An 281 862

UNCLASSIFIED

An 281 862 depAodaced

luf, Ute

ARMED SERVICES TECHNICAL INFORMATION AGENCY ARLINGTON HALL STATION ARLINGTON 12, VIRGINIA

UNCLASSIFIED

NOTICE: When government or other drawings, specifications or other data are used for any purpose other than in connection with a definitely related government procurement operation, the U. S. Government thereby incurs no responsibility, nor any obligation whatsoever; and the fact that the Govern- ment may have formulated, furnished, or in any way supplied the said drawings, specifications, or other data is not to be regarded by implication or other- wise as in any manner licensing the holder or any other person or corporation, or conveying any rights or permission to manufacture, use or sell any patented invention that may in any way be related thereto.

Best Available

Copy

281 862 CJ-Y-

i-H

CO

i H »8 CM

O w

co Ul ■s o K 0.

v-

00 H 00

«dC

CO

C1J

C"

NAVAL AIR TEST CENTER Patuxent River, Maryland

k&pwd- 4*4

WEPTASK RA1200001/201 1/F012-15-002 PROBLEM ASSIGNMENT RSSH-31003

OPTIMUM WIND-OVER-DECK FOR SHIPBOARD RECOVERY OPERATIONS WITH CARRIER BASED AIRPLANES

REPORT NO. 2 FINAL REPORT

r16!^0 Asm b7—^ WEtfQ/Ks Bureau of without res

Käm^FUIIIT TEST DIVISION AÜ613 1962

TISIA

RAT 200001 NAVAL AIR TEST CENTER (RSSH-31Ü03) U.S. NAVAL AIR STATION FT2222-176 patuxent River, Maryland 21 JUN 1962

WEPTASK RA1200001/201 1/F012-15-002, Problem Assignment RSSH-31003, optimum Wind-Over-Deck for Shipboard Recovery Operations with Carrier Based Airplanes; Report No. 2, Final Report

ABSTRACT

1. Airflow disturbance aft of the ramp and in the landing area is one of the most significant adverse influences on the pilot's ability to make a precise carrier final approach and landing, and is primarily affected by the Wind-Over-Deck (WOD) . Tests conducted on board USS MIDWAY (CVA-41), USS RANGER (CVA-61) , USS CORAL SEA (CVA-43) and USS SARATOGA (CVA-60) determined that, from the pilot's viewpoint, a WOD of 25 kt for jet and 15 kt for propeller airplanes is optimum. Conclusions are drawn concerning required glide slope angles and the undesirable demands imposed on pilots by variations in carrier landing conditions.

2. The deteimination of an optimum WOD must be predicated upon operational feasibility as well as pilot considerations. A 25 kt WOD, in comparison with a 35 kt WOD, accrues the following advantages for jet airplanes: Less demanding on the pilot; reduction in landing gear loads; improved approach airspeed control; less deviation in alignment; and increased jet recovery flexibility. The increased closure rate of a reduced WOD results in the following disadvantages: Earlier wave-off initiation; slightlv degraded landing dispersion; and increased bolter rate. Based on arresting gear and/or airplane limits, fleet capabilitv for utilizing a reduced WOD is determined.

3. It is concluded that any operationally feasible reduction in WOD that is standardized ^s optimum for individual carriers, and is as near as practicable to 25 kt for jet and 15 kt for propeller airplanes, will improve safety of recovery operations

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No.

Introduction and Purpose r 1

Description of Test Airplanes 2

Record of Tests 2

Scope and Methods of Tests 3

Results and Discussion

Airflow Disturbance 4

Variations in Carrier Landing Conditions 6

Analysis of Airplane Landing Parameters -n-. . 7

Operational Considerations 9

Conclusions 13

Recommendations 14

Enclosures (12)

II

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

FINAL REPORT ON

WEPTASK RA1200001/201 1/F012-15-002 PROBLEM ASSIGNMENT RSSH-31003

OPTIMUM WIND-OVER-DECK, FOR SHIPBOARD RECOVERY OPERATIONS WITH CARRIER BASED AIRPLANES

21 JTJN 1962

PREPARED BY:

REVIEWED BY;

APPROVED BY;

R. M. DECKER Project Engineer

LCDR N. A. CASTRUCCIO, USN Project Pilot

CDR G. W. ELLIS, USN Head, Carrier Suitability Branch

B. V. STUBER Chief Project Engineer

F. G. EDWARDS Captain, U. S. Navy Director, Flight Test

III

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

NAVAL AIR TEST CENTER U. S. NAVAL AIR STATION

Patuxent River, Maryland

21 JTJN 1962

From: To:

Subj:

Ref:

End

Commander, Naval Air Test Center Chief, Bureau of Naval Weapons

WEPTASK RA1200001/201 1/F012-15-002, Problem Assignment RSSH-31003, Optimum Wind-Over-Deck for Shipboard Recovery Operations with Carrier Based Airplanes; Report No. 2, Final Report

a) BuWeps Itr RSSH-3121-DDF:mja of 28 May 1960 b) NATO spdltr PTR RSSH-31003 ser FT2222-40 of 1 Feb 1961 c) NATO spdltr PTR RSSH-31003 ser FT2222-276 of 8 Aug 1961 d) NATC spdltr RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) ser FT2222-348

of 9 Oct 1961 e) Spec MIL-A-8629 (Aer) of 28 Aug 1953

1) Data Recorded and Associated Accuracies of Data 2) Arrest«d Landing Tabulated Data, USS GORAL SEA

(CVA-43) 3) Summary of Optimum WOD Landings 4) Summary of Airplane Landing Parameter Analysis 5) Minimum WOD Requirements for Most Critical Jet and

