA-63 aircraft approach control system uses the AN/SPN-41 and the AN/TRN-28 transmitting sets. It provides primary or backup instrument approach capability." https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/we ... spn-41.htm


JPALS, by contrast, is a GPS-based system. Rather than the ship broadcasting a glideslope to world+dog, JPALS emits an encrypted burst of data that allows the approaching aircraft to precisely fix the ship's position and make a safe landing. The USN is buying 22 JPALS sets for use with its F-35Cs and the USMC’s F-35Bs."

Also from next post down at other URL: "...The USN is buying 22 sets of JPALS to install in both carriers and land bases for training purposes...." [QUE? CVNs & LHAs add up to 22?]


Source: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/2 ... 2386485241

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 24 Aug 2017, 16:09
by spazsinbad
:shock: Video of bits & pieces re FORD & EMALS / AAG - see how the deck is made rusty but it looks very clean otherwise! :doh:



PHOTO: https://i0.wp.com/fightersweep.com/wp-c ... cvn-78.jpg

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2017, 05:41
by spazsinbad
"Norfolk, Va. (Aug. 21, 2017) Showing visible wear and tear from many days at sea, the aircraft carrier George H.W. Bush makes the turn into Pier 14 at Naval Station, Norfolk, Va. after returning from 212-day deployment. The cruise saw the ship and Carrier Air Wing 8 spend 99-day “on the line” in the fight against ISIS. Photo by Mark D. Faram/staff" https://www.armytimes.com/resizer/id3_T ... uality(100)/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-mco.s3.amazonaws.com/public/CV2TP3DOSJHPTMAOJZ7GUOGSUU.jpg & http://hrana.org/news/2017/08/carrier-b ... o-norfolk/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2017, 11:23
by krorvik
There must be salt in seawater or something.... ;)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2017, 11:41
by viper12
Worse ; there's dihydrogen monoxide. :mrgreen:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2017, 12:58
by krorvik
Sounds dangerous. Should be banned.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2017, 14:05
by white_lightning35

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2017, 16:15
by rheonomic
All the hydric acid can't help either.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Aug 2017, 17:49
by SpudmanWP
I have seen evidence of where it was used in a foolish attempt to stop an out of control exothermic reaction but was spilled on an innocent bystander instead.

She dissolved in seconds. :doh:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Aug 2017, 06:35
by spazsinbad
LIAONING deck is so clean & rust free & freshly painted (never used) that the crew wear white gloves & eat chow off it.

https://cdn2.i-scmp.com/sites/default/f ... 103134.jpg

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 Sep 2017, 15:36
by spazsinbad
Raytheon Pitches Jpals Precision Landing For F-35A [BEST READ IT ALL AT SOURCE]
18 Sep 2017 James Drew

"NATIONAL HARBOR, Maryland—Raytheon has proposed an expeditionary version of the U.S. Navy’s GPS-based Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (Jpals), which was developed to securely guide Lockheed Martin F-35s onto carrier decks and Marine Corps amphibious assault ships. Brooks Cleveland, the company’s business development consultant for Jpals, says the landing system could support distributed basing of U.S. Air Force fighters and rotorcraft, beginning with the conventional takeoff and landing F-35A.... {USMC will be interested in this exped version also - they were once]

...Raytheon is also pressing the Navy to integrate its primary strike fighter, the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, along with the three variants of the Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey.

Beyond the F-35 and V-22, Raytheon says Jpals could support next-generation precision approach for the Air Force F-16, HH-60G Pave Hawk and U.S. Army Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk.

“If they wanted to do dispersed basing, maybe a small unit of F-35s in a remote location instead of having everybody together, we could put an expeditionary or mobile version Jpals at any airfield or any site,” Cleveland says. “It will give you precision landing to 20 cm [8 in.] on the runway and can control up to 50 airplanes with one system out to 20 nm.”

He says the system has a demonstrated reliability rate greater than 99% for automatic landings, including in harsh weather on pitching ships. The mobile version for land applications is based on a single Humvee with four GPS antennas and four UHF antennas. It can be air dropped from a Lockheed C-5M or Boeing C-17 and set up within 1 hr., Raytheon claims. The company will also pitch the concept to Army aviators at next month’s Association of the U.S. Army conference in Washington."

Source: http://aviationweek.com/afa-national-co ... ding-f-35a

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 Sep 2017, 15:51
by neptune
[quote="spazsinbad"][quote]Raytheon Pitches Jpals Precision Landing For F-35A.....Beyond the F-35 and V-22, Raytheon says Jpals could support next-generation precision approach for the Air Force F-16, HH-60G Pave Hawk and U.S. Army Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk....quote]

...MQ-25A???, etc..
:)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 Sep 2017, 16:02
by spazsinbad
Are you asking a question or making a statement - too cryptic for me. However many many reports have said that: like the X-47B before it, the MQ-25 will use the same JPALS system (which was an early version not qualified for human use).

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 10 Oct 2017, 14:45
by spazsinbad
Perhaps NOT all video relevant to this forum however we do see VX-23 Super Hornet carrying out initial flight ops aboard USS Ford including spooky EMALS catapults & AAG arrests. Last segment shows fire fighting training simulation in a hangar.


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 Oct 2017, 15:42
by spazsinbad

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 Oct 2017, 16:09
by steve2267
Are the sparks "normal" for arresting gear, or is that a characteristic peculiar to the electro-magnetic braking system the Ford uses?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 Oct 2017, 16:59
by spazsinbad
Depends on 'which sparks'. Big sparks from the hook. Towards the end we see small sparks from the arresting wire. During daylight operations these sparks not usually seen - they are brief - in night conditions with night film they are ARRESTING!

This is HEAVY METAL on HEAVY METAL stuff - screenshot shows coupling of cross deck pendant to the rest of wire sparking.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 Oct 2017, 17:10
by steve2267
Spaz -- yeah, the screenshot you posted is to what I was referring -- not the tailhook.

So I take it that any arresting gear is going to spark like that, especially visible at night, because of the "heavy metal" on "heavy metal" contact at high speeds etc etc?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 Oct 2017, 20:54
by zhangmdev
Seems those sparks are generated when fast a moving cable contacting the deck, or other cable(s).

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 Oct 2017, 21:02
by steve2267
I was thinking they might have been spars of the 'lectrical variety... my bad.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 Oct 2017, 21:48
by spazsinbad
Difficult to remember all the different names USN call their equipment. The 'terminal' (round thingy) connects the CDP with the PC (runs through sheave then under flight deck) which strikes the deck after 1st hitting the pad - cause of sparks.
“Impact pads are made up of several sections of polyurethane pads laid side by side and secured within an outer steel frame. The frame is both welded and bolted to the flight deck inboard of each of the deck sheaves at an approximate 45 degrees forward facing angle. The bolted section of the frame is removable in order to replace worn impact pads as needed. Upon initial arrestment by an aircraft the terminal will impact on the pads instead of the steel deck, minimizing damage to the fittings, purchase cable, and crossdeck pendants.” http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... 10_ch3.pdf


http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/ ... 24-057.JPG

Image

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 14 Oct 2017, 00:29
by spazsinbad
Aircraft Launch and Recovery Systems in Sync
13 Oct 2017 PEO(T) Public Affairs

"Aboard the U.S. Navy's newest and most technologically advanced aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), it takes an entire suite of systems to enable safe and effective operations on the flight deck. This infographic shows the aircraft launch and recovery equipment (ALRE) aboard the ship, which returned from Independent Steaming Exercise Two (ISE-2) the second week of October. During ISE-2, Ford Sailors conducted 83 launches and traps, which included nighttime flight operations."



Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=6659

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 14 Oct 2017, 04:50
by steve2267
The Advanced Arresting Gear and ElectroMagnetic Aircraft Launching System had drawn the ire of Gilmore and received a lot of negative press. Haven't heard much about it as of late. Have they got the bugs worked out, and is it starting to live up to its promise?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 14 Oct 2017, 05:50
by spazsinbad
I don't know if ALL the bugs are worked out of these systems however it is obvious they are both in use aboard USS Ford.

Remember GILMORE is always publishing old information without usually regard for current information. This thread has several articles about what was then current which contradicts the OLD Gilmore info. Sure there is more testing to be carried out at Lakehurst (testing is ongoing with all kinds of Cats/Traps gear & aircraft) however these systems are in use.

An example of what I would have thought was done & dusted but no....
http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.PhotoGalleryDetail&key=59D89215-1194-4C93-8B42-C27FEDCDDBA6 “Night flight during developmental testing of the new Low-FOD drogue at Naval Air Station Patuxent River. The new drogue will improve readiness, availability and significantly reduce the fleet burden of spending high-maintenance man-hours required to repair legacy drogues. (U.S. Navy photo)” http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/ ... 0Photo.jpg

Image

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2017, 06:40
by alloycowboy
Some night traps aboard the USS Gearld R. Ford.


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2017, 18:03
by lamoey
steve2267 wrote:The Advanced Arresting Gear and ElectroMagnetic Aircraft Launching System had drawn the ire of Gilmore and received a lot of negative press. Haven't heard much about it as of late. Have they got the bugs worked out, and is it starting to live up to its promise?


Certainly not a bugfree system as it keeps catching bugs :D

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Oct 2017, 21:37
by spazsinbad
'lamoey' :roll: Oh Dear. :doh: Weez wuz trapped into that one. :mrgreen: Note that the bolter is very hook bouncy flashy in video. :shock:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2017, 02:28
by spazsinbad
INDIA has a habit of buying FAULTY equipment so maybe this indicates that the EMALS is NOT good to go? <sarcasm off>
Reports: U.S. Offers EMALS for Indian Carrier Development Program
20 Oct 2017 Sam LaGrone

"India could be the first export customer for the aircraft launching system that is key to the new Gerald R. Ford-class carriers, according to reports in the Indian press this week. Citing sources in the Trump administration, the Press Trust of India reported this week that the U.S. has approved the Indian military use of General Atomics’ Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) for its carrier development program.

The timing of the technology transfer is set to occur ahead of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s anticipated visit to India in the next several months....

...Naval Sea Systems Command has shared information on carrier development, and India has reached out to U.K. firm BAE Systems, DCNS in France, Lockheed Martin and Russia’s Rosoboronexport for more information on carrier design.

EMALS is key to the Ford-class and its new reactor. Without having to generate the steam needed for older catapults designs, the Navy was able to develop smaller and more efficient [I DID NOT KNOW THAT - I read that 3 times previous electricity power needs to be created now for FORD class AFAIK] reactors....

Source: https://news.usni.org/2017/10/20/report ... nt-program

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2017, 05:32
by neptune
[quote="spazsinbad"]INDIA has a habit of buying FAULTY equipment so maybe this indicates that the EMALS is NOT good to go? <sarcasm off>
[quote]Reports: U.S. Offers EMALS for Indian Carrier Development Program
20 Oct 2017 Sam LaGrone

"India could be the first export customer for the aircraft launching system that is key to the new Gerald R. Ford-class carriers, according to reports in the Indian press this week. Citing sources in the Trump administration, the Press Trust of India reported this week that the U.S. has approved the Indian military use of General Atomics’ Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) for its carrier development program.

The timing of the technology transfer is set to occur ahead of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s anticipated visit to India in the next several months....

...Naval Sea Systems Command has shared information on carrier development, and India has reached out to U.K. firm BAE Systems, DCNS in France, Lockheed Martin and Russia’s Rosoboronexport for more information on carrier design.

EMALS is key to the Ford-class and its new reactor. Without having to generate the steam needed for older catapults designs, the Navy was able to develop smaller and more efficient [I DID NOT KNOW THAT - I read that 3 times previous electricity power needs to be created now for FORD class AFAIK] reactors....

....they'll need a nuke to run it and that is not their strong suit!
:)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2017, 05:46
by rheonomic
neptune wrote:EMALS is key to the Ford-class and its new reactor. Without having to generate the steam needed for older catapults designs, the Navy was able to develop smaller and more efficient [I DID NOT KNOW THAT - I read that 3 times previous electricity power needs to be created now for FORD class AFAIK] reactors....


I'm not really a ship person, but as I understand it the reactors are smaller and more efficient, but they want the ship to generate a lot of power for future expansion for things like DEW, various electronic systems, etc.

After all, the Navy anticipates operating the Ford class into the 22nd century...

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2017, 06:16
by blindpilot
neptune wrote:...

....they'll need a nuke to run it and that is not their strong suit!
:)


The Vishal Class that is installing the EMALS is to be a nuke ship.

FWIW,
BP

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2017, 16:53
by wolfpak
Nuclear powered carriers came into being in part to address the issues of steam production and catapults. Oil fired carriers could only launch a number of aircraft before needing to rebuild steam pressure in the system. The nukes generate more heat and can make more steam. Hence they could launch without taking pauses. With the advent of EMALS you don't need as much steam volume because you just direct what you make thru turbines that drive the ship and produce electric power. Catapults are a steam hog taking a lot of volume due to loses in the piping and the one shot use in the piston/cylinder itself. That steam used to generate electricity is condensed and recycled in the system not expended as in traditional catapults so the reactors can be smaller and more efficient.
EMALS uses ship's electric power to run a motor generator coupled to a flywheel to generate the on demand (pulsed) power needed to operate that cats while demanding only continuous power from the ship's plant. Think of them as a electromechanical capacitor storing energy for when needed. That in itself decreases reactor size because you now don't have peak demands but an average power use.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Oct 2017, 19:12
by tincansailor
[
quote="wolfpak"]Nuclear powered carriers came into being in part to address the issues of steam production and catapults. Oil fired carriers could only launch a number of aircraft before needing to rebuild steam pressure in the system. The nukes generate more heat and can make more steam. Hence they could launch without taking pauses. With the advent of EMALS you don't need as much steam volume because you just direct what you make thru turbines that drive the ship and produce electric power. Catapults are a steam hog taking a lot of volume due to loses in the piping and the one shot use in the piston/cylinder itself. That steam used to generate electricity is condensed and recycled in the system not expended as in traditional catapults so the reactors can be smaller and more efficient.
EMALS uses ship's electric power to run a motor generator coupled to a flywheel to generate the on demand (pulsed) power needed to operate that cats while demanding only continuous power from the ship's plant. Think of them as a electromechanical capacitor storing energy for when needed. That in itself decreases reactor size because you now don't have peak demands but an average power use.

[/quote]

Good job. Very concise exposition. You explained it very well, so even non technical readers could understand. It's amazing what a steam plant can put out, but every technology has it's limits, and the steam catapult has reached that point.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Nov 2017, 05:52
by spazsinbad
Breakthrough to power most advanced jet launch system on China’s second home-grown aircraft carrier
01 Nov 2017 Minnie Chan

"A technological breakthrough in naval propulsion will enable China’s second home-grown aircraft carrier to use the world’s most advanced jet launch system without having to resort to nuclear power, overcoming a huge hurdle in the vessel’s development, military sources said. The development of the integrated propulsion system (IPS) would allow the vessel to be more efficient, allowing more power for an electromagnetic catapult, rather than a less technologically advanced steam-driven catapult launch system, the sources said.

China’s first two carriers, the Liaoning and its sister ship, the Type 001A, are conventionally powered vessels equipped with Soviet-designed ski-jump launch systems. But an electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS) on the Type 002, China’s second home-grown aircraft carrier, would mean less wear and tear on the planes and allow more aircraft to be launched in a shorter time than the ski and steam-catapult systems.

According to a source close to the People’s Liberation Army, China’s Central Military Commission was keen to use EMALS on the Type 002. “[But] the obstacle … was whether a conventionally powered carrier would be able to support EMALS, and now that problem has been solved,” the person, who is close to the PLA’s equipment department, told the South China Morning Post. The solution was provided by a team led by China’s top naval engineer Rear Admiral Ma Weiming, which developed a medium-voltage, direct-current transmission network to replace an earlier system based on alternating current....

...“It wasn’t just a simple switch from alternating to direct current, but a complete overhaul of the energy supply and distribution system – from steam boilers to the energy storage device,” he said. Wang added that in the future, the same technology could be used to launch not just aircraft, but also missiles and satellites, and maybe even power high-speed trains....

...He [Weiming] also said on the sidelines of the annual National People’s Congress in Beijing that China’s EMALS technology was more advanced and more reliable than the system used on the nuclear-powered USS Gerald Ford supercarrier...."



Source: http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomac ... nch-system

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Nov 2017, 17:31
by sunstersun
Man, China's navy is really beasting ahead.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Nov 2017, 17:41
by afjag
The danger of industrial espionage is that you also steal all of the current flaws and technical design limitations inherent in new systems. :devil:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Nov 2017, 19:03
by tincansailor
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. It's hard to imagine that with so little effort, they would get a successful operational system, with their first try. They may have stolen a lot of data, but this is apparently a different system then we are using. DC power is a short cut, that has some drawbacks. We have to wait for the 002 to go to sea, and see how well it works out.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Nov 2017, 19:55
by usnvo
blindpilot wrote:
neptune wrote:...

....they'll need a nuke to run it and that is not their strong suit!
:)


The Vishal Class that is installing the EMALS is to be a nuke ship.

FWIW,
BP


Besides the article being riddled with errors, the comments were even more laughable.

Just for starters, the reactors on the FORD are more compact and efficient than the ones on the NIMITZ class because they weren't designed in the 1960s! They could power steam catapults even better than the reactors on the NIMITZ if that was how they chose to use them. All a reactor does is generate pressurized hot water for the steam converters.

There is absolutely no reason you need a nuclear power plant to run EMALS. The FORD class has 4 26MW SSTGs (they have 4 diesel generators of similar size for backup) to provide electrical power although it is highly unlikely they will ever use all of them at once. An MT-30 GTG puts out something like 35MW of power and can react to changes in load dramatically quicker than the steam turbines on the carrier. 2 MT-30s can provide all the power required for EMALS, the rest of the ship, and then some without even working hard.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Nov 2017, 20:19
by sprstdlyscottsmn
usnvo wrote: 2 MT-30s can provide all the power required for EMALS, the rest of the ship, and then some without even working hard.

Saving power for laser CWIS and railguns. :P

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 03 Nov 2017, 00:09
by wolfpak
The use of DC is probably because they don't have the technology to make AC work. It's a step back in my opinion. The auto industry abandoned DC for similar applications long ago because of the problems and expense of maintaining those systems.

From published reports the reactors on the Fords put out around 770MW compare to 525 or so on the Nimitz class. They're comparable to those in domestic power plants that are rated at 800MW. They may be smaller in size

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 03 Nov 2017, 03:08
by neptune
spazsinbad wrote:.... to the energy storage device,” he said. Wang added that in the future, the same technology could be used to launch not just aircraft, but also missiles and satellites, and maybe even power high-speed trains.....


