If you know more i want hear it
CV-16 Liaoning (001 carrier) Thread II ...News, Views and operations
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
I would think that it has more to do with the safety time after each aircraft launched. For a catapult carrier, the planes will immediately fly with a certain speed, without the need of "altitude recovery" as the Ski-Jump carriers will necessitate, as the Flankers will be launching with relatively low speed that will make them drop down like a stone for a few seconds, before they can gain enough airspeed to recover.
But I still think that one plane each minute is very pessimistic. When the Liaoning, for example, has three planes in all three positions, it would only take a few dozen seconds after the first plane launch to launch the following two planes. In a few seconds, maybe 10-15 or so, the previous plane would have recovered altitude and have crossed a certain safety distance, so that the follow on planes can be launched. I think the 3rd plane would take the longest, since it has to wait for the 2nd plane's backblast shield to go down first, and it will also have to roll a longer distance compared to first other two. But that's a question of mere seconds, not minutes. We have to keep in mind that, even though the J-15s will be initially "slow" compared to catapult-launched planes, they still fly with a speed like 200-250km/h. They will cross that "safety distance" rather fast.
I'd say, one minute for all three planes, if they are on highest alert, prepped and good to go.
Ah, and also the Liaoning's own sailing speed would decrease the safety time as well. If the Liaoning steams ahead with 30 knots, the J-15s will recover much faster due to higher lift because of faster wind over deck.
I remember that chinese chart depicting how even sailing with 20 knots will significantly reduce the "drop down" height, even with a fully loaded J-15.
But I still think that one plane each minute is very pessimistic. When the Liaoning, for example, has three planes in all three positions, it would only take a few dozen seconds after the first plane launch to launch the following two planes. In a few seconds, maybe 10-15 or so, the previous plane would have recovered altitude and have crossed a certain safety distance, so that the follow on planes can be launched. I think the 3rd plane would take the longest, since it has to wait for the 2nd plane's backblast shield to go down first, and it will also have to roll a longer distance compared to first other two. But that's a question of mere seconds, not minutes. We have to keep in mind that, even though the J-15s will be initially "slow" compared to catapult-launched planes, they still fly with a speed like 200-250km/h. They will cross that "safety distance" rather fast.
I'd say, one minute for all three planes, if they are on highest alert, prepped and good to go.
Ah, and also the Liaoning's own sailing speed would decrease the safety time as well. If the Liaoning steams ahead with 30 knots, the J-15s will recover much faster due to higher lift because of faster wind over deck.
I remember that chinese chart depicting how even sailing with 20 knots will significantly reduce the "drop down" height, even with a fully loaded J-15.
If you know more i want hear it
I think launches would be faster if the port bow position launches first so that the port bow blast deflector can then start dropping while the starboard bow position launches second. By the time the starboard bow position launches the waist position should be ready to launch. Setting up all 3 positions for another launch is another matter of course, and I think this is the real bottleneck, not the actual launching or the "safety time", which seems to me not to need more than a few seconds per plane after each launch. Maybe Forbin is referring to 1 minute per position, which seems more reasonable IMO. I would also buy 1 plane per minute overall as Liaoning's current practical launch rate if we presume that the deck crew is not yet at their maximum theoretical proficiency/efficiency.
Intrepid
Major
The bottleneck is, that you have to plan with enough wind if you use two positions. If wind is calm, there is only one take-off position and this has a rate of one aircraft per minute.
I never saw, that both port positions were used simultanously. Only forward OR aft position is used. So Kuznetsov, Liaoning and Type_001A have only two usable take-off positions, not three. Only one position is usable under all flyable circumstances.
I never saw, that both port positions were used simultanously. Only forward OR aft position is used. So Kuznetsov, Liaoning and Type_001A have only two usable take-off positions, not three. Only one position is usable under all flyable circumstances.
What you have personally seen and what is reality is not necessarily the same thing. IMO there is no reason both positions cannot somehow be used within a short time span of each other. Can you provide a reason?
Also, since the angle between the port and starboard positions is not exactly massive, a few seconds of heading change from the carrier is all that is needed to maintain identical wind speeds over each launch position. Mountain, meet molehill.
You must have seen launches from Liaoning that shows you are wrong. The take off with a semi-parabolic part will only occur in case one engine fails.
A heading change isn't necessary.
Nothing to see with a STOBARYa' know if Liaoning could do this ...
...there would be no controversy.....
The video is not in real time.. but you gents get the point I'm sure.
No total but I did not invent this data...
The J-15s took off without any payload or with very light payload. Try a J-15 approaching its theoretical limit of 32 tons MTOW and you will see them plunging down before getting up again.
At around 0:30 you will see that two J-15s are prepped to take off from the two bow positions. Dunno if there is a third one in the "long runway" behind, but there should be no reason for why not.
Also, you see that the sea isnt that calm at all.
- Status