Propeller Airplanes 6) Annual Percentage Frequency of Surface Wind in

Carrier Operating Areas 7) Frequency Distribution of Model A4D Airplane Landing

Parameters (8) Frequency Distribution of Model F8U Airplane Landing

Parameters [9) Comparison of Percent Ultimate Sinking Speed/Roll

Angle Envelope (10) Determination of Equations Utilized in the

Statistical Analysis of Airplane Landing Parameters (11) Abbreviations and Symbols (12) Bibliography of Selected Reports Pertinent to

"Burble" and WOD Variation

INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

1. Reference (a) established Problem Assignment RSSH-31003 with a "B" priority to determine if an optimum wind-over-deck (WOD) exists for the recovery of the various model airplanes currently assigned to the Fleet. Specific requirements were:

RA1200001 (RSSH- FT2222 (RSSH-3iQ03)

a. To determine whether an optimuiB WOD exists for particular groupings of models, such as by gross weight, wing loading or approach speed.

b. To evaluate the significance of variation from an optimum WOD, if established, on landing parameters such as approach speed, sinking speed, off-center distance and bolter rate.

2. Results of qualitative tests conducted on board USS MIDWAY (CVA-41), USS CORAL SEA (CVA-43) and USS SARATOGA (CVA-60) are reported in references (b) through (d) , respectively.

DESCRIPTION OF TEST AIRPLANES

3. Model F8U-1/2, F4D-1, A4D-2, A3D-2P and TF-1 airplanes were used in the prosecution of the problem assignment. All were representative of production airplanes except models F8U-1 BuNo 143749 and A4D-2 BuNo 142089, which contained test instrumentation required for other projects, but not used during these tests.

RECORD OF TESTS

4. The below summary Is a chronological record of tests conducted:

a. Date of project directive 28 May 1960

b. USS MIDWAY (CVA-41) Trials 12-16 Dec 1960

c. USS RANGER (CVA-61) Trials 24-27 Feb 1961

d. USS CORAL SEA (CVA-43) Trials 14-21 Jul 1961

e. USS SARATOGA (CVA-60) Trials; Flying Completed 11-21 Sep 1961

f. Data reduction of CORAL SEA tests of NATO airplanes completed 15 Dec 1961

g. CORAL SEA data analysis completed for NATC airplanes ' 9 Mar 1962

RA1200001 (R5SH-31003) FT2222-176

SCOPE AND METHODS OF TESTS

5. This final report reflects the conclusions of references (b) through (d), includes qualitative test results not previously reported fron trials on board USS RANGER (CVA-61), and reports the results of landing parameter analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data obtained from tests conducted on USS CORAL SEA (CVA-43).

6. Qualitative evaluation was made of day carrier approaches and landings under WOD conditions varying between 15 and 45 kt for jet and between 7 and 30 kt for propeller airplanes. Particular emphasis was placed on obtaining a large sample of pilot and landing.signal officer (LSO) opinion aboard MIDWAY and RANGER, where 15 pilots flew 5 different model airplanes. Each pilot conducted two or more periods of touch-and-go landings in each model flown. One or more periods were at a high WOD and one or more at a low WOD value. The time interval between two periods for an individual pilot was held to a minimum.

7. —Night qualitative evaluation-was conducted on-board SARATOGA and reported in reference (d). Tests consisted of two pilots' participation in one day period each, followed by two night periods each during one day's operation. The models F8U-2 and A4D-2 airplanes were utilized. WOD for the day and first night periods was 25 kt, while 35 kt was maintained for the second night period. Comparative results were thus determined between day and night landings for two WOD values.

8. Optimum WOD tests were conducted aboard CORAL SEA with three model A4D and two model F8U airplanes in order to obtain a representative sample of quantitative data (307 landings) for WOD values of 25 and 35 kt. Each pilot/airplane combination was maintained throughout the tests in order to provide a statistical comparison between a 25 kt WOD/3^0 glide slope and a 35 kt WOD/40 glide slope for the following airplane landing parameters:

a. Approach speed.

b. Actual and theoretical sinking speeds.

c. Off-center distance at both the ramp and at touchdown.

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

d. Actual and theoretical touchdown distances from the ramp.

e. Main gear to ramp clearance.

f. Roll angle at touchdown.

All data for the above parameters were obtained from camera coverage of the landing area except airplane approach speed, which was obtained from the ship's AN/SPN-12 radar. The MK VI Mod 0 Fresnel Lens Optical Landing System (FLOLS) was adjusted to maintain approximately the same hook touchdown distance from the ramp for both a 3^° and 4° glide, slope setting.

9. Qualitative data were obtained from debriefings, flight reports and questionnaires completed by pilots and ISO's. Quantitative data recorded, with source and associated accuracies, are presented in enclosure (1). Arrested landing data obtained for test airplanes aboard CORAL SEA are contained in enclosure (2). As reported in reference (c), quantitative data were additionally recorded for approtximately 890 fleet carrier qualification (CaxQual) landings of A3D, A4D, F3H and FJ-4B airplanes, utilizing a WOD of 25 to 40 kt. These CarQual data do not constitute a part of this report and will be forwarded separately to BuWeps upon completion of analysis of the airplane landing parameters.