....nice idea "IF", I'll wait-to-see when the new trains are competing in the commercial market; until then, the Ford is underway!
:)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 10 Nov 2017, 04:16
by spazsinbad
One wonders how some defence 'reporters' are employed. Apparently having no recent knowledge about topic is OKay. OK?
China claims breakthrough in electromagnetic launch system for aircraft carrier
09 Nov 2017 Mike Yeo

"MELBOURNE, Australia — China has reportedly achieved a breakthrough on a conventional propulsion system for its next carrier, which would allow it to operate advanced catapults for launching aircraft without necessitating the use of nuclear propulsion....

...The People’s Liberation Army Navy, or PLAN, has been operating a pair of catapults at its carrier training base at Huangdicun since the second half of 2016. The pair are believed to consist of a single steam catapult and one EMALS. The service is evaluating both systems and carrying out test launches using a modified Shenyang J-15 (Flying Shark) carrierborne fighter jet....

...The new power-generating system could allow PLAN warships to be armed with modern weapons like electromagnetic rail guns and directed-energy weapons. In March, Ma had told state broadcaster CCTV that the “ultimate aim” of his work on the integrated propulsion system was to “solve the problem of deploying high-energy weapons” from its ships.

He has also subsequently claimed that China’s EMALS technology was more advanced and more reliable than the system used on the U.S. Navy’s aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford. The Ford marked its first aircraft launches using EMALS during post-commissioning trials in July.

Its development in the U.S. Navy has, however, been beset with problems, particularly concerning reliability while testing modifications of EMALS, which are meant to allow it to launch the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler while carrying external fuel tanks. [fixed OK-new tech does have problems-but Chinese new tech does not have?]

Source: https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2017/ ... ch-system/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 10 Nov 2017, 23:09
by neptune
spazsinbad wrote:... operate advanced catapults for launching aircraft without necessitating the use of nuclear propulsion....... “solve the problem of deploying high-energy weapons” ...


....I am looking forward to the public demonstration of the advanced train propulsion system, as associated with this technological breakthru!!
:wink:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 11 Nov 2017, 15:45
by spazsinbad
Raytheon's JPALS Brings Precision Landing
11 Nov 2017 Angus Batey

"What appears to be this counter-intuitive proposition is being made by Raytheon, whose JPALS (Joint Precision Approach and Landing System) is in development for the U.S. Navy, who will use it to help F-35 pilots land on carrier decks. The system, which uses GPS data to provide pilots with a landing spot measured in centimetres, will also be part of the landing technology utilized by the MQ-25 unmanned tanker program, regardless of which aircraft is selected.

Raytheon's contract with the U.S. Navy was let in 2008: the carrier-borne iteration of JPALS is currently in test, and is scheduled to achieve initial operating capability in 2019. Clues to the system's utility on land go back to the roots of the program in the 1990s, when the U.S. Department of Defense published a precision-landing requirement. In 1996, following the deaths of all 34 people on board a USAF Boeing T-43A which crashed on a non-precision approach to Dubrovnik, efforts intensified to field a system that offered that capability in a deployable form....

...So far, the system has been flown on F-35 and F-18 aircraft, but it can be retrofitted to any platform. The hardware is mainly contained in the ship- or ground-based package, which Ray describes as "Humvee-sized": some modification may be required to the aircraft, but usually only to software of equipment already carried on board.

"The JPALS unit can talk to whatever aircraft can receive its waveform," says Raytheon consultant and F-18 pilot Brooks Cleveland. "They need GPS, which almost every airplane these days has; they need an inertial navigation system, which, again, most have; they need some spare processing power, typically found in the mission computer; and then the key piece is a radio that can recognise the JPALS waveform. That's not a new radio: it'll mean a software upgrade, or perhaps a chip in an existing radio."

The need for a new waveform has been driven by security requirements. The links between the JPALS unit and the aircraft are encrypted, and designed to have a low probability of being observed or intercepted by a third party. Unlike the hemispherical radio frequency "bubble" produced by a radar-based system, Cleveland says JPALS' RF footprint is "virtually non-existent." To further minimize any chance of detection in a deployed ground operation, the unit can be placed up to 20 miles away from the desired landing site.

JPALS is capable of guiding up to 50 inbound aircraft simultaneously, from ranges of up to 200 miles....

...The system's reliance on GPS may leave it susceptible to jamming - not of the links between the unit and the aircraft, but of the signals from the GPS satellite constellation. The U.S. DoD has recognized GPS resilience as a potential area of vulnerability, and as part of its mitigations it has contracted with Raytheon for the delivery of a next-generation GPS ground station.

"Our customers will tell you that that's one of the hardest problems we've had to tackle across the DoD," says Ray. "I think the architecture that we're delivering as part of the upgraded GPS will be able to meet those needs and provide more resilience against those low-end jam threats. And because JPALS is going to be accessing the GPS system, as GPS moves to the next-generation system it will make JPALS much more resilient.""

Source: http://aviationweek.com/dubai-air-show- ... on-landing

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 07 Dec 2017, 12:51
by spazsinbad
Excerpt mostly 'bout JPALS & future F-35B LHA Ops with it. The full 12 page PDF article will go in F-35 UNIT subsection.

Go here: viewtopic.php?f=59&t=53007&p=382733&hilit=father#p382733
VMFA-211 Wake Island Avengers F-35B USMC Combat Aircraft Monthly Jan 2018 pp12.pdf
Download 12 page PDF: download/file.php?id=26042 (PDF 2.13Mb)
Wake Island Avengers
Jan 2018 Jamie Hunter

"Every squadron has a unique tale of its history and heritage, and none more so than VMFA-211. Steeped in battle honors and now leading from the front in the F-35B Lightning II program, the ‘Avengers’ have an incredible story to tell... report and photos: Jamie Hunter...

“...Going to sea
In late October, VMFA-211 participated in Exercise ‘Dawn Blitz’, embarking aboard the USS Essex (LHD 2) as part of a Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB). The squadron had already embarked on the Essex in August to assist in the recertification of the ship’s flight deck with new upgrades to accommodate the F-35. ‘That was our first night CQ in the squadron — in fact it was really the first night CQ evolution in the fleet,’ describes Vaughn. ‘Our night work around the boat is all unaided right now because of the limitations of the night vision camera in the helmet. We’ve still got some way to go with that. For me it’s similar to flying a Hornet onto a bigdeck carrier. That’s all unaided and you only use the night vision goggles when you’re up and away from the ship.’ When it comes to the actual flying around the boat, the F-35B is still some way off realizing the fully automated landing characteristics that are planned. The Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) will ultimately enable the ship and the aircraft to talk to one another, guiding the aircraft to carriers and amphibious assault ships in all weather conditions and in surface conditions up to sea state five using an encrypted, jam-proof datalink. The system should enable the F-35B to auto-land on the amphibious assault ship, although that ambition is still some way off. Eventually the aircraft will do a completely automated landing. The jet will communicate via JPALS with the ship to get speed and set a GPS offset to the location it needs to hover abeam the landing spot.

For now, fleet pilots are manually flying the aircraft but they can still plug the ship’s speed into the autopilot. Vaughn says: ‘About a mile behind the ship you’re set up in Mode 4 [STOVL mode] and starting to decelerate. The LSO [landing signals officer] lets you know the ship’s speed, so you can program that into the autopilot and the jet will auto-decelerate. You rarely nail it and start your ‘decel’ at exactly the right time, so you have to make some small adjustments. Ultimately, you’re looking to pull up to a hover abeam the port side of the ship in daylight. At night you’re going to fly down the center ‘tramline’ of the deck and creep up over spot seven, which is where we generally land.

‘The autopilot in STOVL is truly amazing — it’s very steady. There’s a lot of science going on behind you. We hold the aircraft above the spot, make a few positional corrections, then push the stick forwards and hit a button, which captures your optimum rate of descent. You’re just making small line-up corrections all the way down.’

Vaughn says that despite currently flying around the ship without night vision aids, pilots sometimes call upon the F-35’s distributed aperture system (DAS). Pilots can bring this all-round external view of the jet into their visor, or up on the large-area cockpit display. ‘I love flying with the DAS when I’m up and away from the ship. It can be a bit of a distraction when I’m landing if it’s in the helmet, but I love it on the screen.’..."

Source: Combat Aircraft Volume 19 Number 1

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 07 Dec 2017, 17:57
by splittingatoms
wolfpak wrote:The use of DC is probably because they don't have the technology to make AC work. It's a step back in my opinion. The auto industry abandoned DC for similar applications long ago because of the problems and expense of maintaining those systems.

From published reports the reactors on the Fords put out around 770MW compare to 525 or so on the Nimitz class. They're comparable to those in domestic power plants that are rated at 800MW. They may be smaller in size


Long time lurker (couple years now), first time poster.

I just want to chime in here on something I know pretty well (nuclear power plants)...the Ford plants likely have a thermal output (MWt) in the range posted. However, their electrical/propulsion output is probably around 28-30% of that. So let's assume maybe 215-230 MWe (288,000-308,000 HP).

A single-core, commercial nuclear power plant will range anywhere from about 1600 MWt for a small, two-loop plant to 4500 MWt for an EPR or APWR type plant. That will give electrical output in the range of 580-1700 MWe (775,000-2,275,000 HP).

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 07 Dec 2017, 20:48
by tincansailor
Long time lurker (couple years now), first time poster.

I just want to chime in here on something I know pretty well (nuclear power plants)...the Ford plants likely have a thermal output (MWt) in the range posted. However, their electrical/propulsion output is probably around 28-30% of that. So let's assume maybe 215-230 MWe (288,000-308,000 HP).

A single-core, commercial nuclear power plant will range anywhere from about 1600 MWt for a small, two-loop plant to 4500 MWt for an EPR or APWR type plant. That will give electrical output in the range of 580-1700 MWe (775,000-2,275,000 HP).

[/quote]

Welcome aboard splittingatoms. Interesting analysis. So a DC system would give you greater Shaft Horse Power? I was discussing this a couple of weeks ago with another old navy guy, with engineering experience. He was surprised the Chinese would try this because of the greatly added weight of generators, need for thicker wiring, and insulation, and safety issues. But your suggesting it may be worth it?

My thought was the breakthrough the Chinese were referring to might be room temperature super conductivity. We haven't heard much about that technology lately, but if they have made that kind of breakthrough it would solve some problems with the weight, but not the safety issues. What are your thoughts on the subject?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 07 Dec 2017, 21:07
by wolfpak
Splittingatom,

Thanks. I stand corrected. My 800 MW should have been qualified as electrical power out the door at one of the Midwest utilities. Mixing apples and oranges.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 08 Dec 2017, 05:38
by splittingatoms
tincansailor wrote:Welcome aboard splittingatoms. Interesting analysis. So a DC system would give you greater Shaft Horse Power? I was discussing this a couple of weeks ago with another old navy guy, with engineering experience. He was surprised the Chinese would try this because of the greatly added weight of generators, need for thicker wiring, and insulation, and safety issues. But your suggesting it may be worth it?

My thought was the breakthrough the Chinese were referring to might be room temperature super conductivity. We haven't heard much about that technology lately, but if they have made that kind of breakthrough it would solve some problems with the weight, but not the safety issues. What are your thoughts on the subject?


Sorry if I wasn't clear. My analysis was merely comparing the size of commercial scale plants to naval plants and making sure the difference between thermal and electrical Megawatts was understood and called out.

As far as AC or DC power for EMALS (and the like), I can't say I see any one system being superior or "cutting edge" over the other. Three phase, AC power has a lot of advantages in rugged simplicity. Power electronics can be minimized in many systems, voltages steeped up or down as needed, and motors can be off the shelf. DC power offers the potential for minimized transmission losses, however I'm not sure how much that buys you on a ship. Doing voltage transformations in DC is very well-established at this point, but it isn't as rugged or cheap as a transformer in my opinion (I am open to be wrong on this). I would imagine the EMALS system has DC as some point which is then put through something looking a bit like a giant audio amplifier to drive the linear motor. In the sense that a massive amount of power can undergo one less transformation, perhaps it's a benefit. With that said, the EMALS flywheels could already accomplish that with the right kind of motor/generator, i.e. taking in AC to spin them up and then outputting DC. Long story short, choosing DC doesn't illustrate any advantage or disadvantage in my eyes, nor does it make or break the coupling to conventional power sources.

As has already been mentioned, diesels and gas turbines are more than capable (actually more so than nuclear) of shifting power to meet demands. Like the Zumwalt has lots of extra electrons for lasers/railguns/etc., adding additional generation capacity for EMALS strikes me as no big deal. A single added LM2500 or MT30 turbine is a very small addition to the layout of the ship and is MORE than capable of running EMALS. It could even sit dormant until one wishes to launch aircraft and then be brought into action. I simply attribute the article above to typical journalist incompetence.

Perhaps the "innovation" is the use of high temperature superconductors. These certainly exist and work to bring sizes down. I can once again point to the Zumwalt, which has the largest superconducting motor on the face of the earth. It has also struggled with that FOAK technology and I'm sure a linear motor up on the deck would be even more "adventuresome" from a qualification and refinement perspective. HT superconductors still require liquid nitrogen for cooling, so there is a whole subsystem of cryo equipment and insulated lines which must exist. Leaks in these systems can be catastrophic to personnel safety and to other equipment. They can also cause the superconducting equipment to not superconduct. Should this happen, the arc-flash will do a nice impression of a bomb, with similar risks to personnel.

It is conceivable that China has devised a superconducting, DC EMALS system. If so, good for them. I don't see any actual advantages to what is currently on the Ford carrier. In a war environment, the KISS standard still applies. Fancy for fancy's sake didn't do the German's a lot of good in WW2 and it still won't today.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 08 Dec 2017, 06:04
by steve2267
That is a VERY NICE 2nd post. I too welcome you aboard! :D

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 16 Dec 2017, 02:42
by spazsinbad
Thanks to 'zerion' on another thread posting about these events - the JPALS part reposted here because it is THE THING.

viewtopic.php?f=57&t=53429&p=383516&hilit=rough#p383516
USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) Completes First F-35C Carrier Qualification
15 Dec 2017 Mass Communication Specialist Second Class Jessica Paulauskas, USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) Public Affairs

"The Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) successfully completed Fleet Replacement Squadron (FRS) Carrier Qualifications for the F-35C Lightning II program, carrier qualifying the first nine fleet aviators in the new aircraft, while underway Dec. 7-11.

Along with Abraham Lincoln, the "Rough Raiders" of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 125, the "Grim Reapers" of VFA-101, and VX-9 accomplished many first steps including... use of the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) in an operational setting.

"Thanks to the tireless work from the VFA-125, VFA-101, VX-9, CVN72, and the Lockheed Team this detachment was able to successfully complete numerous milestones that will set the foundation for the future 5th generation employment of the F-35C into the Carrier Air Wing," said Cmdr. Scott Hulett, VFA-125 executive officer....

...Abraham Lincoln operated in inclement weather during portion of the qualification process, which gave the squadrons varying condition to test the new landing system, JPALS. The all-weather system works with the ship's navigation system to provide accurate and reliable guidance for the aircraft. Prior to this underway, F-35Cs only used JPALS for developmental testing...."

Photo: "ATLANTIC OCEAN (Dec. 8, 2017) Sailors prepare to launch an F-35C Lightning II assigned to the "Rough Raiders" of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 125 during flight operations aboard the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72). (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Josue Escobosa/Released)" https://www.navyrecognition.com/images/ ... tion_1.JPG


Source: https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.p ... ation.html

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Dec 2017, 21:56
by spazsinbad
More EMALS cats than anyone needs to see in a lifetime aboard FORD - sad that EMALS does not work - but hey it might.




Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Dec 2017, 22:21
by steve2267
AAGS seemed to work just fine in the first video, when the aviators cared to lower their tailhook :mrgreen: . What is the purpose of bouncing off the deck? Just for the fun of it? Or does a training or qualification evolution require a certain number of approaches and touch-n-goes just enables getting in the required number of approaches?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Dec 2017, 22:27
by neptune
spazsinbad wrote:More EMALS cats than anyone needs to see in a lifetime aboard FORD - sad that EMALS does not work - but hey it might....


...in the spirit of the season, LEDs for the house decorations, auto decorations, drone decorations; the EMALS should add LEDs to the shuttle coils to provide visual indication of the progress along the chute during a/c launch, maybe alternating Red, White and Blue!

...perhaps similar with the AAG!
:pint:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Dec 2017, 23:07
by spazsinbad
steve2267 wrote:AAGS seemed to work just fine in the first video, when the aviators cared to lower their tailhook. What is the purpose of bouncing off the deck? Just for the fun of it? Or does a training or qualification evolution require a certain number of approaches and touch-n-goes just enables getting in the required number of approaches?

:doh: You do not need to have that attitude - ignorance is just that - a simple question would suffice. Depending on situation with LSOs & Pilots - for example new deck landers require two rollers/touch and goes hook up before putting hook down for first arrest. At least once this has been explained on other NavAv threads. Also experienced pilots 'not having deck landed for awhile / deck landing for the first time on a new carrier' carry out at least one roller but probably two, to get a look at the deck and new perhaps line up situations not seen before. Also LSOs need to adjust their 'eyes' to the carrier from their previous FCLP 'eyes' - practice in case of bolters LSOs/Pilots need to get that power on quick smart.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Dec 2017, 23:44
by steve2267
Sorry... no attitude intended or implied. I shoulda added the smiley. Corrected.

I was surprised at the number of bolters at first. Because with, errr their magical carpet (strikeout Delta Flight Path), and/or all that technological flightpath geewhizzery the F/A-18 Super Duper possesses... I was surprised they woulda been missing the arrester gear, and on such a beyoootiful day with apparently calm seas. Then I looked again and seen no tailhook lowered. Hence my non-smiley enquirey.

ETA: Fixed carpetbagging of DFP

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2017, 00:15
by spazsinbad
The last word in the title of the first long video above is 'Testing' so that is in play also. Yes a bolter is not a roller. And Super Hornets have MAGIC CARPET. The F-35C has DELTA FLIGHT PATH (also 'MC' called something different now 'PLM'?).

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=53617&p=380932&hilit=magic+carpet#p380932

PLM = Precision Landing Modes name change found: http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... 17_web.pdf
&
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/magic- ... 1793618342
&
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=52238&p=353004&hilit=precision#p353004

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 24 Dec 2017, 05:10
by mas
Nice videos. I know it's called the Super Hornet but its size and lines remind me more of the original Tomcat than the original Hornet, similar power too. You kind of forget how bigger they made it until reminded.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Jan 2018, 02:37
by spazsinbad
I like the look on the face of the chap with the spray bottle: http://static.atimes.com/uploads/2018/0 ... tapult.jpg at http://hrana.org/news/2018/01/third-car ... catapults/
"The new EMALS electromagnetic system on USS Ford. Photo: US Navy" [BOLLOCKS BUDDY!]

