Navy F-35C DT-III Testing

neptune · by **neptune** » 09 Sep 2016, 04:02

spazsinbad wrote:[....

"Two F-35Cs from the ITF at Pax River recently completed ship trials while operating from USS George Washington (CVN 73) off the Atlantic Coast. The ITF flew nearly 40 hours and checked off 613 unique test points that further validated the carrier suitability of the F-35C. .... The team once again understood their mission and went out in one of the harshest working environments anywhere, and flawlessly executed the final F-35C ship trial for SDD. ....

....hope to hear (later) some validation (benefits) of their JPALS testing.....

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 09 Sep 2016, 08:15

What are the benefits of JPALS? Search the forum using JPALS as the search term. Meanwhile the 'JPALS' being tested is only the interim version which also includes an UDB radio for link to aircraft from ship. The final version of JPALS is a few years away that will not have this temporary measure. The final JPALS version is/will be very accurate for auto landings.

"...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...." 28 May 2015
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=14115&p=291823&hilit=JPALS+radio#p291823

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 09 Sep 2016, 16:22

sferrin · by **sferrin** » 09 Sep 2016, 20:59

How does one have 121 catapult launches but only 41 flights? :?:

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 09 Sep 2016, 21:51

Many/several catapults & arrests/touch & goes in one sortie/flight as you call it. My question to you is: "what is a flight"?

I listened to the last two videos above and heard no reference to 'flights'. The Babione PDF newsletter says "...ITF flew nearly 40 hours..." is this to what you refer? Again it is possible to gain many arrests/T&Gs & catapults in one hour of sortie time.

The attached .GIF is from my RAN FAA logbook Aug/Sep 1971 when I first qualified as a Navy Pilot (wings confirmed) after my first arrest and catapult. One can see by that time I had 900 hours flying time, having earlier gained my wings with the RAAF after Basic / Advanced Flying Training at the end of 1968; then training with the RAN FAA but no chance to deck land. First I had to learn to fly the A4G which occurred in the first half of 1970, then wait until posted to VF-805 then wait for MELBOURNE to become available for CarQuals (the rest of the squadron had already qualified earlier but were requalifying after time ashore).

Anyway you can see that flying from NAS Nowra a sortie included several arrests and catapults and touch and goes in one sortie. A deck landing can be an arrest or touch and go with hook up (confirmed by LSOs). To be clear, earlier on 10th August I had four touch and goes - hook up - aboard HMS Eagle visiting our east coast on her farewell tour. Without a catapult these deck landings did not qualify my wings until the first catapult (usually preceded by an arrest but later I found with other pilots not necessarily). Anyway that is why the monthly deck landing totals for August add up to 33.

MADDLS = FCLP =Mirror Assisted Dummy Deck Landings - in our case only on the main runways at NAS Nowra - at night - with the deck marked out with removable limpet lights that would not damage the aircraft if hit but might go flying by/near the LSOs but rarely happened if at all.

sferrin · by **sferrin** » 10 Sep 2016, 01:38

Pause the second video at 0:59 and look what it says on the banner. (The other video said 121 catapults and 121 arrests.)

yeswepromise · by **yeswepromise** » 10 Sep 2016, 02:08

That last cat shot in vid 1 was pretty cool.

madrat · by **madrat** » 10 Sep 2016, 02:30

With landing so precise, is this a precursor to shock dampening built into the deck?

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 10 Sep 2016, 02:48

It's still going to be a controlled crash and all that implies for aircraft design and construction.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 10 Sep 2016, 03:01

OK thanks I missed that text - see below. So in this context 'flights' means SORTIES or equivalent. USN nasal radiators use terminology I am not so familiar with but I get up to speed sometimes. It still grates that they refer to their carriers as 'boats' but I understand why they do this. I liked to look out the 'windows' of our ships (when they were port holes).

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 15 Sep 2016, 22:32

Pic sent via e-mail & I do not know the CVN but it is a 3 wire setup. Looks like the barricade sheave is very close to No.3.
OR
The No.3A wire is set instead of the No.3 wire? Perhaps the barricade can be installed on any wire on a 3 wire set up? I'll find out. See OLD article below - now four engines under deck with only 3 wires + 3A wire above; but ONLY three wires.

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 15 Sep 2016, 23:06

OK two wire! Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) ramps up new technology.
01 Jul 2002 Dan Ball [Roger]

"In 1995 Newport News Shipbuilding engineers began designing the ninth Nimitz-class nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, Ronald Reagan (CVN 76)....

...There are several changes on the flight deck of Ronald Reagan. A new design layout extending the port side angle of the landing area has moved the foul line clear of jet blast deflector two. The carrier can simultaneously launch an aircraft from catapult two and trap on the landing angle. Another visible change is a three-wire arresting gear design instead of the traditional four-wire system. The number two wire, located in the same spot as number three on other carriers, will be the "hit wire."

The new system uses polycore cables designed to withstand more traps than steel cables and extra-large pulleys to reduce maintenance and man-hours, and provides the capability to land potentially larger and heavier aircraft. The former setup of four arresting gear engines and one barricade engine is now four arresting gear engines [1,2,3 &3A] with two of them interchangeable as barricade engines. The removal of one engine greatly frees up the space to flight line maintenance crews. The four jet blast deflectors are also new, incorporating a one-panel design with a side-panel cooling loop to keep exhaust gasses from harming flight deck personnel...."

Source: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/OK+two+wi ... an+(CVN+76)+ramps+up+new+technology.-a090332253

popcorn · by **popcorn** » 16 Sep 2016, 00:11

Are "barriers" and "barricades" synonymous nowadays?

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 16 Sep 2016, 01:11

Not on aircraft carriers - not sure of the nomenclature ashore for 'end of runway RUNOFF barriers' which can be more than just a net that pops up (like a barricade on an aircraft carrier) but on command from the tower - already set to go. There is a good 'blogspot' about the diff: http://thanlont.blogspot.com.au/search?q=barricade

Back to the question from the 'corn of pop' :mrgreen:

: "Are "barriers" and "barricades" synonymous nowadays?"

Ashore it seems BARRIER is the most used for ashore arresting systems and even that term in nobbled by incorrectness. So search this forum with 'barrier + runway' to find that usage (I don't quibble - just for aircraft carriers as seen below). &:
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=15767&p=213010&hilit=barrier+runway#p213010

Barriers and Barricades, One More Time
04 Oct 2010 Tommy H. Thomason

"...The original barrier was introduced at the very beginning of carrier operations to stop an airplane when its tail hook had missed all the arresting wires. First one steel cable and then two were strung across the deck about three feet high at each barrier station. They were attached to stanchions which could be folded down to place the cables on the deck so airplanes could taxi past the barriers. An operator was stationed at each barrier to raise and lower it....

...After a few incidents in the fleet with jets not being stopped by the Davis barrier [explained at SOURCE], a really big canvas net hung from scaled-up barrier stanchions was introduced as the last-chance layer of protection for the men and aircraft forward of the landing area. This was the barricade.

With the advent of the angled deck, barriers were no longer required. However, the barricade was still necessary if a jet had a landing gear or tail hook problem and couldn't land ashore. It is only rigged when required and the deck crews periodically practice erecting it on short notice and in only a few minutes."

Source: http://thanlont.blogspot.com.au/2010/10 ... -time.html

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 18 Sep 2016, 01:17

An inside view of the Super Hornet 'head bob' at start of catapult - look familiar? Think F-35C. Then a view at start of second video of what must be an 'auto throttle' [no throttle movement] Super Hornet approach I guess.