10. Enclosure (3) contains a tabulated summary of landings made on each carrier by test airplanes. Enclosure (10) presents the methods used for determining glide slope presentation at touchdown with respect to the angle deck, the theoretical sinking speed and the theoretical touchdown distance. Abbreviations and symbols contained herein are listed in enclosure (11).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Airflow Disturbance

11. Airflow disturbance aft of the ramp and in the landing area is one of the most significant adverse influences on the pilot's ability to make a precise final approach and landing. Airflow disturbance aft of the ramp, or "burble", may be generally described as a downdraft of varying intensity immediately aft of the ramp, followed by a resultant updraft of varying and shifting location in the vicinity of 1000 ft

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

astern. "Burble" and airflow disturbance in the landing area are caused by the relationship of fixed and variable factors, some of which are sufficiently within the operational commander's control to minimize their adverse effects. Ship design characteristics vary considerably among classes and exert a significant influence on the air mass through which the pilot must fly. The magnitude and direction of the WOD is the most significant variable influenciijig airflow disturbances. It has been determined that for a given magnitude of WOD that the airflow in the landi. g area is steadiest when the relative wind direction is parallel to the angled deck centerline. Star- board recovery crosswinds are accompanied by relative wind velocities in the landing area considerably lower than those recorded by superstructure mounted anemometers. Airflow conditions in the landing area improve when the magnitude of the WOD is reduced. The burble" aft of the ramp becomes stronger when: the magnitude of WOD increases; the angle between the relative wind and the angle deck centerline increases; the natural wind component increases for a given WOD. Other variable factors influencing airflow disturbance include flight deck spot, aircraft exhaust or prop wash over the deck and-natural turbulence. EncloAure (12; is a compilation of selected reports pertaining to WOD surveys and tests, which directly relate to airflow disturbances.

12. Glide slope and lateral corrections required by the pilot increase with increased WOD. Upon first entering the "burble" with high WOD (above 35 kt) airplanes generally experience a significant upward displacement from the glide slope followed by a downward displacement near the carrier ramn. The downdraft effect is also a function of the airplane s position on the glide slope at the time of transiting the downdraft; a low position results in a deeper penetration of the "burble" and maximum downdraft effect. All pilots reported that re- gardless of the model airplane being flown, the tendency for the airplane to go low on the glide slope increased considerably as WOD increased above 25 kt and 15 kt for jet and propeller airplanes, respectively. The pilot control requirement is greater for low approach airspeed and lower wing loading airplanes. To counteract the tendency of the airplane to go low during high values of WOD, all pilots anticipated the effects of downdraft by adding power approximately 400 ft from the ramp. The amount of power addition varied among airplanes of different models. Generally, an increase of about 4-67o RPM was sufficient to maintain glide slope for jet airplanes at WOD values in excess of 25 kt.

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

Variations In Carrier Landing Conditions

13. Variations in WOD require pilots to compensate for differences in the airflow pattern aft of the ship and in the landing area (paragraphs 11 & 12), alter the 180° position and change the power setting utilized on the glide path for a fixed Optical Landing System (OLS) glide slope. It is highly desirable that these variables be minimized, and pilots be made aware of any significant deviation from expected landing conditions.

14. The turn off the 180° position was delayed 8 to 10 sec at low WOD (20-25 kt) in comparison to approaches with 30-35 kt WOD to allow 25-30 sec in a one-mile final approach.

15. Airplane approach power settings which are optimum and to which the pilots have become accustomed should be maintained relatively constant. This is synonymous to maintaining the glide path of the airplane relative to the air mass (airplane rate of descent) relatively constant. By maintaining the same approach power settings at low WOD values, trim requirements and wave-off (WO) capability remain the same, except that the WO maneuver should be initiated earlier because of increased closure rate. Shipboard airplane power settings will remain approximately the same as those utilized for field carrier landing practice (FCLP) if OLS glide slope angles are adjusted in the following manner:

Approach Speed - 100 kt Approach Speed - 135 kt

WOD. kt

0

15

Glide Slope Setting, deg

3k

WOD, kt

0

20

Glide Slope Setting, deg

3h

25 35

For jet airplanes, a 3% glide slope is recommended for 25 kt WOD and a 4 glide slope for WOD values greater than 30 kt. There is a greater tendency for airplanes to be low at the ramp with WOD above 30 kt when using a 3^° vice a 4 glide slope setting. This is attributed to a deeper penetration of the "burble" with the lower glide slope.

RA1200001 CRSSH-31003) FT2222-176

Analysis of Airplane Landing Parameters

16. Enclosure (4) is a sutmnary of the analysis of the airplane landing parameters investigated aboard CORAL SEA at both WOD conditions. Quantitative data for this analysis are based upon 307 landings conducted by three model A4D and two model F8U airplanes. Enclosures (7) and (8) con- tain the frequency distribution of the parameters for the A4D and the F8U airplanes, respectively. Paragraphs 17 through 24, below, discuss the results of landing parameter analysis of the CORAL SEA tests. The term "deviation", as used in this report, includes at least 99 per cent of all the variates and represents 3 cr (where T is the standard deviation).

17. Sinking Speed. The use of a 25 kt WOD and 3%° glide slope angle theoretically provides a 0.5 fps reduction in sinking speed from that resulting from a 35 kt WOD and 4° glide slope angle. The model A4D airplanes' average sinking speed data in enclosure (4) conform with theory, having a 12.0 fps average sinking speed it 25 kt WOD and a value of 12^5 fps with 35 kt WOD. The model F8U airplan«T however experienced the same average sinking speed, 14.0 fps, for' both the 25 kt and 35 kt WOD values. Considering the related parameter of deviation in sinking speed, both airplanes experienced a deviation of 1 fps less with a 25 kt WOD.

Deviation in Sinking Speed

35 kt WOD

5.5 fps

6.0 fps

The sinking speed data of enclosure (4) indicate there is less probability of exceeding maximum design sinking soeed when using a 25 kt WOD.