Looks like a STEAM catapult to me - I'll look around.... Here is the land EMALS open [from Naval Aviation News]:

http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... ture2a.jpg

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Jan 2018, 02:58
by SpudmanWP
This is what it looks like.

Image

Here is an EMALS module being lowered into place.

Image

According to this url, those photos are of the old steam cat being removed.

http://www.migflug.com/jetflights/the-a ... erior.html

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Jan 2018, 03:12
by spazsinbad
Nice EMALS on FORD photo. The caption at the other site says of original wrong photo above: "EMALS being installed"
I like this quote from the same MiGflug source: http://www.migflug.com/jetflights/the-a ... erior.html
"... Another feature of the deck on the USS Nimitz is the coating of it. The coating on the surface is constructed so that it is anti-slip, preventing the aircraft to slide during heavy seas and landings, and also heat resistant which makes it possible for STOVL (Short Take Off Vertical Landing) jets such as the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II to land vertically. If the carrier would not have this feature the F-35’s down-facing nozzle would melt the carrier’s surface...."


DiD Defence Industry Daily images cannot be hotlinked: https://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/ ... T-1_lg.jpg

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 26 Jan 2018, 10:24
by spazsinbad
BabaLOO BOO Sucks BOOyah. EMALS & AAG goes GOOD. This is HUGE!
Aircraft Launch and Recovery Systems in Sync
25 Jan 2018 PEO(T) Public Affairs

"NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. — An entire suite of aircraft launch and recovery equipment (ALRE) systems is required to enable safe and effective operations on the flight deck of the U.S. Navy's newest and most technologically advanced aircraft carrier, USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78). CVN 78 recently completed Independent Steaming Exercise Five, during which it completed 401 catapults and arrestments, according to the ship's Facebook page post Jan. 21."

Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=6659

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 26 Jan 2018, 11:06
by popcorn
More on the Advanced Arresting Gear...
https://www.military.com/defensetech/2017/01/23/navy-use-embattled-arresting-gear-technology-next-supercarrier

Navy to Use Embattled Arresting Gear Technology on Next Supercarrier

A controversial arresting gear system that has suffered delays and spurred congressional inquiries will remain the technology of choice for the Navy's next aircraft carrier, officials with Naval Air Systems Command announced Monday.

Citing continued progress in the test program for the Advanced Arresting Gear developed by General Atomics, officials announced in a release that the system would remain the recovery system of choice aboard the future carrier John F. Kennedy, set to be commissioned in 2020. The Kennedy is the second in a new class of carriers, with the first, the Gerald R. Ford, expected to be delivered to the Navy in April...

Navy officials said the decision to move forward with AAG came on the heels of the 350th recovery of an F/A-18E Super Hornet in December using the new system. Other milestones for testing include the completion of more than 1,400 dead-load arrestments and 351 test arrestments with the Super Hornet, and ongoing commissioning testing aboard the Ford, according to the announcement.

Also... the team that worked out the bugs on the Water Twister were recognized for their achievement.
https://smnewsnet.com/archives/429055/429055/

NAWCAD Commander’s Awards Honor Excellence in Work for the Warfighter
January 18, 2018
Technical advancements and achievements from across the Command were recognized at the 17th Annual Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division (NAWCAD) Commander’s and Innovation Awards ceremony at the Rear Adm. William A. Moffett Building, Patuxent (Pax) River in December.

Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) Water Twister Integrated Program Team, Lakehurst, New Jersey, led by Karine Mouradian

This team built a three-phase solution and organized a highly-specialized, multi-disciplined team to work in parallel on several design issues with the water twister aboard USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78). The water twister, a component of the arresting gear, is designed to absorb 70 percent of the force of an aircraft’s landing against an arresting wire, thereby reducing stress on the airframe during the landing and leading to increased aircraft longevity. The team used advanced analytical methods to support creative redesign and expeditiously responded to new issues on the fielded systems. Throughout all efforts, the team ensured safe operations at the Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst land-based test sites and aboard CVN 78, while developing future advanced technical solutions to fulfill the advanced arresting gear mission for the U. S. Navy.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 26 Jan 2018, 11:26
by spazsinbad
That first story is misleading because it is one year old - obviously things have improved in that one year. So the TWISTED SISTAs got the TWISTER TWISTING again? Cool. :mrgreen:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 26 Jan 2018, 19:01
by blindpilot
spazsinbad wrote:That first story is misleading because it is one year old - obviously things have improved in that one year. So the TWISTED SISTAs got the TWISTER TWISTING again? Cool. :mrgreen:


Actually it appears they are doing good work getting there.

Whenever there is a paradigm change, I always remember the battle to replace the internal combustion piston engine. The engineering there is very long lived, extremely mature, and right at the far edge. But the reality is that to move forward, we will end up with hybrid-electric etc. technologies, for the reason that they have a larger potential down the road.

Now the first such engine technologies will be hard pressed to beat out the range/efficiency of the current 21st century internal combustion engines. In fact they can't .... "yet". But even if they only are as good as the old '55 Chevy 427 4 barrel Holley engine I ran back in the 60's.... That is not a failure!!!!!. That was a dang good motor, and effective for the purpose. If you gave me a Hybrid as good as that '55 Chevy, you'd have nothing to be ashamed about. No it's not a Viper V'10, but it is a good starting place for future maturity.

As near as I can tell they have made this shift with a lot better performance than my 427 example, and it will provide much better capability, down the road, probably sooner than later, as they work out the engineering issues, and get maturation under their belt. Initial adgustment, reliability and maintenance growth pains? Probably ... but it doesn't mean they can't do 400+ cat n traps. They obviously can.

MHO,
BP

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jan 2018, 01:13
by neptune
blindpilot wrote:..
Whenever there is a paradigm change, I always remember the battle to replace the internal combustion piston engine. The engineering there is very long lived, extremely mature, and right at the far edge. But the reality is that to move forward, we will end up with hybrid-electric etc. technologies, for the reason that they have a larger potential down the road...
As near as I can tell they have made this shift with a lot better performance than my 427 example, and it will provide much better capability, down the road, probably sooner than later, as they work out the engineering issues, and get maturation under their belt. Initial adgustment, reliability and maintenance growth pains? Probably ... but it doesn't mean they can't do 400+ cat n traps. They obviously can.MHO,
BP


.... I somewhat agree with the analogy but those of us who work with power are slightly disappointed with the "water twister" level of technology. It is an improvement but more like a 235cu. 6cyl rather than the Power Pack 283 '57 Belair. We had hoped for a triple redundant reciprocal of the disk alternators that would recover the launching 121 MJ for a 100klb a/c; or trapping (at least 50%) 60.5 MJ and a 50klb a/c . Maybe DARPA/ NRL will come thru with an electrical retrofit, in the near future.
:)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2018, 21:27
by spazsinbad
Not sure if the TWISTER is used now but anyway there are an astonishing number of sHORNET ARRESTS cited - FAAARout!
Advanced arresting gear is coming along
25 Jun 2018 David B. Larter

"The Navy’s next generation advanced arresting gear destined for the Ford-class carriers trapped two new aircraft in May, according to a release from the company. The AAG, which will replace the traditional arresting cable on the Ford-class flight deck, was used to trap both the C-2A Greyhound carrier on-board delivery aircraft an an E-2D Hawkeye. Both traps occurred a the Runway Arrested Landing Site in Lakehurst, New Jersey.

In a release, General Atomics said the test represented a new phase in the development of the technology. “Since the carrier’s July 2017 commissioning, the AAG system aboard [the carrier Gerald R. Ford] has successfully arrested the F/A-18 Super Hornet 747 times,” Rolf Ziesing, an official with General Atomics’ electromagnetic systems division. “We are now in the next phase of AAG capability and performance testing targeting heavier, prop-based C-2A, E-2C and E-2D aircraft.

“We’ll continue both roll-in and fly-in testing throughout the summer. Once RALS testing is completed, the aircraft will be cleared to begin testing aboard CVN 78.”..."

Source: https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/ ... ing-along/

Photo: "JOINT BASE MCGUIRE-DIX-LAKEHURST, N.J. – The E-2C Hawkeye completes its first arrestment with Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) at the Runway Arrested Landing Site (RALS) in Lakehurst, N.J., June 8. The E-2C is the latest platform participating in ongoing AAG performance testing to ensure the system can support the full USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) air wing. (U.S. Navy photo)" http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/ ... stment.jpg

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2018, 09:08
by sunstersun
so EMALS are doin fine?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2018, 09:36
by spazsinbad
Not sure how one measures 'fine' - my association with that word is WX or 'fine tuning' but if "... the AAG system aboard [the carrier Gerald R. Ford] has successfully arrested the F/A-18 Super Hornet 747 times,” Rolf Ziesing, an official with General Atomics’ electromagnetic systems division..." somehow or other these 'arrested developments' got off again.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2018, 14:49
by madrat
Water twister implies some sort of stator-impeller being drawn through liquid to drive some sort of permanent magnet rotor recovering kinetic energy back into electrical energy, kind of on the principles of how an automatic transmission works under a load.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 30 Jun 2018, 17:07
by popcorn

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2018, 02:12
by spazsinbad
AAG being upgraded in GERALD (CVN78)
Carrier USS Gerald R. Ford Enters Year-Long Post-Shakedown Maintenance and Upgrade Period
16 Jul 2018 Ben Werner

"After spending 81 days at sea spread out during eight steaming events, USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) is back at Huntington Ingalls Industries Newport News Shipbuilding for a year-long maintenance and upgrade period. For the next year, Ford’s post-shakedown availability (PSA)/selected restricted availability (SRA) will concentrate on installing the aircraft carrier’s remaining combat systems, completing any deferred work...

upgrading the advanced arresting gear....

...Since commissioning on July 22, 2017, Ford has successfully completed nearly 750 shipboard aircraft launches and recoveries, nearly double the approximately 400 launches and recoveries originally planned, according to the Navy. Ford also certified its air traffic control center, its JP-5 fuel system, demonstrated daytime and nighttime replenishment capability and the ship’s defensive systems."..."

Source: https://news.usni.org/2018/07/16/35142

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 17 Jul 2018, 10:38
by spazsinbad
FARNBOROUGH: Raytheon JPALS landing aid nears serial production
17 Jul 2018 Michael Gubisch

"Raytheon intends to reach operational capability of its military joint precision approach and landing system (JPALS) this year, and start production in 2019. The manufacturer has been testing the system since 2015 and earlier this year conducted landing trials with a Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning aboard the US Navy’s amphibious assault ship USS Wasp.... [jeepers USN has been testing JPALS on CVNs for YONKs buddy - since 2015 - ya coulda said so]

...Raytheon sees opportunities for further deployment beyond the US Navy. Scott says the manufacturer has had enquiries by the US Air Force and Marine Corps for a land-based system. A prototype has been developed, and Scott says he expects a trial to begin within a year. He adds that the system could provide precision landing capability at an airfield within two hours, while installation of conventional ground infrastructure would typically be a matter of months.

Raytheon vice-president of navigation, weather and services Matt Gilligan says: “There are many fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft around the world and across the services that deploy to harsh, low-visibility environments where JPALS would be extremely valuable.""

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... al-450320/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 18 Jul 2018, 14:50
by spazsinbad
USS Wasp First Carrier to Use JPALS on Deployment
17 Jul 2018 SEAPOWER

"FARNBOROUGH, England — Early in 2018, U.S. Marine Corps F-35B Lightning II fighters deployed to the Pacific aboard the amphibious assault ship USS Wasp, and used the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS), produced by the Raytheon Co.’s Intelligence, Information and Services business, to guide them onto the ship’s deck in all weather and surface conditions up to the rough waters of Sea State 5, the company said in a July 16 release....

...The system is slated to go into production in 2019."

Source: http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20180717-jpals.html

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 Jul 2018, 01:12
by spazsinbad

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jul 2018, 22:00
by spazsinbad
Page 15 this thread has story 'bout NEW OUIJAs: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=370280&hilit=OUIJA#p370280
“Lt. Cmdr. Rodney King (right), USS Gerald R. Ford's (CVN 78) aircraft handling officer, explains flight deck aircraft operations in the flight deck control office to AIR 6.7 employees. Photo by Petty Officer 1st Class Jeffrey Troutman, USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78).” http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/model.jpg

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jul 2018, 13:39
by spazsinbad

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jul 2018, 22:14
by spazsinbad
Navy’s newest carrier-based catapult, trap systems steadily advance through test
27 Jul 2018 PEO(T) Public Affairs

"NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Md. – One year ago, the Navy’s newest aircraft launch and recovery systems successfully conducted historic first sorties aboard the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78). Today, the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) and Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) progress through comprehensive test programs.

Testing toward reliability
“Data from shipboard testing indicates that both EMALS and AAG have demonstrated improved reliability projections over the solely land-based testing,” said Capt. Steve Tedford, former Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment (PMA 251) program manager.

Reliability is a key performance parameter for any new aircraft system, ensuring operational readiness for the fleet. EMALS and AAG are being put through the rigors to ensure they meet developmental milestones. Single-day shipboard operations show that both systems are capable of meeting operational requirements.

The EMALS and AAG teams, along with industry partner General Atomics, have developed numerous engineering changes to support the systems’ continued maturity and reliability growth, Tedford explained….

...“The dedicated EMALS and AAG teams have excelled in overcoming numerous challenges and will continue charging ahead, completing these concurrent test programs, continually increasing confidence in these technologies and getting both systems mission ready,” said Tedford."

Photo:“An F/A-18F Super Hornet catches a wire of the Advanced Arresting Gear system aboard USS Gerald R. “ Ford (CVN 78) for the first time, marking a naval history first, on July 28, 2017. (U.S. Navy Photo)” http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/ ... 6-0113.jpg


Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=6889

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 13 Aug 2018, 21:33
by spazsinbad
Hail and farewell: Carrier Ford changes command
10 Aug 2018 Mark D. Faram

"...Capt. John J. “Yank” Cummings will preside over a first-in-class carrier undergoing extensive work designed to fix the glitches that have dogged the carrier since it was commissioned on July 22, 2017, and began its shakedown cruise. The list includes propulsion problems and software bugs but the Ford is slated to return to sea in late 2019 and the Pentagon believes it will deploy overseas three years after that.

“The shakedown period was an opportunity for the Navy to run the ship through a rigorous set of operational tasks and assess her performance," McCormack [previous skipper] told Navy Times in an interview. “We now enter a post-shakedown availability period to incorporate several design changes to correct performance deficiencies and complete the installation of other systems needed to ensure the ship, her embarked air wing and the strike group are ready.”

McCormack’s crew spent 81 days at sea testing the Ford, the newest class of American carriers in four decades. One of their most rewarding moments came when they discovered that the shipboard Electromagnetic Aircraft Launching System — called “EMALS” — and its companion Advanced Arresting Gear worked well.... [GOSH - WHO'DA THUNK]

...Although commanders planned on only 400 launches and arrested aircraft landings during the Ford’s maiden year of operations, EMALs worked so well that they pushed testing far higher. The crew tallied 747 launches and recoveries, seven of them made by McCormack himself, a career F/A-18 Hornet strike fighter pilot.

“It’s shows your crew that you have confidence in them and in the equipment to have them shoot you off the bow and bring you back aboard from the stern,” said McCormack, a California native who also served as a test pilot. He has orders to become chief of staff for Naval Air Forces, Atlantic...."

Source: https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-nav ... s-command/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 20 Aug 2018, 18:16
by spazsinbad
Which SIDE shows the DEADload?
“Secretary of the Navy Richard V. Spencer and Sen. Robert Menendez receive a demonstration of the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) during a visit to the Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division (NAWCAD) Lakehurst Aug. 17. [2018] (U.S. Navy photo)” http://www.navair.navy.mil/img/uploads/SECNAV%202.JPG

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Aug 2018, 21:37
by spazsinbad
Props testing completion advances AAG fidelity
22 Aug 2018 NAWCAD Public Affairs

"JOINT BASE MCGUIRE-DIX-LAKEHURST, New Jersey, — The team behind the Navy’s newest carrier-based aircraft recovery system, the Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG), completed C-2A Greyhound, E-2C Hawkeye and E-2D Advanced Hawkeye Performance Testing Aug. 11 at a land-based test site located here.

The propellered segment of the USS Gerald R. Ford’s (CVN 78) airwing, or “props,” completed a total of 450 aircraft recoveries since beginning the rigorous and specialized Performance Testing program in late May and will generate the Aircraft Recovery Bulletin (ARB) that clears the C-2A, E-2C and E-2D for future manned aircraft testing aboard CVN 78.

The Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment (ALRE) team designed and executed a test program that would validate AAG’s ability to safely arrest the aircraft aboard the supercarrier, while purposely challenging the system by inserting faults and verifying both the aircraft’s and system’s response by analyzing the data obtained during test....

...Concurrent testing at JCTS has been underway to support the F/A-18 Super Hornet ARB expansion as well as the EA-18G Growler ARB, and the jets will be the next to conduct a series of roll-in and fly-in arrestments at RALS. This pattern of sequential land-based testing will be completed for all aircraft types – first at JCTS, then RALS, prior to landing aboard the carrier."

Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/index.cfm?fu ... ry&id=6905

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Sep 2018, 19:28
by spazsinbad
JPALS JPALS JPALS - wherefor art thou JPALS. USAF will have to be dragged akickin' and ascreamin' to the altar of JPALS.
Update: Raytheon developing expeditionary land-based JPALS system
04 Sep 2018 Pat Host

"Key Points
---------- • Raytheon is developing a man-portable land-based JPALS system
---------- • The system would enable the USAF to land aircraft where it does not have bases

Raytheon is developing a smaller, expeditionary, land-based version of its Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) for a demonstration to the US Air Force (USAF), [wodabout USMC?] according to a company official.

CJ Jaynes, Raytheon executive technical adviser for precision landing, told Jane's on 22 August that the company is repackaging JPALS so it can be built with transit cases and transported on, or in, a truck, such as a light armoured utility vehicle. The idea is that it can be mobile and expeditionary, or carried by two people, as current JPALS equipment for US Navy (USN) aircraft carriers are extremely large, Jaynes said, with four avionics racks each 1.5 m tall by 0.8 m wide."