18. Frequency of High Landing Gear Loads (Sinking Speed/Rell Angle Parameters). keterence (e) specifies that with a F5 roll angle the airplane ultimate sinking speed Is reduced by 50/o. Enclosure (9) contains a comparison of the actual sinkliu speed/roll angle combinations with 25 kt and 35 kt WOD. The per cent of ultimate sinking speed/roll angle envelope was determined by the method contained in enclosure (10). The

25 kt WOD

5 A4D 4 fps

F8U 5. 0 fps

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

average percent of ultimate of these parameters for the MD airplanes with 25 kt WOD is 56.07. and with 35 kt WOD is 61.07.. For the F8U airplanes the average percent of ultimate is 64.57. with 25 kt WOD and 68.57. with 35 kt WOD. The deviation, in percent of ultimate, is 16.07. less with 25 kt WOD than with 35 kt WOD for the A4D, and 12.07. less with 25 kt WOD than with 35 kt WOD for the FSV. The use of a 25 kt WOD, as compared to a value of 35 kt, reduces the frequency of high landing gear loads for jet airplanes.

19. Control oi Airplane Approach Speed. As indicated in enclosure C4), the deviation from desired approach speed was slightly less with a 25 kt WOD than with a 35 kt WOD for both model airplanes.

20. Control of Alignment. For both models tested, the overall tendency was to be right of the centerline under both WOD conditions. Four of the five airplanes (three A4D and one F8U) experienced less deviation in line-up at touchdown at 25 kt WOD, and the other F8U airplane experienced the same deviation for both WOD conditions (enclosure (4)).

21. Landing Dispersion. Data analysis determines that the average main gear touchdown distance from the theoretical for the A4D airplanes was approximately 50 ft short for 25 kt WOD and 40 ft short for 35 kt WOD, The A4D data also show the deviation from the theoretical touchdown distance to be larger for 25 kt WOD (100 ft) than for 35 kt WOD (85 ft). The model F8U airplane average touchdown distance was closer to the theoretical with 25 kt WOD (5 ft short) than with 35 kt WOD (15 ft short), but the deviation was the same (120 ft) for both WOD values. The use of a 25 kt WOD therefore indi- cates a 15 ft increase in touchdown deviation for recovery of the model A4D airplane, with the average touchdown distance from the theoretical being 10 ft further aft (at 50 ft short). For the model F8U airplane, with 25 kt WOD, although no change in deviation was experienced, the average touchdown distance was 10 ft farther forward (at 5 ft short of the theoretical).

22. Bolter Rate. The method of determining the bolter rate during touch-and-go landings is contained in enclosure (10). The three A4D airplanes had a 1.5% bolter rate with 35 kt WOD and a 3.07. bolter rate with 25 kt WOD. The two F8U airplanes' bolter rate was 7.0% with 35 kt WOD and 12.5% with 25 kt WOD, By eliminating the first period of touch-and-go

RA1200001 (RSSH-31QQ3) FT2222- J-zB

landings by each pilot, the F8U bolter rate wa«? 11 S7 t,-f<-v, 25 kt WOD and 8 ol with 35 kt WOD, while the MD bolter ^ rate was 4.5% with 25 kt WOD and 1.57, with 35 kt WOD Analyzing the bolter rate in this manner appreciably'de- creases the number of landings with 25 kt WOD, since two A4D airplanes and one F8U airplane utilized this WOD condition for their first period. However, both models would have experienced a highelr bolter rate with 2S kt- WOD than with 35 kt WOD had arrestments ?een maSe on all landings.

23 Closure Rate For a constant approach airspeed of 135 kt, tor example, a 25 kt WOD results in an approximate 1070 increase in rate of closure above that for a 35 kt WOD The resultant disadvantage of a higher closing speed on wave-off initiation has been previously discussed The larger deviation of the model A4D airplane from the theoretical touchdown and the increased bolter rate of both the A4D and F8U airplanes are considered largely attributable to the approximately 107. higher relative closure speed associated with a 10 kt reduction in WOD.

24• Main Gear to Ramp (MG/R) Clearance. Sufficient data *** not available to Compare the MG/R clearance at the was !??.hM h-0HS' a?-thou8h ^ aPPears that this clearance ^L?^ghtly ^8her than the theoretical for both WOD conditions When using a 3i>0 glide slope for a 25 kt WOD approximately 2 ft less MG/R clearance will be afforded a ?? w^wnS6 4 gUdf.slope previously recommended for ?n rh M T he/e llrnited distance exists from the ramp to the No 1 pendant, the reduced glide slope angle ^CSnn0ned ^ a1

loyer W0D P^^ents a disadvantage of the 25 kt WOD, particularly for deck motion in pitch.

Operational Considerations

25' Frequency of Prevailing Wind Values. A WOD that can be predictiveiy utilized operationally must be considered ^KVr5eCt t0 the Prevailing surface winds over the oceans Tabulated in enclosure (6) are the average annual surface md

a^e^ntaSe frequencies in various cfrrier operating

areas The surface wind is 16 kt or less in the tabulated operating areas 657. of the time. A WOD of 25 kt can therefore be more consistently obtained than one of 35 kt Pre- vailing surface winds, required speed for steerage and caJrler capability to make rapid changes in speed decreafe ?he

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

possibility of using 15 kt WOD for propeller operations, since 577o of the time the surface winds are greater than 10 kt in the operating areas. It is indicated that from a standpoint of prevailing surface winds, the use of a 25 kt WOD would greatly increase flexibility of jet carrier operations, and that although desirable for predominantly propeller operations, a 15 kt WOD will be available less often,

26. Increased Engaging Speed. The disadvantage of a 25 kt WOD in increased closure rate (paragraph 23) is also mani- fested in a like increase in arresting gear engaging speed. During these tests the average deviation in approach speed was less for a 25 kt WOD than for a 35 kt WOD. However, for both WOD values examined, the model A4D and F8U airplanes maintained an average approach speed approximately 4 kt higher than that recommended. It is reasonable to assume that fleet operations will encounter some recoveries when averages are to some degree higher than those determined under test conditions reported herein. Reduction in WOD will result in an equal increase in engaging speed plus the algebraic variation by individual pilots from recommended approach airspeed. The tendenicy is normally taJbe too fast.