Source: https://www.janes.com/article/82763/upd ... als-system

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 Sep 2018, 23:51
by spazsinbad
Raytheon TOUTS TOUTS TOUTS for the JPALS everywhere concept - an USAF drone did an auto landing just recently....
Precision Ship-Landing System Could Be Game-Changer at Bare Airfields
19 Sep 2018 Hope Hodge Seck

"Raytheon says its Joint Precision Approach and Landings System, or JPALS, is revolutionizing landings at sea for the first two deployed squadrons of the F-35B Joint Strike Fighter. Now, the company is setting its sights on the Air Force, where JPALs, already installed on the service's F-35A, could help take the guesswork out of landings at austere airfields with little infrastructure, and in bad weather conditions.

Brooks Cleveland, the senior aviation adviser for landing systems at Raytheon and a former Navy F/A-18 Hornet pilot, said Raytheon wants to take a "road show" demonstration of JPALS capabilities to Hill and Luke Air Force bases, two major F-35 operations hubs. "On the F-35A, [JPALS] is in there and it's turned on, but there's no land-based system yet," Cleveland said. "It will be demonstrating that it's in there and it works as it does at sea, on an aircraft carrier."

JPALS works by enabling communication between a landing aircraft and systems on the ship or ground that can guide the plane in safely and accurately, even on a pitching ship deck or a zero-visibility landing zone. Since the JPALS-equipped F-35B embarked on historic first shipboard deployments with the 31st and 13th Marine Expeditionary Units earlier this year, Cleveland said the system has been 99.9 percent reliable.

"To us on the ships, it's unheard of," he said. "Just off the top of my head, about one out of every three times I came back, the landing systems weren't working, so you're just doing it by sight, which is kind of frustrating, off an eight-hour mission. [The pilots] love it, so that's been very successful."

...JPALS ground components can be set up within 90 minutes and can offer pilots 50 different possible approaches at multiple airfields within a radius of 20 nautical miles, Watkins [business development manager for Raytheon and a retired Air Force colonel who flew F-16 Fighting Falcons] said. Approaches, he said, can be tailored to accommodate challenging terrain or hazardous weather.

Cleveland said it's not just about taking the complexity out of landings; it also offers a level of greater safety to pilots....

...Cleveland said most aircraft have the basic infrastructure needed to work with JPALs, with some modifications.

"It's a task, but not complex," he said. "It's not this massive, huge-scale, 'we have to flight test and certify because we're taking added things on.' But it's still something we have to solve because every airplane has a different radio ... [and] industry partners to work with. It's challenging, but certainly not insurmountable.""

Source: https://www.military.com/defensetech/20 ... ields.html

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2018, 20:57
by spazsinbad
The DFP F-35C HOOK tore up the same spot on the FCLP runway and now someone's hook is tearing holes in carrier decks?
Raytheon pitches USAF on F-35A auto-landing system
20 Sep 2018 Garrett Reim

"After successfully integrating its Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) on F-35B fighters and a growing number of US Navy aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships, Raytheon is pitching a modified version of the system to the US Air Force for auto-landing F-35A aircraft at expeditionary airfields.

The company is in talks with the USAF on how exactly the service would like a portable system configured to automatically land the Lockheed Martin F-35A on remote airfields without traditional instrument landing systems. Such airfields may have difficult approaches due to surrounding mountains, bad weather or potential enemy fire.

Raytheon says it is building a Humvee portable version of JPALS which could be transported to expeditionary air bases aboard a C-130J transport and set up in 60 to 90 minutes. The system would be able to manage 50 different aircraft making different approaches within a radius of 20nm....

...Initially designed to help a pilot land on an aircraft carrier in poor visibility or after long, tiring flights, the auto-landing system can put down an aircraft in a 20cm by 20cm box, says Raytheon.

“It was so precise that when they were testing it that they were having to move around the touchdown point on the aircraft carrier because the deck was getting worn out by the tail hook hitting the same spot,” says Brooks Cleveland, Raytheon’s senior aviation advisor for precision landing systems."

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... em-452040/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Sep 2018, 22:58
by spazsinbad
JPALS Precision Approach and Landing Expeditionary for USAF https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTtVf-qZVro


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Nov 2018, 03:24
by spazsinbad
Catch and Release [LONG ARTICLE BEST READ at source]
04 Sep 2018 Jeff Newman; NAN Naval Aviation News

"...Since first launching and recovering aircraft at-sea July 28, 2017—six days after Ford’s commissioning—the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) and Advanced Arrested Gear (AAG) have successfully executed 747 day-and-night catapult launches and arrestments of F/A-18E/F Super Hornets. The initial goal was to conduct between 400 and 500 such cycles prior to the post-shakedown availability (PSA)…

...Fully installed on Ford, the four EMALS catapults and AAG, which comprises three engines powering three arresting wires, are set for initial operational capability in 2019 and 2021, respectively, prior to the ship’s first scheduled deployment. Through January, Ford had six at-sea periods, four of which included EMALS launches and AAG recoveries. Multiple times, the systems launched and recovered more than 80 Super Hornets in a single day, including one day with more than 110 cycles, and another with more than 130, Tedford [Capt. Stephen Tedford, the former program manager for the Aircraft Launch and Recovery Program Office at Naval Air Systems Command. Tedford led the program office from September 2014 until his change of command on July 12] said....

...Systems Deliver Advantages
EMALS and AAG are designed to, respectively, launch and recover a wider envelope of aircraft than the legacy steam catapult and MK 7 arresting gear. They also weigh less and require significantly less manning—AAG alone saves 65 tons and requires half the manning of the MK-7.

“The difference in performance, you can definitely feel it,” said Lt. Cmdr. James Struck, a pilot with Air Test and Evaluation Squadron (VX) 23, who flew the first launch-and-recovery off Ford in July 2017. “With the old arresting gear, you catch the wire and have a constant deceleration until you stop. With AAG, it tries to reduce the load on the aircraft. It’s not a constant deceleration; it’s controlled by software, so you catch the wire, and you can feel the system adjusting your deceleration profile.”

Struck said launching with EMALS also feels “just a little bit different” than with steam catapults. “EMALS is also driven by software, so the acceleration profile is slightly different, a little smoother,” he said....

...Built-in diagnostics identify components in need of repair, making EMALS and AAG far more reliable and easier to maintain than the legacy systems. “Life as a maintainer is much easier working on EMALS than on steam catapults,” Rivera said [Aviation Boatswain’s Mate (Launching and Recovery) Petty Officer 1st Class (ABE1) Daniel Rivera]. “When there is a problem with EMALS, the system is able to determine exactly what is wrong, so there is less manpower needed to troubleshoot.

“Once the problem is identified, EMALS is more plug-and-play than steam catapults, meaning Sailors can simply remove a failed component instead of attempting to fix it on the spot. This results in less downtime of the equipment and more availability to complete the ship’s mission of launching and recovering aircraft.”...

Test and Evaluation Phase
Having completed land-based developmental testing at its test site at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey, EMALS will soon begin an integrated test and evaluation (IT&E) period, which will include system reliability testing. A key performance parameter for any new aircraft system, reliability ensures operational readiness for the fleet. Single-day shipboard operations have shown that both systems are able to meet operational requirements.

“In developmental testing, we’re trying to find problems with these systems,” Tedford said. “We then take that data and do the best we can to generate predictions of what we think our reliability will be when we get to the ship. “What we learned on CVN 78 last year was that our reliability for both systems was significantly better than our land-based data was predicting, which is a good thing.”

As for AAG, “the team has made incredible progress over the last two years,” Tedford said. The system has conducted more than 2,000 arrestments using dead-loads, weighted sleds that replicate the mass and—when pushed by a jet car—force of an aircraft. Following its year-long PSA, Ford is set to undergo flight deck certification with components of the entire air wing sometime in 2020, Tedford said...."

Entire PDF Summer 2018: http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... er2018.pdf (8.1Mb)

Source: http://navalaviationnews.navylive.dodli ... d-release/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Nov 2018, 03:30
by popcorn
Wasn't there an issue that it took a significantly long time( ie. something like 30-45 min IIRC) to power down EMALS before the techs could safely dp their stuff? Anyone know if that's still the case?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Nov 2018, 03:40
by spazsinbad
There are still issues to be worked upon IIRC involving powering down ALL EMALS before fixing THE ONE but YMMV. :drool:

I'll guess a solution to all problems will be found even if we are not told. So for example OTHER CLOWNS can dig up OLD POTUS QUOTES to lash him with it when he admits the USN Officer gave POTUS a great reply about EMALS recently. :roll:
Trump uses Thanksgiving call to Navy officer to voice a weird grudge about aircraft carriers
23 Nov 2018 Alex Lockie

"President Donald Trump returned to one of his more bizarre concerns about the US military on a call with US service members overseas on Thanksgiving Day. Talking to a US Navy officer on the phone from his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, Trump asked about a pet peeve of his: the catapults aircraft carriers use to launch aircraft....

...“So when you do the new carriers, as we do and as we’re thinking about doing, would you go with steam, or would you go with electromagnetic?” Trump quizzed the sailor, putting him in the awkward position of disagreeing with the president or disagreeing with his superior officers. “Because steam is very reliable, and the electromagnetic, I mean, unfortunately you have to be Albert Einstein to really work it properly,” Trump said. “What would you do?”

“Yes sir, you sort of have to be Albert Einstein to run the nuclear power plant that we have here as well, but we’re doing that very well,” the officer replied. “Mr. President, I would go electromagnetic [catapults] … We do pay a heavy cost to transit the steam around the ship.”

“Good, OK, I like to hear that. I’m actually happy about that answer,” Trump said. “They’re doing what they’re doing, but that’s actually a very good answer.”…"

Source: https://www.businessinsider.com.au/trum ... ke-2018-11

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Nov 2018, 05:57
by steve2267
EMALS is saved! Trump orders a dozen more Ford class carriers! Two dozen Zumwalts also ordered, cuz ‘lectromagnetic!

Give that sailor a promotion! This is YUGE!!!

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Nov 2018, 06:01
by spazsinbad
NOPE. Digital - no 'lectromagneato Einsteinian Schrodingers Catapult' needed to explain it herein - it is HUUUGGGEEEE!

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 Nov 2018, 06:25
by popcorn
I can't imagine that officer endorsing a return to steam.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 24 Nov 2018, 13:34
by spazsinbad
'navy officer' was the CO of REAGAN. Another look at the 'electronic & digital' later 'electromagnetic' that TRUMPs steam.
VIDEO: President Trump Quizzes Reagan Carrier CO on EMALS Program
23 Nov 2018 Ben Werner

"During a Thanksgiving-greetings call with the crew of USS Ronald Reagan (CVN-76), President Donald Trump posed the question which is better, steam or electromagnetic flight-deck catapults....

...During the exchange with Capt. Pat Hannifin, Reagan’s commanding officer, Trump asked about the condition of the ship and wanted to know how the Nimitz-class Reagan compared with the nation’s newest carrier, the first-in-class USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78). “Sir, the condition of the ship is Alpha 1, A-1,” Hannifin said....

...“Tell me about the catapult,” Trump asked before Hannifin finished his answer. “On Gerald Ford, they don’t use steam which is the first one that I’ve ever heard of that doesn’t use steam. I know they have some difficulties which I’m not happy about, they spent a lot of money. I was just curious, the steam system is tried and true for many, many years, as long as we’ve had aircraft carriers, how do you find steam versus what they’re doing on the Gerald Ford which is electronic and digital if you can believe it.”...

...“Yes sir, all of our Nimitz supercarriers have been using steam for decades, and we find pretty reliable. However the electromagnetic catapults they’re running there offer some great benefits,” Hannifin said. “Obviously any new piece you gotta’ work through the bugs, but they offer some benefits, not only to stress and strain on the aircraft to extend service life. I have no doubt we’ll work through that just as we worked through all of our other advancements and continue to bring it to the enemy when we’re called to do so.”...

...“So when you do the new carriers as you do and we’re thinking of doing, would you go steam or would you go with the electromagnetic?” Trump asked. “Steam is very reliable, and the electromagnetic, I mean, unfortunately, you have to be Albert Einstein to work it properly.”

“Yes sir, sir you have to be Albert Einstein to run the nuclear power plants we have here as well, but we’re doing that very well,” Hannifin answered. “Sir, Mr. President I would go electro-magnetic cats, I think that’s the way to go, we do pay a heavy cost to transit the steam around the ship.”

Before becoming Reagan’s commanding officer, Hannifin spent most of his carrier flying fighters. He’s logged more than 2,800 hours flight hours, mostly in F/A-18 Super Hornets. He was also a Navy test pilot, and in 2000 was named the Naval Strike Test Squadron’s Test Pilot of the Year.

“Good, OK, I like to hear that,” Trump responded. “I’m actually happy about that answer because at least they’re doing what they’re doing, but that’s actually a very good answer.”"

Source: https://news.usni.org/2018/11/23/presid ... uss-reagan

President Trump Discusses EMALS with Aircraft Carrier Commander https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQmObklrXUU

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 24 Nov 2018, 15:56
by steve2267
Is it unusual for a flyer to become a carrier captain?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 24 Nov 2018, 16:06
by marsavian
Capt Hannifin saves the Ford Class ! Shout-out to the airforce guys too who told him that the F-35 was invisible ! I actually think he is the most competent President since Reagan but his technical literacy leaves a lot to be desired. It says a lot though when ex actors and businessmen are better at the job then career politicians.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 24 Nov 2018, 21:54
by spazsinbad
steve2267 wrote:Is it unusual for a flyer to become a carrier captain?

From some very general knowledge about USN I would suggest it is mandatory for NASAL REBATERS to be COs of CVNs. :mrgreen:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 24 Nov 2018, 23:57
by popcorn
spazsinbad wrote:
steve2267 wrote:Is it unusual for a flyer to become a carrier captain?

From some very general knowledge about USN I would suggest it is mandatory for NASAL REBATERS to be COs of CVNs. :mrgreen:

Yup, IIRC one of the smartest decisions the Congress ever made to allow naval aviation to realize it's potential.

An interesting origin account of how the 'Brown Shoes' navy ...

http://thebrownshoes.org/whence-term-brown-shoes

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Nov 2018, 01:31
by popcorn
One of the major benefits envisioned from implementing EMALS...

https://sldinfo.com/2018/11/the-french- ... nnovation/

This system is one of numerous initiatives built into the design of this ship that will allow us to change from the current nine to ten year dry dock repair cycle and extend it to a 12 year docking cycle.

Essentially in a half-life you have taken away one full dry dock repair cycle.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Nov 2018, 02:03
by spazsinbad
Thanks - I missed that bit but discovered this :roll: HOWLER: "...With regard to the installation of meals, the two big steam cylinders are replaced with banks of electromagnetic motors...." :mrgreen: POOFread POOFread POOFread….

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Nov 2018, 02:09
by popcorn
spazsinbad wrote:Thanks - I missed that bit but discovered this :roll: HOWLER: "...With regard to the installation of meals, the two big steam cylinders are replaced with banks of electromagnetic motors...." :mrgreen: POOFread POOFread POOFread….

LOL.. I saw that scrambled mess too and knew you'ld be commenting. :D

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Nov 2018, 02:39
by spazsinbad
Trouble is that 'mess' brings down that site along with the interminable single sentence sometimes 'moving' paragraphs. :bang:

Seems to me they - at SLDinfo - 'don't give a damn'.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Nov 2018, 03:06
by popcorn
spazsinbad wrote:Trouble is that 'mess' brings down that site along with the interminable single sentence sometimes 'moving' paragraphs. :bang:

Seems to me they - at SLDinfo - 'don't give a damn'.

Agree... but I'm happy to find a few nuggets once in a while.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 26 Nov 2018, 21:49
by operaaperta
steve2267 wrote:Is it unusual for a flyer to become a carrier captain?


Check here at around 42.47 where a Naval Aviator describes the pathway to commanding a carrier (part of a great 4 part series on carrier aviation)-

https://www.fighterpilotpodcast.com/pod ... rs-part-2/

EDIT- Thanks Spaz, time stamp updated,

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Nov 2018, 02:18
by spazsinbad
Maybe start from 42min 47sec for PAPPY explanation from being an XO of a CVN to becoming CO one day perhaps....

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Nov 2018, 21:26
by spazsinbad
Why the Navy thinks the carrier Gerald R. Ford will work after all
28 Nov 2018 Mark D. Faram

"The technology glitches plaguing the aircraft carrier Gerald R. Ford, lead ship of the Navy’s next generation of flattops, are getting fixed, officials told lawmakers during a Tuesday hearing on Capitol Hill....

...The Ford has long been a source of disgruntlement to President Donald J. Trump, who repeatedly bashes the carrier’s Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System, or EMALS, which is replacing traditional steam-powered catapults. In a Thanksgiving call to Capt. Pat Hannifin, the commanding officer of the Nimitz-class carrier Ronald Reagan while it was visiting Hong Kong, Trump asked the skipper to compare his warship to the Ford.

“Tell me about the catapult,” Trump said. “On Gerald Ford, they don’t use steam, which is the first one that I’ve ever heard of that doesn’t use steam. And I know they have some difficulties, which I’m not happy about, and they spent a lot of money. And I was just curious — the steam system is tried and true for many, many years, as long as we’ve had aircraft carriers, how do you find steam versus what they’re doing on the Gerald Ford, which is electronic and digital, if you can believe it.”

Hannifin told Trump that while the Nimitz class of carriers has depended on the reliable steam catapults for generations, EMALS “offered some great benefits” such as reducing stress on aircraft, but like any new system it required experts to “work through the bugs.” Unlike legacy steam catapults, EMALS was designed to vary the stroke of the launch based on the size and weight of the aircraft its hurling into the air. That’s particularly important for launching relatively light aircraft like aerial drones.

Initial software gremlins prevented the Ford from deploying combat-loaded aircraft but Navy officials believe a system update slated to be installed while the carrier is in the shipyard will fix them.

Echoing Trump on Tuesday, subcommittee chairman Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Mississippi, grilled Geurts on whether Congress will “be glad we with the EMALS and Advanced Arresting Gear?” Noting the 747 launches and recoveries at sea the Ford performed since it commissioned in 2017, plus more than 24,000 launch and recovery cycles using the systems at the land-based site in [?], Geurts was optimistic. [We can guess the ONLY LAND SITE where this testing is possible - can't we.]

“While there have been technical difficulties we’ve had to work through, it really opens up our ability to operate a wider variety of aircraft from the deck, both manned and unmanned which I think is going to be critical to those effective carrier operations as we look to the future,” Geurts said...."

Source: https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-nav ... after-all/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 31 Jan 2019, 04:40
by spazsinbad
Launch-and-Landing Failures Add to $13 Billion Ship’s Troubles
30 Jan 2019 Anthony Capaccio

"Gerald R. Ford had 20 failures in sea operations, tester says
-Navy already faces problems with carrier’s munitions elevators


...The previously undisclosed failures with the electromagnetic systems made by General Atomics occurred during more than 740 at-sea trials since the aircraft carrier’s delivery in May 2017 despite praise from Navy officials of its growing combat capabilities. The Navy must pay to fix such flaws under a “cost-plus” development contract.