27■ Arresting Gear Capabilities for Increased Engaging Speeds. Endosure (5), pages 1 and 2, list the minimum WOD requirements for various airplane/arresting gear combinations. These WOD requirements are based on the recommended approach speed at the maximum arrested landing gross weight. When the minimum WOD values listed in enclosure (5) are increased by 4 kt, it is evident that:

a. Only carriers equipped with MK 7, Mod 2-3 Constant Runout Arresting Gear (CROAG) with operative sheave dampers can utilize a 25 kt WOD for all carrier-based airplanes when at the maximum arrested landing gross weight.

b. Carriers equipped with MK 7, Mod 1-3 CROAG with operative sheave dampers can utilize a 25 kt WOD for the majority of carrier-based airplanes at gross weights less than the maximum.

c. Carriers equipped with any MK 7 CROAG without sheave dampers cannot utilize a 25 kt WOD for the majority of carrier-based airplanes.

10

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

28. Desirability of Standardization of WOP for Individual Carriers. From the pilot's point of view, the not uncommon practice of increasing the WOD for night operations is undesirable, since the pilot experiences different airflow conditions than he is normally accustomed to during day- operations. The most desirable practice would be to standardize the prescribed WOD for all operations (day, night, routine recoveries and^CarQual) in order to reduce the number of variables affecting the pilot during all carrier approaches. The value of WOD established should be that considered to be optimum in light of all previously mentioned factors that pertain to the particular ship. Emphasis should be placed on meticulously minimizing crosswind during recoveries and avoiding an increase in WOD for night operations. Where group composition is predominantly jet, a standardized optimum WOD should be established as close to 25 kt as all considerations will permit. When the CVS composition is predominantly propeller aircraft and surface winds permit, a standardized optimum WOD of as near to 15 kt as is practicable should be established. For present carrier operations, if day and night recoveries can be standardizecPand maintainecTat a particular optimum WOD value for individual ships, although not necessarily as low as 25 kt, it is concluded that safety of recovery operations can be improved.

29. Present Application of Optimum WOD. An optimum WOD is that relative wind over the angle deck, with minimum practicable cross-wind component, which will minimize pilot control problems in the "burble", and at the same time prove opera'-.ionally feasible from a standpoint of airplane/ arresting gear structural limitations, prevailing surface winds and operationally acceptable landing parameters. It has been determined that a 25 kt WOD meets many, although not all, of these criteria. Recovery operations must take into consideration deviations in airplane approach speed and overall accuracy of the AN/SPN-12 equipment, which is at best to within ± 37«. Air group training level and individual ship's arresting gear capability are major considerations. It is recommended that type commanders, fleet commanders and commanding officers be informed of the merits of a lower WOD, where feasible, and that utilization of a WOD that is optimum for a particular carrier be established with a view toward maintaining as low a value of WOD as is considered practicable.

11

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

30. Future Considerations. The Increased application of an optimum WUD tor tuture carrier operations Is dependent upon continued developmental effort. For example the approach power compensator (APC), recently evaluated In the model F8Ü-1 airplane, will provide a significant Improvement In approach alrspded control. Future installation of higher capacity arresting dear is a requirement to permit the use of lower values of WOQ for some carriers. Continued emphasis on the many areas of the carrier landing improvement program will contribute toward more effective utilization of a WOD that is realistically optimum.

12

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

CONCLUSIONS

31, It is concluded that:

a From the pilot's viewpoint alone 25 kt WOD for all jet airplanes and 15 kt WOD for all ProPf 11^r/irPi?^ (WOD parallel to the angled deck centerline) is optimuin (paragraphs 11 and 12).

b Any operationally feasible reduction in WOD that is standardized as optimum for individual carriers, and is near as practicable to 25 kt for jet and 15 kt for PropeUer airplanes, will improve safety of recovery operations (paragraph 28) .

c It is desirable to standardize the prescribed WOD for ail operations for an individual carrier, within the limitations imposed by operational considerations (paragraphs 13, 15 and 28).

d Prevailing surface winds preclude standardization of- 15 kt WOD for propeller aircraft (paragraph-2-5) .

e OLS glide slope setting should be adjusted as a function of WOD to maintain airplane approach power setting relatively constant (paragraph 15).

f For let airplane recoveries, a 2>k glide slope is required for 25 kt WOD, and a 4° glide slope is required for WOD values in excess of 30 kt (paragraph 15).

e. For propeller airplane recoveries, a 3js gl-ide

slope is satisfactory for a 15 kt WOD, and a 4° glide slope is desirable for a 25 kt WOD (paragraph 15).

32 As a result of comparative evaluation of WOD values of 35 kt and 25 kt for jet airplanes, it is concluded that, in addition to pilot control considerations, the following advantages of a 25 kt WOD are realized:

a. Reduction in the frequency of high landing gear loads (paragraphs 17 and 18).

b. Less deviation in alignment during the final approach and touchdown (paragraph 21).

13

RÄ1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

c. Improved flexibility of recovery operations (paragraph 25).

d. Improved approach airspeed control (paragraph 19).