The new reliability issues add to doubts the carrier, designated as CVN-78, will meet its planned rate of combat sorties per 24 hours -- the prime metric for any aircraft carrier -- according to the annual report on major weapons from the Defense Department’s operational test office.

“None of the interruptions experienced during CVN-78 flight operations caused injury to personnel, or damage to the aircraft or ship,” Michael Land, a Navy spokesman, said in an email. There were, he added, two “mission aborts” associated with the catapult launch system. In both cases, flight operations were briefly suspended and “a correction was implemented.”...

...Ten “critical failures” occurred during 747 at-sea catapults of jets; another 10 “operational mission failures” occurred during 763 shipboard landing attempts, according to the testing office’s report.

...Land, a spokesman for the Naval Air Systems Command, said in an email that the 747 launch and landings to date are “quite an achievement” but “an insufficient number of events from which to draw conclusions with respect to reliability.”"

Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... s-troubles

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 31 Jan 2019, 04:54
by Corsair1963
So, that's 20 failures compared of several hundred successful launches???

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 31 Jan 2019, 05:10
by spazsinbad
The Count says 700+ successes fordem EMALS.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 31 Jan 2019, 05:53
by steve2267
How does that performance compare to the requirements?

How does that performance compare to the steam system and conventional arrestor gear on the Nimitz boats?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 31 Jan 2019, 06:12
by usnvo
Corsair1963 wrote:So, that's 20 failures compared of several hundred successful launches???


10 were EMALS and 10 were AAG, only 2 required suspension of flight op.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 31 Jan 2019, 06:23
by usnvo
Corsair1963 wrote:So, that's 20 failures compared of several hundred successful launches???


Not really. We know there were 747 successful launches. There were ten critical failures on EMALS and of those, "There were, he added, two “mission aborts” associated with the catapult launch system. In both cases, flight operations were briefly suspended and “a correction was implemented.”...

Any numbers of things could cause critical failures from hardware to software and obviously they have different impacts and repair times. So, if only 2 failures required a brief interruption of flight operations, by inference the other 8 didn't. So operational impact was really limited to 2 of 747 launches.

In any event, given that the design requirement is something like a MTBF of 4000 launches, and they have only completed 747, as indicated in the article they need a bunch more cycles before they can start to draw valid conclusions on reliability. Of course, it is hard to tell if any of the failures constitutes a failure in terms of calculating MTBF since they only required a "brief" suspension of flight operations, what ever that means.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 01 Feb 2019, 10:05
by spazsinbad
There is a new DOT&E 2018 report on CVN 78 which includes EMALS - I'll get to that later - meanwhile some JPALS DOT&E.
Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS)
01 Feb 2019 DOT&E

"...Executive Summary
• As of the end of FY18, DOT&E’s analysis of the data and results for the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System
(JPALS) Block 0 is ongoing; however, preliminary observations from the Navy’s IOT&E period indicate JPALS Block 0 will meet the Program Office’s objectives to support an Early Operational Capability decision.

• The Navy’s Operational Test and Evaluation Force (OPTEVFOR) conducted the JPALS Block 0 IOT&E. This consisted of an at-sea period with an F-35B, an at-sea period with an F-35C, and one pier-side test period.

• The Navy will conduct an operational assessment of the JPALS Block 1 Full Operational Capability in 3QFY19....

System
...• JPALS Block 0 is an interim solution/Early Operational Capability of JPALS, specifically to support the F-35B. Block 0 uses an ultrahigh frequency data broadcast to transmit a subset of the JPALS precision approach data and on-deck Inertial Navigation System alignment from ship to aircraft.

• JPALS Block 1 will further support the F-35B/C and MQ-25A with a two-way datalink capability by providing the accuracy, integrity, and continuity required for future F-35C and MQ-25A autoland capability on CVN-type ships and F-35B coupled flight capability on LH-type ships …."

Source: http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2 ... 8jpals.pdf (0.5Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 01 Feb 2019, 11:25
by spazsinbad
CVN 78 Gerald R. Ford-Class Nuclear Aircraft Carrier FY 18 NAVY PROGRAMS
01 Feb 2019 DOT&E

"Executive Summary
• The DOT&E assessment of CVN 78 remains consistent with previous assessments. Poor or unknown reliability of systems critical for flight operations including newly designed catapults, arresting gear, weapons elevators, and radar, could affect the ability of CVN 78 to generate sorties. Reliability of these critical subsystems poses the most significant risk to the CVN 78 IOT&E timeline.

• CVN 78 completed eight Independent Steaming Event (ISE) at-sea periods in support of developmental test and ship certification. Four of these at-sea periods included fixed-wing flight operations for a total of 747 F/A-18E/F launches and arrestments. Mechanical problems forced CVN 78 to return to port early on three of the eight ISE events.

• CVN 78 will probably not achieve the Sortie Generation Rate (SGR) (number of aircraft sorties per day) requirement. Unrealistic assumptions underpin the SGR threshold requirement. These assumptions ignore the effects of weather, aircraft emergencies, ship maneuvers, and current air wing composition on flight operations. DOT&E plans to assess CVN 78 performance during IOT&E by comparing it to the demonstrated performance of the Nimitz-class carriers as well as to the SGR requirement....

... • The Navy previously identified an inability to readily electrically isolate Electromagnetic Aircraft Launching System
(EMALS) and Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) components to perform maintenance. This limitation precludes some types of maintenance during flight operations.

• The Navy continued performance testing of the AAG at the Jet Car Track Site at Join Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey, with 2,230 arrestments completed as of September 30, 2018. Runway Arrested Landing Site (RALS) testing with manned aircraft continues and has completed a total of 928 aircraft arrestments as of September 30, 2018. RALS testing began on E-2 and C-2 on May 24, 2018, with the first propeller aircraft fly-in arrestment occurring on the C-2 on July 18, 2018....

... • CVN 78 exhibits more electromagnetic compatibility problems than other Navy ships. The Navy continues to characterize the problems and develop mitigation plans.

• The development and testing of AWE, EMALS, AAG, DBR, and the Integrated Warfare System will continue to drive the Gerald R. Ford timeline as it progresses toward IOT&E....

...SYSTEM
... • CVN 78 incorporates a more efficient flight deck layout, dedicated weapons handling areas, and an increased number of aircraft refueling stations designed to enhance its ability to launch, recover, and service aircraft. The Navy set a sortie generation requirement for CVN 78 to sustain 160 sorties per 12-hour fly day for 26 days and surge to 270 sorties per
24-hour fly day for 4 days....

...ACTIVITY
...EMALS
• The Navy conducted 747 F/A-18E/F launches from CVN 78.

• As of September 30, 2018, the program conducted 3,807 dead loads (non-aircraft, weight equivalent sled) and 523 aircraft launches at the land-based test site.

AAG
• The Navy conducted 747 F/A-18E/F arrestments on CVN 78.

• The Navy continues to test the AAG on a jet car track at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey. Earlier testing prompted system design changes that the program is now testing. The jet car track testing examined the F/A-18E/F performance envelope with the new design, and initial E-2C/D and C-2A testing. As of November 3, 2018, land-based jet car track testing accomplished a total of 2,230 dead load arrestments and land-based RALS testing accomplished a total of 456 F/A-18E/F, 65 EA-18G, 226 C-2A, 84 E-2C+, and 140 E-2D aircraft arrestments....

...Reliability
• Four of CVN 78’s new systems stand out as being critical to flight operations: EMALS, AAG, DBR, and AWEs.

Overall, the poor reliability demonstrated by AAG and EMALS and the uncertain reliability of DBR and AWEs could delay CVN 78 IOT&E. The Navy continues to test all four of these systems in their shipboard configurations aboard CVN 78. Reliability estimates derived from test data for EMALS and AAG are discussed in following subsections....

...EMALS
• Testing to date involved 747 shipboard launches and demonstrated EMALS capability to launch aircraft planned for the CVN 78 Air Wing.

• Through the first 747 [JUMBO? Wait WUT!?] shipboard launches, EMALS suffered 10 critical failures. This is well below the requirement of 4,166 Mean Cycles Between Critical Failures, where a cycle represents the launch of one aircraft.

• The reliability concerns are exacerbated by the fact that the crew cannot readily electrically isolate EMALS components during flight operations due to the shared nature of the Energy Storage Groups and Power Conversion Subsystem inverters onboard CVN 78. The process for electrically isolating equipment is time-consuming; spinning down the EMALS motor/ generators takes 1.5 hours by itself. The inability to readily electrically isolate equipment precludes EMALS maintenance during flight operations.

AAG
• Testing to date included 763 attempted shipboard landings and demonstrated AAG capability to recover aircraft planned for the CVN 78 air wing.

• The Program Office redesigned major components that did not meet system specifications during land-based testing. Through the first 763 attempted shipboard landings, AAG suffered 10 operational mission failures (which includes one failure of the barricade system). This reliability estimate falls well below the re-baselined reliability growth curve and well below the requirement of 16,500 Mean Cycles Between Operational Mission Failures, where a cycle represents the recovery of one aircraft.

• The reliability concerns are magnified by the current AAG design that does not allow electrical isolation of the Power Conditioning Subsystem equipment from high power buses, limiting corrective maintenance on below-deck equipment during flight operations...."

Source: http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2 ... 8cvn78.pdf (372Kb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 17:04
by spazsinbad
Earlier this thread? there is a story about F-35C tail hook point hitting the same spot at FCLP site - so now 'JPALS ungood'.
Raytheon Investing in JPALS Software Upgrades
28 Feb 2019 Jennifer-Leigh Oprihory

"Raytheon is spending its own money to upgrade the software in its Joint Precision Approach and Landing Systems (JPALS), retired US Navy Rear Adm. C.J. Jaynes, executive technical advisor for precision landing systems at Raytheon Intelligence, Information, and Services, said on Thursday. The company is currently trying to sell the Air Force on the idea of using JPALS... to support its expeditionary operations. More specifically, it hopes that US Air Forces Europe will utilize it for dispersed operations and US Pacific Air Forces will use it as part of its adaptive basing strategy. “The system enhances operations in harsh environments, giving aircraft capability when it comes to precision landings in challenging terrain conditions,” the company’s website notes.

All three F-35 Lightning II fighter models—including the F-35A—are JPALS-capable, and the company is currently in talks with USAF about the possibility of conducting an F-35A landing test at Edwards AFB, Calif., this fall.

JPALS currently “mirrors the ship system, which is single-runway, single-approach,” Jaynes explained. “We want to make … that one a multiple-runway, multiple-approach system.” Jaynes said the goal is for the system to ultimately have multi-aircraft capability, for it to allow aircraft to land up to 20 nautical miles away from a ground station, and for it to accommodate more than one touchdown point.

Using multiple touchdown points is meant to reduce the likelihood of damage to ship decks, Jaynes told Air Force Magazine in a subsequent interview, since JPALS’ consistency in leading aircraft to land within approximately 20 cm of its intended target during a recent test led to noticeable wear to the landing surface.…"

Source: http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pag ... ades-.aspx

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 19:33
by optimist
With the fa-18ef, they had to introduce an error into the software, so it would impact on a larger area. This was a known some time ago, I'm surprised it wasn't already in the f-35 software. In some ways the fa-18 was the test bed for the f-35 software, magic carpet etc.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 22:28
by spazsinbad
optimist wrote:With the fa-18ef, they had to introduce an error into the software, so it would impact on a larger area. This was a known some time ago, I'm surprised it wasn't already in the f-35 software. In some ways the fa-18 was the test bed for the f-35 software, magic carpet etc.

What would impact? The wheels/hook? Do you have a reference for this claim? The bit about software seems confused. There is plenty of info here about 'magic carpet' for the Super Hornet and what became 'delta flight path' for the F-35C.

The articles are about JPALS in this thread mostly as was the most recent article above. Page 4 this thread has a 2012 LSO article on JPALS & development (since adjusted) viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=238113&hilit=page#p238113

MAGIC CARPET and what became DFP for F-35C articles are mostly in this thread but also scattered about - with PDFs:

F-35C Lands at Lakehurst For Testing
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=15767&hilit=magic [use magic to search with - top left here]
OR
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=15767&p=374676&hilit=Delta#p374676
OR
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=15767&hilit=delta use delta to search with - top left here]

Interesting? viewtopic.php?f=22&t=45451&p=337917&hilit=Delta+Flight+Path+PDF%2A#p337917

My favourite MAGIC CARPET VIDEO (but see last URL above for the real deal explaino videos and such like etc.)

Magic Carpet Ladyhawke Kraken Carrier Approach Simulation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwoSKG9SzOI


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 02:03
by optimist
It was the hook. It was the auto land (or the correct name) software on the fa-18ef. It was years ago whey they were testing that. Well before magic carpet.

It isn't that f-18ef has auto land. It's that the F-35 hasn't carried over the error rate to impact on a larger area.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 02:36
by spazsinbad
So no reference then. Years ago until recently JPALS was tested with a VX-23 HORNET - however last I read (now perhaps changed again) JPALS was only going to be fitted to the F-35C/CVN/ (& LHA/F-35B/CVF) combinations. Probably time for a JPALS updated PDF. There is probably an old JPALS info PDF in this/in other thread but a new one should be good to go.

MEENwile good story about MAGIC CARPET + SUPER HORNET & DISPERSION - but NO JPALS INVOLVED - Pilot still flies A/C.

http://breakingdefense.com/2016/08/magi ... -landings/ (search will find this here)
“...When Magic Carpet is switched on, the pilot no longer directly controls the flaps, throttle, and so on. Instead, he or she chooses a path and the computer makes the fine adjustments to get and stay on it. Affecting one aspect of flight — angle, speed, alignment, and so on — still affects the others, but the pilot can focus on one at a time while the computer keeps the others under control. The pilot remains a crucial part of the system....” [NO JPALS]

Missing DISPERSION USN graphic at BrakeDaFence below.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 03:13
by optimist
Take it fwiw, I don't care that much, least of all googling up about 10 years ago info. It has nothing to do with magic carpet, that came later

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 03:32
by spazsinbad
I'm not understanding what you refer to however IF you read the links we could guess you 'remembered' AUTO-THROTTLE?

However I can only guess because I"M NOT YOU. And do I care? No. Without a reference memories are just faulty at best.

Some excellent slids for those not interested: http://www.slideshare.net/robbinlaird/m ... m-for-f18s

Have JPALS - Will NOT: http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG1171z8.html
OR
download/file.php?id=23983 PDF 1.1Mb

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 06:12
by optimist
No, it was a hands off auto landing. The accuracy was too great and was scaring a patch, so they had to introduce software that made changes to have a greater landing area. I'm now starting to wonder if I'm getting mixed up with the UAV?

edit. A quick google shows it could have been the fa-18a I was thinking of, that started back in 2000. Some 20 years ago.
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... s-(aug.-31).html
Raytheon Company completed a major milestone last month during shore-based flight trials of its Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) technology demonstrator. The flight trials, conducted by the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) at NAS Patuxent River, Md., achieved the first automatic landings in an F/A-18A Hornet using the Global Positioning System (GPS)-based JPALS system for guidance.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 09:39
by spazsinbad
GOOD URL: http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... s-(aug.-31).html (but it stupidly breaks so cannot copy/paste)

TINY URL it is: https://tinyurl.com/y4etclmb JPALS Guides An F/A-18A Hornet To First Automatic Landing 2000

Thanks for that 'old info' - did not have that from wayback - it will go in the new PDF about JPALS getting produced now.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 10:08
by spazsinbad
Over the page 'optimist' said:
"No, it was a hands off auto landing. The accuracy was too great and was scaring a patch, so they had to introduce software that made changes to have a greater landing area. I'm now starting to wonder if I'm getting mixed up with the UAV?..."

There are no quotes with that kind of information in that 2000 article. Without a pointer to the source of your claim I can only claim that you have misremembered something or similar; when the original article is found it all may become plain.

USN aircrew will tell you that 'automatic landings' have been carried out for a LONG TIME not just with JPALS to guide them and of course no magic carpet to glide upon. The X-47B was dramatically accurate however I do not believe anyone complained about that aspect or anything else. It was superb, with the robot using a special version of JPALS (not OK for humans) to do the business. Extreme accuracy is required for carrier landings because the SIX DEGREES of FREEDOM of ship movement ENSURE that the aircraft/hook combo will NOT hit in the same spot every time BUT the aircraft MAY catch the same arrestor wire every time which means that it needs to be replaced more often but also the others stay put for longer - winsome losesome.

There is at least one thread about the early to date 'auto landings' (which could be very uncomfortable for the aircrew).

A 'short' article about 'first auto': http://thanlont.blogspot.com.au/2011/07 ... hands.html

http://www.tsretirees.org/memory/Femiano.doc [NO LONGER THERE SO TWO PDF page attached made from .DOC]

Just found this PDF on web (don't think I've seen it before but who knows eh).

F/A-18A-D Hornet Current and Future Utilization of Mode I Automatic Carrier Landings May 2007 Brian T. Schrum
https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcon ... k_gradthes (PDF 2Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 10:40
by spazsinbad
Aeronautics and Space Report of the President
Fiscal Year 2014 Activities NASA

"...Aircraft Safety and Survivability [page 65]
The Navy recently completed a technology demonstration of the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS). The ship-based JPALS included auto landings by F/A-18C Hornets on the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt. JPALS is a GPS-based precision approach and landing system that will help ship-based aircraft land in all weather conditions, initially providing guidance to a decision height of 200 feet and half-nautical-mile visibility. While JPALS was originally a tri-service program with multiple increments, it has been restructured into one increment to support the F-35B and F-35C, as well as UCLASS aircraft. JPALS will allow for coupled, auto-landing functionality via two-way data link.

A dramatic reduction in pilot workload during F/A-18 carrier landings was demonstrated in flight simulations at the Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division, Patuxent River, Maryland. Sponsored by the Office of Naval Research, the Maritime Augmented Guidance with Integrated Controls for Carrier Approach and Recovery Precision Enabling Technologies (MAGIC CARPET) project developed a combination of integrated direct lift control, flight path control augmentation, and ship-relative heads-up display, which allowed pilots to consistently conduct precision landings on the carrier with minimal pilot compensation. This capability is now planned for implementation in operational F/A-18E/F/G and F-35C aircraft. Greater ease in carrier landings will result in enhanced safety and the ability to shift valuable training resources from carrier qualification to complex mission training...."

Source: https://history.nasa.gov/presrep2014.pdf (2.4Mb)

A slice of ancient history of fortune JPALS telling which did not come to pass as noted in a previous post graphic....
USN Program Guide Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS)
2013 USN

"...[JPALS] Description
The JPALS is a joint DoD effort with the Air Force and Army. The Navy assumed the lead service role in March 2007. JPALS fulfills the need for a rapidly deployable, adverse weather, adverse terrain, day-night, survivable, DoD/civil/ internationally interoperable, and mobile Precision Approach and Landing capability that can support forward presence, crisis response, and mobility needs. Sea-based JPALS consists of a GPS/INS-based precision landing system component (Shipboard Relative GPS or SRGPS) with a two-way data-link and an independent backup system. JPALS provides critical enabling technology for several naval programs such as CVN/LH type ships, JSF, and unmanned systems (UCLASS). Sea-based JPALS will also be installed on all air-capable surface ships, carrier air wing aircraft, and DoD aircraft capable of operating from Navy ships. JPALS will replace the Automatic Carrier Landing System (ACLS) on nuclear aircraft carriers, SPN-35 on LH type amphibious ships, and various approach systems ashore, including Instrument Landing Systems (ILS), TACAN, and fixed and mobile Precision Approach Radar (PAR). JPALS land-based systems and aircraft systems will also be civil interoperable and FAA certifiable.

Status [2013]
JPALS completed MS B in June 2008, with contract award on September 15, 2008. Sea-based JPALS IOC is 2016. The system is on schedule for installation in CVN 78, the lead ship of the Gerald R. Ford new-design aircraft carrier program.

Developers
Raytheon Fullerton, California USA - Partnering developers include Rockwell Collins

Source: https://www.navy.mil/navydata/policy/se ... -npg13.pdf (9.4Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 10 Mar 2019, 07:47
by spazsinbad
113 pages of appropriate JPALS goodness in a PDF attached below - only the 2nd page 3 VIDEO URLS are LIVE - rest dead.

VIDEO .MP4 attached is just a silent view of the CVN JPALS approach simulation as viewed via F-35 HMDS apparently.

See F-35C JPALS CVN Carrier Approach Simulated HMDS View https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJ3lHvv-v0c


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Apr 2019, 20:31
by aussiebloke
26 April, 2019. The US Navy (USN) is preparing to place an order for Raytheon's Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS), to be manufactured and installed on all of its aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships.

Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) on 25 March approved production of the system, which is installed on all three variants of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, and should sign a contract with the Raytheon at the beginning of May. This will launch serial production of the technology, says Raytheon and lead to JPALS being installed on 11 nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and eight amphibious assault ships, with the first units expected to be delivered some time in 2020.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... er-457458/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Apr 2019, 23:01
by spazsinbad
Thanks, seems to be a well researched article. Some other interesting quotes from 'aussiebloke' URL above perhaps, YMMV.

NOW ALL THE TEXT of article is in 4 page PDF attached below.
ANALYSIS: US Navy precision landing system to enter production [I'm assuming people read all the article]
26 Apr 2019 Garrett Reim

"..."In layman’s terms, it provides a kind of a tunnel [on the heads-up display] for the airplane to fly through to get at the same landing point every time safely," says Brooks Cleveland, Raytheon's senior aviation adviser for precision landing systems.

Raytheon promises that the system is 99% reliable, guiding an aircraft to a 20x20cm (8x8in) spot on a carrier's deck in almost all weather and up to Sea State 5, an ocean surface condition where rough waves are cresting as high as 2.5m (8ft). JPALs uses an encrypted, anti-jam data link to connect to software and receiver hardware built into F-35 fighters and MQ-25A tankers, as well as an array of GPS sensors, mast-mounted antennas and shipboard equipment.

Pilots returning to a carrier for a landing will first engage with JPALS at about 200nm (370km) away, where they start receiving range and bearing information, then at 60nm the jet automatically logs into the JPALS queue, receiving more precise data while beginning two-way data-link communication. At 10nm the pilot starts receiving precision data for landing, following visual cues to land on an exact spot.

Using JPALS is more covert than relying on a legacy tactical air navigation system and radio transmissions between a pilot and air traffic control, says CJ Jaynes, Raytheon executive technical adviser for JPALS. "You do not have to have an air traffic control tower. You don't have to have anyone talking to you," she says. "A system can be on the ground and a pilot can go all the way to his landing point without any communication whatsoever."...

EXPEDITIONARY USE
In January 2019, Raytheon demonstrated a portable version of JPALS guiding in a USMC F-35B vertical take-off and landing variant for a touchdown at Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona. In attendance were personnel from the USN, USMC and US Air Force (USAF), says the company.

Those services are interested in JPALS as a way to rapidly set up and facilitate air traffic control operations at expeditionary bases, which are part of a Pentagon idea to make the position of air forces unpredictable – a strategy to keep near-peer adversaries such as China or Russia on their heels should war break out. In particular, the USAF is showing strong interest, says Jaynes.

"The reason the air force is interested is they are developing a concept of operations called 'agile basing' where they intend to bring in their air wing, maybe stay in a location for 24 to 48h and then move the entire air wing to a new location," she says.

The USMC is also interested because it could play a role in the Pacific theatre, says Cleveland. "This system is perfect for that island hopping," he says....

...For a second demonstration of the expeditionary version of JPALS at NAS Patuxent River in Maryland on 8 May and 9 May, Raytheon invited back all of the US military services, plus international development partners on the Joint Strike Fighter programme. "Any country that's buying an F-35 – whether it's an A, B or C model – is a potential customer for this," says Jaynes...."

Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... er-457458/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2019, 00:34
by popcorn
JPALS' data link is encrypted and jam resistant but is it detectable by non-friendly platforms that could potentially pinpoint it's source of origin?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2019, 01:26
by spazsinbad
Nothing is perfect or have you been under the wrong impression? One has to get between the DIRECT ENCRYPTED but:
"...JPALs uses an encrypted, anti-jam data link to connect to software and receiver hardware built into F-35 fighters and MQ-25A tankers, as well as an array of GPS sensors, mast-mounted antennas and shipboard equipment.... Because the system relies on a direct encrypted data link the likelihood of interception – a risk with a broadcast, which could give away the position of the aircraft or ship – is also lower, says Brooks Cleveland [Raytheon's senior aviation adviser for precision landing systems]...."

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2019, 02:08
by madrat
Trying to pinpoint a pencil beam is not going to be so easy. Even in this case if the pencil beam is more like a 50 foot wide swath, your detector will not have time to draw conclusion to position any faster than it could have visually seen the target firsthand.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Apr 2019, 03:13
by spazsinbad
spazsinbad wrote:Nothing is perfect or have you been under the wrong impression? One has to get between the DIRECT ENCRYPTED but:
"...JPALs uses an encrypted, anti-jam data link to connect to software and receiver hardware built into F-35 fighters and MQ-25A tankers, as well as an array of GPS sensors, mast-mounted antennas and shipboard equipment.... Because the system relies on a direct encrypted data link the likelihood of interception – a risk with a broadcast, which could give away the position of the aircraft or ship – is also lower, says Brooks Cleveland [Raytheon's senior aviation adviser for precision landing systems]...."

Page 4 of this thread has a SAT / CVN / Aircraft diagram which can explain how the ship does not necessarily have to DIRECTLY BROADCAST to aircraft but can do so by Satellite. Then once in range the DIRECT ENCRYPTED KICKS IN: [also in appropriate conditions the CVN could broadcast ONLY when the aircraft is briefed then once DIRECT link - broadcast off.]

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=238894&hilit=Suppression#p238894

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/ieee_pilot/a ... /hires.gif

Image

Then on following page 5 this thread anotherie: download/file.php?id=17478

Image

Page 6 has this goodly one: download/file.php?id=17896

Image

PREVIOUS PAGE THIS THREAD HAS THIS GRAPHIC + PDF LINK: download/file.php?id=29463

Image

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 23 May 2019, 23:33
by spazsinbad
aussiebloke wrote:
26 April, 2019. The US Navy (USN) is preparing to place an order for Raytheon's Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS), to be manufactured and installed on all of its aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships.

Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) on 25 March approved production of the system, which is installed on all three variants of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, and should sign a contract with the Raytheon at the beginning of May. This will launch serial production of the technology, says Raytheon and lead to JPALS being installed on 11 nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and eight amphibious assault ships, with the first units expected to be delivered some time in 2020.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... er-457458/

Contract awarded now...
US Navy awards Raytheon $235m for 23 JPALS units
23 May 2019 Garrett Reim

" [all of the above plus] …The first units are expected to be delivered some time in 2020, Raytheon has said. The final deliveries are expected by 2023....

...Raytheon is interested in adapting JPALS for other USN carrier-based aircraft, such as the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey and Northrop Grumman E-2 Hawkeye.

The company is also pitching the system to foreign militaries. It has said that Italy plans to buy the system for one of its aircraft carriers and the UK Royal Navy is interested in buying two systems for its two Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers."

Photo: "F-35C flight approach during sunset - Jeffrey M Sherman https://www.flightglobal.com/assets/get ... emid=77555


Source: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ts-458438/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 May 2019, 23:34
by usnvo
madrat wrote:Trying to pinpoint a pencil beam is not going to be so easy. Even in this case if the pencil beam is more like a 50 foot wide swath, your detector will not have time to draw conclusion to position any faster than it could have visually seen the target firsthand.


It doesn't use a pencil beam (which in the UHF band would require a giant antenna), Instead it uses an omni-directional antenna with an encrypted spread spectrum signal (also known as frequency hopping). Without the appropriate crypto to tune the receiver it just appears to be noise, although it is still detectable if the carrier is putting out enough power (even then it doesn't decrypt the signal, just detects it). Not nearly as detectable as TACAN or other landing systems.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 May 2019, 01:37
by spazsinbad
SAVE MONEY - VOTE FOR TRUMP. SPEND MONEY - VOTE FOR TRUMP. Shake head in despair - VOTE FOR STEAM TRUMP!
Experts: Navy Would Spend Billions to Answer Trump’s Call to Return Carriers to Steam Catapults
28 May 2019 Ben Werner

"President Donald Trump again called to install steam catapults on future aircraft carriers, in a move experts say would cost billions of dollars and reduce the capital ships’ capabilities.

Trump, who has been critical of the Ford-class carriers’ new electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS) system, said he prefers the steam-powered catapults found on the older Nimitz-class CVNs. He again called on the Navy to revert back to the old technology while speaking to naval forces in Japan over the Memorial Day weekend.

Tuesday, while visiting sailors and Marines aboard amphibious assault ship USS Wasp (LHD-1), Trump faulted EMALS for causing delays and cost overruns on the first-in-class USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78). “We’re spending all that money on electric, and nobody knows what it’s going to be like in bad conditions,” Trump said in his speech. “I’m going to just put out an order, we’re going to use steam.”

...retired Capt. Tal Manvel told USNI News. Manvel was part of the Ford-class design effort a decade ago. The first chance for steam catapults would be CVN-82, Manvel said, “which isn’t scheduled to begin construction until 2028.”...

...EMALS is easier than steam catapults to calibrate for different types of aircraft, which becomes essential as the Navy moves toward incorporating lighter unmanned aircraft into the air wing, Manvel said.

“EMALS works,” Manvel said. “Still has some wrinkles to smooth out, but it works well.”"

Source: https://news.usni.org/2019/05/28/expert ... -catapults

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 May 2019, 01:42
by Corsair1963
As usual Trump has no idea what he is talking about. Yet, according to him he knows more than the "Generals". :doh:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 Jun 2019, 18:42
by spazsinbad
For whatever reason this announcement is ANNOUNCED AGIN but what do I know? Extra detail 'bout testin' added below.
Raytheon Wins $234 Million U.S. Navy Contract for 23 JPALS Landing Systems
19 Jun 2019 Seapower Staff

"PARIS — Raytheon won a four-year $234 million contract from the U.S. Navy to outfit all of its nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships with 23 Joint Precision Approach and Landing Systems (JPALS), the company announced in a release.

JPALS is a GPS-based precision landing system that guides aircraft to precision landings in all weather and surface conditions. “The U.S. Navy understands how JPALS contributes to their mission success and safety of its people,” said Matt Gilligan, vice president of Raytheon’s intelligence, information and services business. “Other military services could also benefit from the system’s ability to safely land both fixed and rotary-wing aircraft in almost any low-visibility environment.”

Since 2018, U.S. Marine Corps F-35B Lightning II fighter pilots have used JPALS to guide them onto the USS Wasp amphibious assault ship during deployed operations in what Navy Capt. B. Joseph Hornbuckle III, program manager, Naval Air Traffic Management Systems Program Office, called “the most difficult conditions on Earth.”

Earlier this year, F-35B pilots participated in two demonstrations of a new expeditionary version of the JPALS system that brings the same precision capability from sea to shore. The proof-of-concept events showed how the GPS-based system could be reconfigured into a mobile version to support landings in a traditional airport setting.

Expeditionary JPALS fits in five transit cases and could be repackaged for a variety of small transit vehicles transportable by C-130. Once on the ground, the system can be fully operational in under 90 minutes."

Source: https://seapowermagazine.org/raytheon-w ... g-systems/

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 19 Jun 2019, 20:14
by outlaw162
"Expeditionary JPALS fits in five transit cases and could be repackaged for a variety of small transit vehicles transportable by C-130.


Not to mention the myriad larger vehicles to transport the PSP or whatever they use now to create the FOL, and in advance the security forces to protect the FOL. Why not just operate out of where-ever the C-130 landed with all the 'stuff'?

Once on the ground, the system can be fully operational in under 90 minutes."


I would think it would have to be flight checked first by one of them fancy military flown Challenger 604s. :D

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 20 Jun 2019, 10:30
by madrat
Maybe some young, enterprising lad will figure out how to bring this technology to land bases where they can avoid damage spots on runways during emergencies and in war-time. Keep runways open when they are not in peak condition.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 20 Jun 2019, 12:18
by sferrin
madrat wrote:Maybe some young, enterprising lad will figure out how to bring this technology to land bases where they can avoid damage spots on runways during emergencies and in war-time. Keep runways open when they are not in peak condition.


That was the plan back in the days of the F-15 SMTD:

f_15s_mtd_71_0290__may_1989_by_fighterman35_dasw1gb-fullview.jpg


f15atd4.jpg


1.png


It amazes me they still don't have something like this online by now.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 20 Jun 2019, 17:40
by mixelflick
I think as the SCS situation heats up, we'll see renewed interest in this kind of STOL capability.

To date though, it hasn't been pursued. I'm guessing because it hasn't been a major problem in the various wars we fought. How many cratered runways did we have to deal with in Vietnam, GWI, GWII, Afghanistan etc??

But past experience isn't necessarily a good indicator of future events. It's a pretty safe bet the Chinese will be out to destroy our runways in the pacific and elsewhere. If memory serves, the short takeoff/landing requirement of the ATF was dropped toward the end. That may change going forward. Will be interesting to see what the PCA requirements are, and if STOL is specified.

If so, will be quite the engineering solution. Going to be a big bird...

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Jun 2019, 01:17
by marauder2048
Experiences in 80's and 90's showed just how resilient runways were to attack even when
the attacker has air superiority; the RAF failures against Iraqi runways are notable.

In most of the recent campaign modeling that I've seen from RAND, it's so easy and cheap
for Blue to amass the materials and improve runway repair capacity that Red shfits
focus to shelters and fuel supply/storage/transfer which are much harder for Blue to repair.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Jun 2019, 17:16
by spazsinbad
Raytheon Pitching its Precision Landing System for USAF Expeditionary Aircraft
19 Jun 2019 Brian Everstine

"...Matt Gilligan, Raytheon’s vice president for Intelligence, Information, and Services, said the company is pitching the system for aircraft such as C-130s that operate in locations without established runways.

The GPS-based system uses multiple antennas and data links to guide an aircraft to a precision touch down point on an airstrip. The company claims it “really revolutionizes precision landing in real austere conditions,” Gilligan said in an interview at the Paris Air Show....

...Raytheon has prototypes in transit cases that can be carried on C-130s or under helicopters and set up at an austere field within 90 minutes, Gilligan said. The sea-based version lets aircraft securely acquire a signal from 200 miles away, and when the aircraft gets within 60 miles those at the landing location will be notified the aircraft is on approach.

Raytheon demonstrated the technology to the Air Force, along with the other services and four international services, earlier this year at NAS Patuxent River, Md. The company plans another demonstration late this year at Edwards AFB, Calif. So far, the company is developing the mobile prototype at its own cost."

Source: http://www.airforcemag.com/Features/Pag ... craft.aspx

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Jun 2019, 17:35
by spazsinbad
Some old JPALS forde USAF austere (no golf course) :twisted: detail here: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=376674&hilit=drew#p376674
"...Beyond the F-35 and V-22, Raytheon says Jpals could support next-generation precision approach for the Air Force F-16, HH-60G Pave Hawk and U.S. Army Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk. “If they wanted to do dispersed basing, maybe a small unit of F-35s in a remote location instead of having everybody together, we could put an expeditionary or mobile version Jpals at any airfield or any site,” Cleveland says. “It will give you precision landing to 20 cm [8 in.] on the runway and can control up to 50 airplanes with one system out to 20 nm.”

He says the system has a demonstrated reliability rate greater than 99% for automatic landings, including in harsh weather on pitching ships. The mobile version for land applications is based on a single Humvee with four GPS antennas and four UHF antennas. It can be air dropped from a Lockheed C-5M or Boeing C-17 and set up within 1 hr., Raytheon claims...." http://aviationweek.com/afa-national-co ... ding-f-35a

& from: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=402118&hilit=reim#p402118
"...Raytheon says it is building a Humvee portable version of JPALS which could be transported to expeditionary air bases aboard a C-130J transport and set up in 60 to 90 minutes. The system would be able to manage 50 different aircraft making different approaches within a radius of 20nm....

...Initially designed to help a pilot land on an aircraft carrier in poor visibility or after long, tiring flights, the auto-landing system can put down an aircraft in a 20cm by 20cm box, says Raytheon. “It was so precise that when they were testing it that they were having to move around the touchdown point on the aircraft carrier because the deck was getting worn out by the tail hook hitting the same spot,” says Brooks Cleveland, Raytheon’s senior aviation advisor for precision landing systems." https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... em-452040/

ASLO: FRUM: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=417805&hilit=reim#p417805
"...Pilots returning to a carrier for a landing will first engage with JPALS at about 200nm (370km) away, where they start receiving range and bearing information, then at 60nm the jet automatically logs into the JPALS queue, receiving more precise data while beginning two-way data-link communication. At 10nm the pilot starts receiving precision data for landing, following visual cues to land on an exact spot.