33. As a result of comparative evaluation of WOD values of 35 kt and 25 kt for jet airplanes, it is concluded that the following disadvantages result from the approximately 10% increase in closure rate when using a 25 kt WOD:

a. Requirement to initiate wave-off earlier in the approach (paragraph 15).

b. Slight degradation in both average main gear touchdown distance from the theoretical as well as in touchdown deviation from the theoretical (paragraphs 21 and 23).

c. Increased bolter rate (paragraphs 22 and 23).

d. Airplane and/or arresting gear structural limits being exceeded on some carriers (paragraphs 26 and 27).

RECOMMENDATIONS

35. It is recommended that:

a. Emphasis be placed on reducing WOD values from those presently in use for fleet recovery operations to standardized WOD values for individual carriers as near to 25 kt for jet airplanes and 15 kt for propeller airplanes as is operationally practicable.

b. The varied adverse effects on the pilot of crosswind normal to the angle deck centerline be emphasized, and continuing action be taken to minimize crosswind during fleet recovery operations.

c. Emphasis be continued on design criteria and developmental effort to improve shipboard airflow characteristics and equipment utilized during the approach and recovery of aircraft.

PAUL H. RAMS

■'//J>^.

P. G. EDWARDS By direction

14

RÄ1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222~176

DATA RECORDED AND ASSOCIATED ACCURACIES OF DATA

External Instrumentation Overal1

Item Recorded by Accuracy (+)

Approach speed AN/SPN-12 radar 3% Engaging speed AN/SPN-12 radar; 3%

Mi tchel1 camera

Wind-Over-Deck Velocity Calibrated boom anemometer 1 kt Direction Calibrated boom anemometer 3 deg

Sinking speed Mitchell camera; cameraflex 2 fps Airplane pitch attitude Mitchell camera; cameraflex 1 deg

Airplane roll angle Cameraflex 1 deg with respect to angle deck

Main gear touchdown Mitchell camera 2 ft distance Cameraflex 5 ft

Off-center distance Ramp Cameraflex 1 ft Touchdown Cameraflex 1 ft

Main gear to ramp Cameraflex 1 ft clearance

Surface wind Ship's aerology 3 kt Log books

Calculated Over a 11

Item Method Accuracy (+)

Airplane gross weight Add associated fuel 200 lb weight to basic airplane wei ght

Theoretical main gear See enclosure (10) -10 to-15 ft touchdown di stance

Page 1 of 2 Enclosure (1)

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

Calculated

Tt Overall Item Method Accuracy (+)

Observed

Item

Theoretical sinking speed See lenclosure (10) 2 fps Bolter rate See fenclosure (10) 2% ^

Overall Accuracy (+)

Ship's pitch and roll ^ d Arresting gear weight setting 500 lb


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

U1

(D a F to Q

r-» 1_ LA < o Lr\ t— -C ir\ 

^ CD > O <D < m 1—^ C h- V TO JZ <

a GO LaJ O. z 00 1_ ►—i JZ .,- a JJ _J

< z •t- < < 3 o:

Cvl _i o 1 (J o

3 a < CO UJ o 00 u. t— ce 00

C>0 o _> ,— LLJ

(U Q: er\ XJ cc i o < rsi

21 X3 O

21

21

§11

n üi : ■ ? -

131 33.;

A . ■_■ ■ -:

HidH

i ■ I

^

--..l.1

f^^

^^ ^3

m m

w J

^

RA1200001 (RSSH-.31003) FT2222-176

(^ l_ (U Q. E ro a

r^ L. un < o LO (— -C LO 3 a; tj

•i en > OJ < ro c i— 0) CT ro x: UJ

.— C3 00 in D. 2 L. i—< -C _J •f- a 4J CT < 2 ■F— rr

< 3 O

1 _i

(J 0

r> C2 < 00 CO Ui O 1/1 Li. (— cc z>

GO o r~ UJ OJ Cü o^

TJ Cd 1 Ü < CN

O

2:

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

er.

-a-

3 m

4) C

00 u.

a Ui

00 <

Q. Z l_ »-I «- Q < Z

_ 3 a ui »- 00 ui at 0)

O X

k. 

4) -C

I

o r

ro 1

>

< UJ 00

» < cc 0

13 0 < O 00 cr 00 0 ra

hA1200001 (RSSH-31003' FT2222- 176

n

3

O) c TO

r 1

Q-

I

00

< < Q

Q

<

<

<

a H

en

CO

0) a. E m Q

o x: o c <

c

> tu

CO

 V

00

I < >

< CO

6 CO CO D

1 1 1 ol ol o| lllflcMlJ l liiii i i iir O-ÜrHLOlOj- OO xO r-rHOJ "S

OJW lie- cô-t-

J [^ C- J OJ

- J CM* ^ S ' rH M H CQ

1 o o o rH O o o o

a tr a- Q tT r^ H (S

r\j oj

' • O tO rH O rH J O • CO II iH rH CO î

o- r- ro co [^ 0

" ' • O 00 | \ ' tO c^ r^, OJ rH O rH rH rH

c c

CO [- LP C

3 O O 5 O O - H O 1 " (\1 IM

CM CM

• • O O IT« O UA CO CN

1 t^ ^t O - •

H tO O • • CO ON .