Using JPALS is more covert than relying on a legacy tactical air navigation system and radio transmissions between a pilot and air traffic control, says CJ Jaynes, Raytheon executive technical adviser for JPALS. "You do not have to have an air traffic control tower. You don't have to have anyone talking to you," she says. "A system can be on the ground and a pilot can go all the way to his landing point without any communication whatsoever."... https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... er-457458/

OlAS here 2: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=402013&hilit=seck#p402013
"...JPALS ground components can be set up within 90 minutes and can offer pilots 50 different possible approaches at multiple airfields within a radius of 20 nautical miles, Watkins [business development manager for Raytheon and a retired Air Force colonel who flew F-16 Fighting Falcons] said. Approaches, he said, can be tailored to accommodate challenging terrain or hazardous weather…." https://www.military.com/defensetech/20 ... ields.html

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Jun 2019, 18:07
by outlaw162
Now the PR pitch is,
....and set up at an austere field within 90 minutes,


Previously the pitch was,
Once on the ground, the system can be fully operational in under 90 minutes.


There's a considerable difference between using a sophisticated LAAS-based RNAV system for guidance to a boat where all the elevations within 200 NM are sea level.....and using the system in variable or even mountainous terrain.

The approaches in to the austere field will have to be developed using routings based on safe terrain clearance around the field to be used in all phases of the approach, and then coded for the flight management system for a particular type aircraft that is going to use the facility. Not all of this can be done well in advance of positioning the system.

Then, as I mentioned, International Flight Inspection crews, military pilots and technicians, in Challenger 604s out-fitted with the necessary test equipment, same planes co-owned with the FAA, will have to validate and certify the approaches. Some of this validation can be done in a simulator, but not all. Then they'll get their published approaches.

I did simulator validations of complicated RNAV approaches with RF turn segments to skirt high terrain into challenging airfields for years. I worked with an ex-Dragon Lady (U-2) driver whose follow-on assignment had been military Flight Inspection in the Hawker 800s previously used for this. Used quite a bit in Iraq & 'Stan. My next door neighbor's kid, previous C-130 & MC-12 spec ops guy showed up at the FAA to fly International Flight Inspection in the Challengers. The ex-mil U-2/Hawkmobile driver retired militarily and transferred over to the FAA Flight Inspection bunch eventually.

The military is not going to put a high value 'asset' into 200 and 1/2 wx in mountainous terrain without ticking all the boxes....automatic precision touchdown is a wonderful thing, easy peasy....once you get over the hill. (so to speak)

Short of a national emergency, 90 minutes would probably turn into 90 days, lest we end up with AGCAS at times competing with and overriding JPALS. :shock:

edit: I see now they're pitching 60-90 minutes. HaHa. They really don't have to exaggerate, it's the only game in town....

edit2: Air dropped :shock:

edit3: 50 different aircraft within 20 NM should serve to rush the development of ACAS :shock:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Jun 2019, 22:27
by spazsinbad
Yes it would be nice to know how JPALS is tuned for different terrain/approaches. Will they tell us? Do they need to do so?

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Jun 2019, 23:08
by outlaw162
Magic and mirrors. :D The LAAS/JPALS technology is pretty well proven, it's the individual aircraft type (not just the F-35) systems, auto-pilot and other avionics that need to be adapted to this next big thing.

Short flight inspection story:

We used the Honolulu Flight Check 727 for student type rating training occasionally (nice TDY). One afternoon, the flight check guys needed a qualified 727 IP to go along on a the flight inspection and to also check their pilot in the 727. I volunteered, figuring I'd be back before the 'Shorebird' wet t-shirt contest got going.

The navaid being checked was a TACAN.....on a destroyer about 200 NM out of Honolulu. The Wx was about 1000-2000 feet overcast in the entire area. So we went out of HNL VFR underneath :shock: found the boat, and shortly after we set up for the required checks their TACAN went unserviceable. They apologized and we headed back. Along the way back, we went head to head with a P-3 doing their MAD tracks. I'm not sure who was more surprised. :D

Flight Inspection, though generally mundane....had its moments.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 21 Jun 2019, 23:14
by spazsinbad
You've reminded me of my meeting/near miss with an USN P-3 near the Philippines (somewhere near Manila). MELBOURNE radar swore there was NOTHING near me during my descent to a CCA at night. Trouble was I was IMC for that HEAD ON!

Storm weather around HONARURU can be deadly. Whilst we were disembarked with VC-1 at NAS Barbers Point one of their new sprog A-4C pilots was lost during an instrument approach in a night storm. We had met him only the previous night.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 02:24
by marauder2048
We're some number of IceSat-2 orbits away from sub-meter elevation (DTED Level 5) resolution of all of
the square footage of any austere airbase of interest.

Not sure where that leaves the human element in validating approaches but deconfliction might not be automatic.
It was the latter than snarled austere airbase uses in the Balkans.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 02:27
by spazsinbad
Some of the previous quotes indicate that an Air Traffic Control Tower will not be needed with Expeditionary JPALS.

For Example see 'aslo: frum:' above:
"...Using JPALS is more covert than relying on a legacy tactical air navigation system and radio transmissions between a pilot and air traffic control, says CJ Jaynes, Raytheon executive technical adviser for JPALS. "You do not have to have an air traffic control tower. You don't have to have anyone talking to you," she says. "A system can be on the ground and a pilot can go all the way to his landing point without any communication whatsoever."..."

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 02:57
by outlaw162
"A system can be on the ground and a pilot can go all the way to his landing point without any communication whatsoever."..."


With an ADS-B In display in the individual aircraft avionics repertoire and interval management software in the FMS and associated speed commands displayed prominently (+ 4D Nav capability for individual waypoints), you might be comfortable with onboard separation for 4 or 5 aircraft.....50 not so much.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 03:08
by marauder2048
spazsinbad wrote:Some of the previous quotes indicate that an Air Traffic Control Tower will not be needed with Expeditionary JPALS.

For Example see 'aslo: frum:' above:
"...Using JPALS is more covert than relying on a legacy tactical air navigation system and radio transmissions between a pilot and air traffic control, says CJ Jaynes, Raytheon executive technical adviser for JPALS. "You do not have to have an air traffic control tower. You don't have to have anyone talking to you," she says. "A system can be on the ground and a pilot can go all the way to his landing point without any communication whatsoever."..."


It's not clear that the expeditionary version has the two-way datalink; in at least some of the previous
envisioned versions it did not.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 03:15
by spazsinbad
Back to the quotes above/now previous page for minute quotes: [why would not EXPEDITIONARY be similar to CVN JPALS?]
"...can control up to 50 airplanes with one system out to 20 nm...."
&
"...The system would be able to manage 50 different aircraft making different approaches within a radius of 20nm...."
&
for CVN bubbas: "...at 60nm the jet automatically logs into the JPALS queue, receiving more precise data while beginning two-way data-link communication. At 10nm the pilot starts receiving precision data for landing, following visual cues to land on an exact spot...."
&
"...JPALS ground components can be set up within 90 minutes and can offer pilots 50 different possible approaches at multiple airfields within a radius of 20 nautical miles...."

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 03:38
by outlaw162
Less salt air. :D

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 06:21
by marauder2048
spazsinbad wrote:Back to the quotes above/now previous page for minute quotes: [why would not EXPEDITIONARY be similar to CVN JPALS?]
"...can control up to 50 airplanes with one system out to 20 nm...."
&
"...The system would be able to manage 50 different aircraft making different approaches within a radius of 20nm...."
&
for CVN bubbas: "...at 60nm the jet automatically logs into the JPALS queue, receiving more precise data while beginning two-way data-link communication. At 10nm the pilot starts receiving precision data for landing, following visual cues to land on an exact spot...."
&
"...JPALS ground components can be set up within 90 minutes and can offer pilots 50 different possible approaches at multiple airfields within a radius of 20 nautical miles...."


I didn't think they wanted to pack an extra receiving antenna (they were not small) and a receiver.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 08:38
by spazsinbad
Did not notice that 'shore based' notation earlier. However another recent quote says: [any idea of date of your SLIDE?]
"...The mobile version for land applications is based on a single Humvee with four GPS antennas and four UHF antennas...." [how many thingamejigs does the USAF need - it has been demonstrated and will be demonstrated again]

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 10:08
by spazsinbad
This article about 'the four boxes' seems to not have been posted - so here 'tis: [Perhaps there is a 5th case with aerials? https://www.raytheon.com/news/feature/rtn_jpals ] No one mentions number of aerials or their size neva. :roll:
Raytheon, for the first time, performs complete JPALS expeditionary setup and demo
17 May 2019 Pat Host

"Key Points
• Raytheon performed a setup & demonstration of its JPALS expeditionary variant for 1st time during the week of 6 May
• The company eventually wants to demonstrate the system with multiple runways and multiple approaches

Raytheon demonstrated, for the first time, a complete setup and execution of its Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS) expeditionary variant during the week of 6 May.

A pair of demonstrations took place over two days at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland, using US Navy (USN) Lockheed Martin F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft carrier variants. On the first day, Raytheon took JPALS from “zero” to fully operational in 70 minutes.

CJ Jaynes, Raytheon executive technical adviser for precision landing, told Jane’s on 15 May that this included opening the JPALS transit cases, rolling out and setting up GPS antennas, activating the system, aligning it with satellites, and then landing the aircraft.

On the second day, the company set up the system and demonstrated it in 50 minutes. Jaynes said Raytheon usually advertises that JPALS expeditionary can be set up in 60–90 minutes, as even if a user minimised the time required to unpack the system, waiting for the satellites to sync takes the longest amount of time.

JPALS is an all-weather landing system based on differential GPS for land-based and sea-based aircraft, according to the USN. JPALS works with GPS to provide accurate, reliable, and high-integrity guidance for fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft.

The system features anti-jam protection to ensure mission continuity in hostile environments. JPALS is a differential GPS that will provide an adverse weather precision approach and landing capability."

Photo: "Raytheon plans to perform its second demonstration of its Joint Precision Approach Landing System (JPALS) expeditionary version in late 2019/early 2020. Pictured is the system in transit cases. (Raytheon)" [“four avionics racks each 1.5 m tall by 0.8 m wide” https://www.janes.com/article/82763/upd ... als-system ] https://www.janes.com/images/assets/614 ... 734354.jpg

Image

Source: https://www.janes.com/article/88614/ray ... p-and-demo

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 10:31
by spazsinbad

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 10:41
by spazsinbad
JPALS Test Aboard USS Abraham Lincoln [CV night landing stress quote] 10 Oct 2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ey4qs-8TjfY

ScreenGrab: Pilot Lookin' Left at IFLOLS just before arrest - wot a good lad is he. :mrgreen:
"F-35 flight approach (prior to trapping) during sunset. Photo by Jeffrey M Sherman" https://www.raytheon.com/sites/default/ ... 6-3302.jpg (1Mb)



Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 11:52
by spazsinbad
:devil: ANTENNA doan look too big in this 2002 JPALS ARKYtexture PDF page graphic (of course the PDF is no longer with us):

http://acast.grc.nasa.gov/wp-content/up ... allace.pdf [no see other antennae anywhere]

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 15:51
by outlaw162
A pair of demonstrations took place over two days at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland, using US Navy (USN) Lockheed Martin F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft carrier variants. On the first day, Raytheon took JPALS from “zero” to fully operational in 70 minutes.


Pax River is not exactly an austere airfield with challenging terrain. It appears the demo was directed at that last 10NM and the precision auto-land.

Not sure where that leaves the human element in validating approaches but deconfliction might not be automatic.


This is challenging terrain: (good place for an airdrop, setup and demo in 90 minutes)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 20:59
by marauder2048
spazsinbad wrote::devil: ANTENNA doan look too big in this 2002 JPALS ARKYtexture PDF page


'cuz you ain't got no frame of reference :)

From what I've found the newer ground based versions look to have a much smaller antenna.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 25 Jun 2019, 22:07
by spazsinbad
:applause: Thanks to both for the info. Challenging terrain. :crazypilot: Sea Level CVN at sea? :salute: Cool Cool Cool. :roll: Sweetness. 8) :cheers: Is there a reference URL & date for the boxes/antennae please. Yeah wot about that latest infographic claim?
"60 NAUTICAL MILES (APPROXIMATELY) Jet will automatically log into the JPALS queue, receiving more precise data while beginning two-way data-link communication." https://www.raytheon.com/sites/default/ ... _Final.pdf (1.8Mb)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 08:56
by spazsinbad
spazsinbad wrote:Did not notice that 'shore based' notation earlier. However another recent quote says: [any idea of date of your SLIDE?]
"...The mobile version for land applications is based on a single Humvee with four GPS antennas and four UHF antennas...." [how many thingamejigs does the USAF need - it has been demonstrated and will be demonstrated again]

As one may imagine their is a lot of JPALS material around the net because it has been going for nearly two decades. The graphics (usually in PDF briefing notes) show all kinds of variations particularly in the shore base. The example noted earlier, saying 'one way data broadcast' is dated Dec 2009 from this PDF example (not available to plebs however it can be attached if required). Front page has this note "This material has been cleared for Public Release by 66ABW/PA; 30 November 2009; Case # 66ABW-2009-1342 Portions approved for Public Release by NAVAIR PR; 21 January 2009 ; Case # SPR 09-917.213; Portions approved for Public Release by MITRE; 30 November 2009; Case # 09-5104; Distribution is Unlimited" TITLE is: Land-Based JPALS Industry Day 8-10 December 2009 http://insidedefense.com/index.php?opti ... 0096_1.pdf (1.4Mb)

I'll guess that 'perhaps' the land based specifications have changed as per the most recent PDF from RAYTHEON cited. ???

Next PDF with the 'one way swimmer' notation is attached & dated June 2008 with some 'different' land based info:

JPALS Program Overview June 2008 CDR Brett Easler, USN
Chief of Naval Operations N885F1; Naval Air Systems Command PMA2135
http://www.jpdo.gov/library/20080618All ... Easler.pdf (not available now of course)

This PDF has a 'deployed man pack prototype' as pictured with an antenna similar to one portrayed recently here.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 09:57
by spazsinbad
My guess is that RAYTHEON have developed a better LAND JPALS on their own initiative (considering ARMY/USAF dropped out earlier) so that land/expeditionary JPALS is better than the old land specification, hence two way data link as per:

download/file.php?id=30718 [original Raytheon PDF date Oct 2018]

Image

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 15:48
by outlaw162
I could be wrong here, I've only been on the cockpit side as a user of a LAAS based system and not real interested in the nuts and bolts, but to address why only an uplink for expeditionary....

I would think the priority for what is uplinked are the differential GPS refinements to the aircraft GPS receiver position to achieve the stated accuracy. This is what the aircraft mission computer/FMS uses for navigation and displays for the pilot in a map format of some type, as well as steering commands (manual or auto-pilot) to the more precise track. For a ground based system, I'm not sure why there would necessarily be a downlink requirement for something, unlike the boat, that is not constantly changing position. This is only where navigation is concerned.

Of course, there's lots of other useful data which can be uplinked/downlinked between the aircraft and the ground based fixed system, something of the nature of the civil CPDLC system which can be used for communicating with and sequencing and separating traffic, with a format for cockpit display. I can see the desirability of having something like this incorporated into the expeditionary system, particularly in challenging areas where you're fortunate enough to find one way in, let alone 50. Or where Wx precludes the use of certain arrival options.

'ADS-B In' (Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast) can provide a sophisticated cockpit display view of traffic in the area also with some separation/deconfliction capability, and has probably advanced in quality and capability since I last fooled with it in a cockpit environment. With the F-35's fancy systems for SA, it may not need this, but for other more vanilla aircraft, F-16, V-22, C-130, helos, etc that use JPALS they may need some avionics and display upgrades of this nature. Even the airlines were somewhat lukewarm to this option however, due to $$$....cost of retro-fit.

Just give me an old ADF. :D

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 16:04
by ricnunes
Bah, JPALS is for pussies! Nothing beats opening the canopy and felling the wind on the face! :mrgreen:

(disclaimer: The above is a joke)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 16:10
by spazsinbad
'outlaw162' said: "...Just give me an old ADF. :D " - :devil: :shock: But but then you will have to learn MORSE CODE! :roll: :doh: :drool:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 17:35
by outlaw162
How primitive. :D

Just a quick story about in-flight validation and the 'human' element:

Way back in the 90s, the Atlantic City test bunch with their LAAS configured 727 loaded with all the test equipment and technicians in the back came in to OKC to run some LAAS testing. They set up the ground facility, and all the data, ground and airborne, both FMS and display that could be pre-loaded for OKC had been.

They used our 727 Instructors as test subjects to fly while they monitored the system performance. I flew the first run and we turned south out of the airfield to set up the first run to 35R at OKC. We fooled with the display for awhile and something didn't look quite right. Steering commands were questionable for the downwind phase of flight.

Shortly, a technician came up and said, "We've got to do some recalibration. As it's set right now, the system has the airport about 60 NM south of here." :shock:

No big deal in OK where it's flat all the way to Texas, but probably would have caused some problems at Rifle or Gunnison in Colorado. Don't remember if they got everything reset in 90 minutes. :mrgreen:

I'm sure everything goes more smoothly now, but, conditions permitting, I would rather have the arrivals looked at by a specifically instrumented flight check aircraft in clear wx, than have the first attempt with a 100 mil aircraft end up in a granite cloud as a result of a laptop keystroke misadventure.

edit: But with the high resolution terrain databases, at least you'll know at exactly what elevation you hit the rocks

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 19:38
by outlaw162
But but then you will have to learn MORSE CODE!


Actually, other than the occasional NDB approach on the yearly instrument check-ride, in the F-100 we used the ADF primarily for listening to AM radio music. Music to drop bombs by or do BFM....

The Eagles' "Take It to the Limit" was particularly inspirational. 8)

(I sure do miss it. :( )

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 21:27
by spazsinbad
outlaw162 wrote:
But but then you will have to learn MORSE CODE!

Actually, other than the occasional NDB approach on the yearly instrument check-ride, in the F-100 we used the ADF primarily for listening to AM radio music. Music to drop bombs by or do BFM.... The Eagles' "Take It to the Limit" was particularly inspirational. 8) (I sure do miss it. :( )

Yep - the transition from Vampire/Venom to Macchi/A4G was great. ADF to TACAN but only on the MB326H could we tune in the local music radio for good listening during the mucho boring high altitude racetrack sorties over a calibrating ship.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 21:37
by marauder2048
outlaw162 wrote:How primitive. :D

Just a quick story about in-flight validation and the 'human' element:

Way back in the 90s, the Atlantic City test bunch with their LAAS configured 727 loaded with all the test equipment and technicians in the back came in to OKC to run some LAAS testing. They set up the ground facility, and all the data, ground and airborne, both FMS and display that could be pre-loaded for OKC had been.

They used our 727 Instructors as test subjects to fly while they monitored the system performance. I flew the first run and we turned south out of the airfield to set up the first run to 35R at OKC. We fooled with the display for awhile and something didn't look quite right. Steering commands were questionable for the downwind phase of flight.

Shortly, a technician came up and said, "We've got to do some recalibration. As it's set right now, the system has the airport about 60 NM south of here." :shock:

No big deal in OK where it's flat all the way to Texas, but probably would have caused some problems at Rifle or Gunnison in Colorado. Don't remember if they got everything reset in 90 minutes. :mrgreen:

I'm sure everything goes more smoothly now, but, conditions permitting, I would rather have the arrivals looked at by a specifically instrumented flight check aircraft in clear wx, than have the first attempt with a 100 mil aircraft end up in a granite cloud as a result of a laptop keystroke misadventure.

edit: But with the high resolution terrain databases, at least you'll know at exactly what elevation you hit the rocks


Yeah..let's bring in some highly vulnerable flight check aircraft and wait for clear weather and make sure that
the competent enemy that necessitated the seizure of this airbase in the first place is cool with that.

I'm sensing opposition couched in job-security terms here. Not technical terms.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 27 Jun 2019, 22:28
by outlaw162
I'm retired.....comfortably.

You know, you mentioned RAND. As a high school student, I used to participate as a subject in tests at both RAND and Systems Development Corp for a modest amount of spending cash.

On one visit after school, the test involved playing tic-tac-toe, ostensibly with one of the other members of the test group. You played ten games and got $5 for each one you won.

I figured splitting $50 was preferable to winning nothing, so I lost the first game on purpose. Whoever or whatever was on the other end understood the gesture and we alternated wins. Sure enough, I won $25, plus the usual pay for test subjects. A number of the participants, unwilling to lose, won nothing....against what I'm guessing was actually a computer.

I'm gathering you would have been in that group.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Jun 2019, 01:05
by marauder2048
outlaw162 wrote:I'm retired.....comfortably.


It's a pity we can't do anything more for the senile except make them comfortable.

outlaw162 wrote:You know, you mentioned RAND. As a high school student, I used to participate as a subject in tests at both RAND and Systems Development Corp for a modest amount of spending cash.


It was controversial but RAND did conduct subject tests on lobotomy patients.

outlaw162 wrote:On one visit after school, the test involved playing tic-tac-toe, ostensibly with one of the other members of the test group. You played ten games and got $5 for each one you won.

I figured splitting $50 was preferable to winning nothing, so I lost the first game on purpose. Whoever or whatever was on the other end understood the gesture and we alternated wins. Sure enough, I won $25, plus the usual pay for test subjects. A number of the participants, unwilling to lose, won nothing....against what I'm guessing was actually a computer.



Yet somehow you didn't scoop Newell and Simon on the subject and win the Turing Award.

You was robbed!

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Jun 2019, 04:01
by outlaw162
Do I detect a bit of hostility?

For a Comm Squadron dude, you certainly profess to have a considerable amount of knowledge about actual flying.

Do you enjoy watching the F-35s takeoff and land? Do you get pictures?

Oops, a bit of drool on my chin, 'scuse me while I go find a kleenex.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 28 Jun 2019, 05:14
by spazsinbad
:mrgreen: Youse guys are a HOOT! :devil:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jun 2019, 00:31
by usnvo
spazsinbad wrote:My guess is that RAYTHEON have developed a better LAND JPALS on their own initiative (considering ARMY/USAF dropped out earlier) so that land/expeditionary JPALS is better than the old land specification, hence two way data link as per:


I believe you are right. The "new" land JPALS is basically the shipboard version with all the shipboard specific stuff left off. This allows the land based version to be smaller but also to direct the aircraft to any spot on any landing field in the 20nm radius vicinity. It can also deliver straight, curved, or segmented approaches to avoid terrain, tactical threats, etc, so clearly the system is sending the landing profile to the aircraft.

The CVN version, besides the multiple GPS antennas to determine differential GPS, has sensors for roll, pitch, heave, speed, heading, turn rate, etc. Hence the two way datalink requirement since the aircraft needs to know where the ship will be when they get there.

The "new" shore based version still has the datalink but doesn't have the sensor stuff for moving ships (well actually it probably uses the exact same software and just zeros the inputs for motion but I digress). The 20nm limit is probably an issue with the DGPS accuracy and communications limitations. The further you are from the DGPS reference station, the greater your error.

Neither the ship or aircraft is tracking each other, the aircraft is using DGPS from the ship to calculate its own position much more accurately and precisely than normal while using the datalinked information on the approach and the ships movement (or airfields lack of movement) to calculate how to fly to arrive at the designated point in space.

Here is a video from AFA 2018 discussing the "new" JPALS and the Raytheon guy clearly says it works the same as the shipboard version. https://www.military.com/video/military ... 7250563001.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jun 2019, 01:36
by spazsinbad
Thanks :mrgreen: the video was noted earlier this thread however being non-'merican some of the dialog with noise ununderstan.

8) Page 22 this thread: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=402125&hilit=iTtVf+qZVro#p402125 :wink:

JPALS Precision Approach and Landing Expeditionary for USAF https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTtVf-qZVro


Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jun 2019, 02:15
by outlaw162
It can also deliver straight, curved, or segmented approaches to avoid terrain, tactical threats, etc, so clearly the system is sending the landing profile to the aircraft.


Does the ground based installation quickly create and send a missed approach profile should one be required? Off the boat it's fairly straight forward....you can go straight ahead for 'a thousand miles' with nothing but sea level elevation. It can deliver accuracy. It doesn't create.

Can it send aircraft specific profiles....compatible with their displays and steering command system and approach category? F-16, F-18, V-22, C-17, helo, etc.? Does the ground based augmentation system provide the minimums associated with the specific approach and missed approach to the pilot or do you just make those up when you get there? The missed approach can be particularly aircraft specific as a function of the minimum climb rates which can be attained. Does the ground based system know the aircraft performance capability?

The profile options for the airfield are pre-determined and coded into the specific aircraft mission computer/FMS and then the assigned or directed one is selected by the pilot just like any coded RNAV approach including the associated missed approach profile specific to the approach....just more accurate track positioning as a result of the ground based system. There are ways to create waypoints on the fly and manually vary the GPA for terrain if necessary, but this is also done on board the aircraft. You don't just 'show up' and have the ground based system suddenly create the approach du jour for you.

That HMDS isn't receiving anything from JPALS, the display is presented based on the selected approach profile in the mission computer/FMS.

Here's a non-tactical ground based profile:

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jun 2019, 02:37
by spazsinbad
The installation on specific aircraft will be done as necessary AFAIK. How it will be done is unknown. I'll guess potential customers / aircraft have to show an interest to be included. I'll reckon computers do a lot of the stated work. IF the expeditionary/ground based JPALS require a lot of work before use then I'll guess there will be less interest. For a given airfield probably no problem however the USAF have already rejected the old JPALS version (for lack of money/interest?).

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jun 2019, 02:49
by outlaw162
then I'll guess there will be less interest.


No, it's a fantastic system. It's just that there's more to it than dropping a couple of boxes on the ground and having the dude with the AR strapped to his back go to work on his laptop. It's a quantum leap in precision approach capability, however still with all the safety considerations and requirements associated with any precision landing system. Flying is dangerous.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jun 2019, 03:03
by spazsinbad
Given all the caveats expressed I will suggest 'Raytheon knows this' - how the safety concerns are ameliorated is beyond my knowledge at this point. IF the USAF express interest NOW then there must be something in it - maybe pretty pictures?

At the risk of repeating an article already posted I'll post this bit and the 3 page PDF from whence it came below. One may note that over the last several years the JPALS articles are extremely repetitive. Someone has to pay for cut/paste.
Precision recovery
30 April - 6 May 2019 Flight International; GARRETT REIM

“...The [JPALS] landing system can be added to any aircraft with a GPS, an inertial navigation system, a software reprogrammable radio and enough computing power, says Jaynes [CJ Jaynes, Raytheon executive technical adviser for JPALS].

EXPEDITIONARY USE
In January 2019, Raytheon demonstrated a portable version of JPALS guiding in a USMC short take-off and vertical landing F-35B to a touchdown at Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona. In attendance were personnel from the USN, USMC and US Air Force (USAF), says the company.

Those services are interested in JPALS as a way to rapidly set up and facilitate air traffic control operations at expeditionary bases, which are part of a Pentagon idea to make the position of air forces unpredictable – a strategy to keep near-peer adversaries such as China or Russia on their heels should war break out. In particular, the USAF is showing strong interest, says Jaynes.

“The reason the air force is interested is they are developing a concept of operations called ‘agile basing’, where they intend to bring in their air wing, maybe stay in a location for 24 to 48h, and then move the entire air wing to a new location,” she says.

The USMC is also interested because it could play a role in the Pacific theatre, says Cleveland. “This system is perfect for that island hopping,” he says.

The expeditionary version could be packed in ruggedised cases or integrated into a Humvee or Polaris RZR light tactical allterrain vehicle, either of which could be quickly air dropped.

“The goal is to have [a] multi-runway, multi-aircraft [capability], with the ultimate goal we envision an end space where you can handle up to 50 aircraft with that landing system,” says Jaynes. “And you could touch down [at] points within 20nm of that ground station.”

For a second demonstration of the expeditionary version of JPALS at NAS Patuxent River in Maryland on 8 and 9 May [2019], Raytheon has invited back all of the US military services, plus international development partners on the Joint Strike Fighter programme. “Any country that’s buying an F-35 – whether it’s an A, B or C model – is a potential customer for this,” says Jaynes.”

Source: 30 April - 6 May 2019 Flight International Magazine

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jun 2019, 03:52
by madrat
Can they reverse the process to get planes off the ground from austere basing? Maybe take off from a relatively short strip of land that has a wee bit of curve and obstacles to clear once airborne. Nobody would suspect a base being located under less than pristine conditions. Maybe you convert patches of remote mountain highways to disperse in less obvious locations.

I still like the idea of taking off from a downhill slope with the natural ogee shape on the upside of the next foothill to act as a ski ramp. Highways across the globe are loaded with nice ramps that could certainly act as opportunistic takeoff jumps or downhill starts. Surely with systems like this you could avoid lighting up the area to remain largely hidden from plain sight.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jun 2019, 04:25
by spazsinbad
Those take off highway ramps would have to have some clearance of obstacles also and not just a path via JPALS. The aircraft will likely be heavy for that take off on a mission, probably the landing strip will be dictated by the tactics.

Taking off HEAVY on RW 26 at NAS Nowra was particularly fraught on a HOT Windless Day as KIWI A-4Ks found also. The rising terrain off the end of that runway could be deceiving - one needed to know NATOPS charts to get the best result. The photo shows a BAD RAMP UP btw whilst the opposite direction is a GOOD RAMP with a deep gully off the runway 08.

That RW 08 take off here: viewtopic.php?f=58&t=23043&p=393920&hilit=Nowra#p393920

Some YABBA YABBA here: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=11311&p=391408&hilit=Nowra#p391408

Here we go we go go: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=11311&p=391325&hilit=Nowra#p391325

Your idea has been discussed before. Nice thing about ski jumps at sea: WOD straight ahead with NOTHING straight ahead.

GRAVITY ASSIST SKI JUMP: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=20426&p=232901&hilit=gravity+assist#p232901

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jun 2019, 15:19
by outlaw162
You know, the ultimate goal of getting to a 0/0 auto-land, civil CAT 3C equivalent, has some interesting ramifications.

Let's say through simulations, bench-testing, flight testing, fail-passive or fail-active analysis, or whatever they use now, they get to the required mathematical confidence level in the system, 10 to the minus 9th or whatever is current. 0/0 or essentially no minimums are in place and here we go.

For the Navy, the auto-land ends within 20 cm of the desired spot, stopped in the arresting gear. Their problem becomes getting the aircraft clear and relocated, in conditions where you can barely see your hand in front of your face.....so the next guy can use it. Challenging.

For the expeditionary system, a few extra challenges:

You've tuned your MMR to the proper 5 digit channel for the approach assigned to you, coupled up your auto-pilot to the gold-plated quasi ILS signals being sent from the ground facility, and off you go. Fat city.

You touch down within 20 cm of the desired spot in the murk.....but you're still trucking along at 140 or so knots....

You need:

1. Roll-out guidance or

2. An auto-pilot that will stay coupled and perform the roll-out

And nice to have:

3. An auto-brake system

4. A digital readout of runway remaining in HDMS or HUD

You finally stop and realize now you have taxi or hover-taxi to the parking area in 0/0 at an 'austere' airfield. :shock: This is a real limitation on the system as far as operating conditions. Back to the old follow-me truck system?

As it stands right now, auto-land from the non-tactical civil LAAS type GLS approach is prohibited. They'll get there someday. Lowest minimums are 200 and 1/2. For the good old ancient ILS system, auto-land standard, lowest minimums allowed are CAT 3B which is a 300' RVR. Still taxi can be challenging and the airports that historically have periods of very low vis have installed SMGCS lighting, surface movement guidance and control system, not in the 'austere' category.

The only folks I can think of who actually operated 0/0 or below minimums were Air Defense Command interceptors when they had no choice. They also lost an occasional aircraft here and there due to wx.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jun 2019, 15:41
by spazsinbad
Perhaps the equipment will be best standard above operating standard so there is leeway for ops in less than zero/zero?

Perhaps the austere field will be virtually represented in HMDS for example? That tech is being worked upon these days.

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 29 Jun 2019, 16:20
by outlaw162
Yep, I flown virtual displays in a HUD in a 738 sim and they were very nice. Not even counting restricted viz, with a high resolution terrain and obstacle database they are very useful at night.

Somewhere out there working on this stuff are rocket science level, brilliant engineers. They'll have to be (and I hope they're on our side). :D

edit: added obstacles (i.e. antennas, towers, bldgs, man-made stuff, etc)

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 04 Jul 2019, 02:37
by spazsinbad
For some reason unknown to me this blog and the other one did not update for weeks until today so there is a backlog:
Navy Buys Tech that Can Land F-35s on Carriers with Pinpoint Accuracy
21 Jun 2019 Hope Hodge Seck

"...Raytheon is now pitching an expeditionary version of JPALS, easily transportable and designed to guide aircraft to safe landings on bare airfields. The whole system can fit in five transit cases, be transported by C-130 Hercules, and be assembled within 90 minutes, Raytheon says.

The Navy's future tanker drone, the MQ-25 Stingray, will also be JPALS-equipped; Jaynes said Raytheon is in talks with the service now about selling expeditionary JPALS for the MQ-25 program for shore-based tanker landings at locations like Norfolk, Virginia, or Point Mugu, California.

Meanwhile, she said, the Marine Corps is considering buying a single expeditionary JPALS system for testing in order to develop a concept of operations to employ it.

But "the closest customer outside of MQ-25 is actually the U.S. Air Force," Jaynes said. "They'd be able to move their aircraft possibly every 24 to 48 hours and do island-hopping in the Pacific. We're going over to [United States Air Forces in Europe -- Air Forces Africa] in July to talk with them about the system," she said."

Source: https://www.military.com/daily-news/201 ... ystem.html

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 14 Aug 2019, 11:30
by spazsinbad
Page 24 this thread last word on AAG Advanced Arresting Gear - new word:
AAG ready for props and jets
12 Aug 2019 NavAir

"NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND, PATUXENT RIVER, Maryland -- The Navy’s newest aircraft carrier Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) system received the green light to recover all “props and jets” aircraft, according to the Aircraft Recovery Bulletin (ARB) released Aug. 2. The ARBs enable propeller aircraft: C-2A Greyhound, E-2C Hawkeye and E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, and jet aircraft: F/A-18E/F Super Hornet & E/A-18G Growler to perform flight operations aboard USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78).

“The entire team did a tremendous job accelerating the schedule and working through challenges,” said Capt. Ken Sterbenz, program manager for the Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment program office (PMA-251). “This achievement is another significant step toward ensuring the system can support the ship’s full airwing.”... [wotno F-35C?]

...The team, in collaboration with prime contractor General Atomics, continues to execute the requisite System Development and Demonstration testing at the land-based test sites located at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey. Mclean [Jeff Mclean, deputy program manager for AAG System Design and Development] added, comprehensive testing of new systems like AAG is critical, and not only ensures the technology meets Navy requirements, but also ensures it is operationally safe for use in the fleet.

Prior to Props and Jets ARB generation, the team conducted more than 2,500 dead-load arrestments at the Jet Car Track Site (JCTS) and 1,420 manned aircraft arrestments at the Runway Arrested Landing Site. “The pace of system testing was consistently demanding and required numerous team members to perform their duties in difficult conditions and in all types of weather in order to meet critical program milestones leading up to these ARB releases,” said Mclean.

USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78) is the lead ship in the Ford-class of aircraft carrier, the Navy’s first new class of aircraft carriers in more than 40 years. The AAG system is designed to arrest a greater range of aircraft, reduce the fatigue impact load to the aircraft, and provide higher safety margins while reducing manpower and maintenance...."

Source: http://www.navair.navy.mil/news/AAG-rea ... 22019-0907

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 12 Sep 2019, 06:49
by spazsinbad

Re: EMALS & JPALS for the JSF

Unread postPosted: 17 Sep 2019, 04:54
by spazsinbad
Raytheon's F-35 precision landing system can be set up anywhere in less than 1.5 hours
16 Sep 2019 RAYTHEON PR

"DULLES, Va., Sept. 16, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- A Raytheon Company team recently conducted a rapid set up demonstration of a land-based expeditionary version of its Joint Precision Approach and Landing System to a group of global military officials at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD. JPALS is a GPS-based precision landing system that guides aircraft to precision landings in all weather and surfaces conditions.

"The entire system was fully operational in 70 minutes on Day One and 50 minutes on Day Two," said Matt Gilligan, vice president at Raytheon's Intelligence, Information and Services business. "Raytheon is offering the U.S. and its allies fast and accurate precision landing systems that support operations from bare-base locations."

During the demonstration, military officials from all four services, as well as representatives from Japan, United Kingdom, The Netherlands, and Italy, watched multiple F-35Cs land on the same designated runway landing point every time over the course of six different approaches.

This was the second proof-of-concept event in 2019 showing how F-35s can use a reconfigured mobile version of JPALS to support landings in austere environments...."

Source: https://www.defensenews.com/digital-sho ... le-design/

JPALS Set Up NAS Patuxent River Demonstration Sep 2019 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKVl2PdvONk