i j oj co o i o H rH rH rH |

r- =8 a to E-i ^

> O O O O

■• P- p | ' OJ CM

CM CM

11 J .'' tr< oj oo a-

O CM J o • ^ 1 rH r-H I^ oj __! 1

io to O o ' • • CO O 1 | •

ND N0 CM O^ O rH rH rH H rH rH |

C O O f^-

to f

o o O O J CM CM OJ CM

rH -3 0.°: 1 rH rH J n

o to . CO O • ■ c^ J O H

c^ or rH CM CM | | | i—1 i—1

C C

tn to r- to c^

O O O O rH O 1 CM Od CM CM

a" 3 ^ ^ "J 1 r^ rH ^ CM

CM rr, 1 • rH rr-, 0

i o-i m vo o rH rH OJ OJ | | tO

1 o O rH O

J ? f- O 1 08 rH [^ rH

O rH J -3 ID • CO C--d- sD CM NO O

• • • O O 1 i • JtA fO, rj H vO rH rH- rH

Öd o CM CM

CM

II C- rH rH ^ „J

-i-- >\

s § o o o o <3 O 1

o o r*- H J r- NO I O • ■ • rH O 1 «

OJ J J- 0J OJ o rH rH rH

tO fH J- OJ Oj OJ CM

CrH rr-tPOJ^rH • J 1 C^ rH rH J j1

o O O 'CM ' ^ CM o to < CC

o o CM O CM

O;1 CM

r^\0 r-{ . (H f^ O-J ^Tv , r-

1 m rt t^ c 1

rH [^ rH CM Oî a y a • • • >• <^ M S* \f\

O O OJ H rH rH Hi

o O O rH O

EH rH

O C 1 tr to C O C\ CM'

J f' . . tOtOOCCr^rH "^ OrH r^JCMr^, o ■ w II or rH rH sO 1

• • • o o j« -. r ' r-CMr^ CMrHvi) -rtr^ rH rH rH rH |

Ä ô'fi O000 4-JO^>JJJJC ° T'. x a X X w O <-l 4H OH

^^ O z & --^ EH O K H

CO

E- EH

, Z OK

So ^ K C P3

OH — S? M

ITC

HE

LL

CA

MER

A

CA

MER

AFL

EX

TH

EO

RE

TIC

AL

MA

IN

GEA

R

TOU

CH

DO

WN

DIS

TA

A

CTU

AL

TH

EO

RE

TIC

AL

MA

IN

GEA

R

TO

RA

MP

CLE

AR

AN

OF

F-C

EN

TE

R

DIS

TA

NC

E (

-

PO

RA

MP

TOU

CH

DO

WN

c c

3 S

g z co x a 5

K J K » ' 1

PH CO O OH ^ ** o K i i: <; h , JJ— \ u: ^-QQCiZb, co o — o H fr c « s Q

ZX M zatat:- .IP üJ<CJ (J Q >H o a o, a, g t B M M EHl-3ltHHMMMHE«a<

JJ(i,a;Wuo K O !■ G ü o >oaiJtios5«i|sc!

cccocoo^]a:o<FH i" *^- o - - iIüM<;cCxit c w MC0CX<(1,Q>Q&JK<!: ug f COZI-HMZ KO^CF'B S N

DIN

G

NU

MB

ER

PE

LA

ND

ING

EL

RPL

AN

E

GR

OSS

R

ES

TIN

G

GEA

R

RS

NO

.

«; PH p hJ tn E

M CC M < <C 3

^wtcxi-H OOHZI-H»; H MJCOCOS COeCbo«-" to

Page 4 of Enclosure

9 (2!

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

w M CU a 6 03 a

CO M r~ < o vO H x; CM cu < 03 c t- 03 CD x:

rH V) C/) a ■z. M M x:

•H U +J < 2 •H

< ^ 1

u n a Q <

^r ULI o < H Cd

CO ( ) i—i LU 0) s CO

T3 cc O < OJ S

"3 O S

en

i

< LU V7

<

LO CO

Page '? of 9 Enclosure (2)

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

(f) f-( OJ a. s ro Q

X in r- < o vO H -C CM (t)

—' c H w < x x: uu

1—I O en CO a 2 M H x: _J

•H U ^ < < 7' ■ H

CNJ < s 8

Q Q < L0 ^■T u; o CO < H CC ■"I

CO u ^-1 LU Oi o^ n

T3 CC i O < CM s

O

r

"1

. <

o UN I

?

c

L ■ •; c to

M

M

■^r

- ■

o

O

x o

DC

3^

3

;•■

s

Oj (\J

CO r^ H CM

O

C\J I -0 I

s

< fei

RA1200001 (RSSH- 31003) FT2222 - 176

uiLij ^^.r-^' ^ C§C ^ S ^TC CC

Q. E

ss5;' ■; = * '2 3:";:»^ 11

TlEi . =3 K Hl =. ^=1^.= S jJlJ fc *- "2 ?i '^ -"= l'1 c c ^ ' ' "~^ri?~Tl 1 1 1 1 1 I 1

!. Jii_!.,..ii -fJ-.lB;? iJ-- ül "- SJH^ ' d« 53 «s= 3i ^ sK, ,2]

1 IM ' ?? *-n i 'V~ ir* V* 51 ? : ; ' 1 d ° * 2 5 c ?l a ; ; S K ' ' T

Q

0

s il], 22 K PS, ri:r^trr ä'l; »" 2" ^f 5S^ ? ' °' S| ■ .2 o siilf' 2o ' i^h 5 ^33 BS- .h - ill, -i' ss «s-T-" — 1— M - ^ v S H L !< J" ^ J" _ °: ^"3 ■J, - T gi^ iT:'- ■»" = -■- <S < o -A-- vv-%w\.--i^\*i^\i- 1 S: S ' ?? -""S;':^1 ' V -3" Cj

Q <

c 0 ui Z 1—

■* - i^l'j b°i!»d dd« Ht 1^2 «|5 31s g|, i ^ 7;:;5 SS, ,s

2,

Bu

^BU

LA

^ J^lf. ffl \i\\k , Wi 13 JJi «!:i ?ä. Fr?l;sls":i > 03 (V JZ 00

«j J aaiJ '' ' ■ "i r Jî" h ^ «• ° ^ °»oöî §^"„r j'— L

C 1- UJ , ,^1* 1 1 ■ ~ Îri-'.-iL"'^,""-" !° ' 5 E ; 4 = ^ - - 5 T ? ; " S ? 35 3 2

^ O 00 ~ r , ..- , , - c - A ' " E"51E —~j T?

Q. Z x: *->

5

. -î-.-^" \. :\'-\'' üT""''-~ i= ■'■ ^ r" .1 " . -J -■ - s a ■>. y -. d " ; ^ =. =

^ z < O Al il.bf r : yi ■ r . --:-. : 2- ■; = :

"' ' ■ ; "''xjx ^= ^^ '■ CM -J C3 <

CJ l j'V'"'- i'ii'll i .""'" ° r--;--, 1 •'' " V"

1 -SS ^ r- 0 r- -I U U c C - c ! ':-^ 0 r 0 ^ J ft ^ S ? „

00

O = ■- B :• - #^ ^ ,:■ # ^ 1 - 1 ' --i—r - H—- gas, c . c---;-d^^"=< ;;: ■ ; 5; i »uj - s' s ^ „

— UJ

i

O X.

1 l;i_' K -J f ^^ ? ' s- ^'s '.*' IN' 1^ M: ' JS: ^; ■: -o cc 0 < X ■jiir"'^""1"'";^ -"^"^m

i .ill' \:- ■■ M~ ' h^ ^ • H55 il 11 ^ sg - - u; j"- c

J a S S i M 'SS^ ■" i ^ ~ o"1^^^^ 5:=^Jä ?3" ?J^ l^x iS 'llÜ -ô î^-gj ■ ■ Dj ?! ■ 'i« 'llH::! -äs!s; i IT. =E: .;

_ - - ----- i? — Ü i ^ _ ^ *■ ^tH

\\ g « - ' h

: !!° !: liliiäMalll li! êM

- > fi it s !l II i n i a1 E =-

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

m ^ 0) a 6 m Q

o M 00 < o o H x: c\ 

OJ < ro c H 0) <r ro x: ai

i—I CD 00 CO a 2 tn M -C K-J

•H Q +J

8 < CM

•H

1 o Q U < to ^r LU o to < H a: ri

CO U rH LU

OJ CC CO -o cr: 1 o < c^ S

T3 O

RA1200001 (ltSSH-31003) ¥12222- 176

a. u

CN I

Q

5 01

O

u a i

a^ M CD < O o H x: CM < o u

^ , , a ro

o UJ T3 Tf 2 1- C 1

1 s 0) S

0) 5 > (tl

W

c H 0) < (0 X UJ

^H O CO CO

x: -P

en <

s u CO

I CN

XI o

8 CO CO D

h IOISISI u, "T" ... _

c\ l-lr — r 1 —

O < c (--, c rn 1A ^ r^ r^ 1 Jr

T E o c ' s (*> d^ a- Kj rH CM -;

c c

1—- cc c i

m o •

• o O I

^ LA

"?

a- o oj

OJ tMJ

o

CJ c r. K/M nJrv

ô M- CM 1

o o o CT or r-

n-, ^^ . O 1 ' f ■

r- ^ a • ^S

o o

o o

O O '

iH O CO O^ r-

tM O S CO

1

f1^

^ -:

H -r. ^ i CM

| o CM

o o [, o ^f o J lA . o ■ ,

c\j - ■D f CO O1 O

rr\ u-. ■-* '

t J_; ^ rj CM ^ n 1

ô o o

O

■ -=f e cc - IN

^ \r

CO

CT- O^

o

' ' 1 '-, ,~l ■— >-* ■ . ' 1

O IT —^— - c

- o

■

CG

o a CC' i*\

o cr

— r-

p-

i

o --

n CM \r\ c ^3 S i o c. cr-| c

rH

.'. -' o CM ■ CO

r H c r

I - K - 1 ' ^ ,_, 7 ^ ^ " 1 u --

■■

c

- "- ' ' r- i

7" c\

r-

X s

OJ 1 ^ r-. s c

" - - ■ ' .^

"1 -: " CM CM

1 ■-

■

ri; r 1

1. o [^ .1 U" Lf ^ 1

1 - c -.

LT ll 1 ■

: ' X .: rj

n r>- '.. ir|

■

U

' 1 ' : -■

■," ,■: '

î

1 *

•j- 1

PH 0 ' ^ . '■ ^

o ' ■ -" o . ~ -,. ■?

■ ■ ■

r" ' ' ■ ■ . r^

r r„ ': ■- 7. o IX ". ■- r i

. - -T

a _. rH ^

~. ^0 o . i -cf i .

- '"' d i i

; ... ■ - -■

J3 J3 -. T- : o c -' — . -' "m w *J —

c

f-

.:. S c

-■»;

(X v

...

■.. .- < E- <

W

■ i

a. T <

■ T-,

rr.

cu

CQ c

| I

Q C -■

î i

5 E

5

- Lr.

.":

W

CC

::

en

<

:::

C z F ■ CO

a<

s w Pfl Q

• J c c-

o [M M K cn

f „ '-0 O

iJ 1 CC J — 1 5 —

« Ü J

i t g j G. en

C CO '-0

0 P- PH

:■-■,

> EH -

r3 ^

X

.;: .-..

■ :t

O 3 <

p a. CO

CJ

re

a. <

■

F

■"

E

0

5

s |

Ö

.■:':

•r

E-

.■■-

-.. ■

- ■

EC <

< i. EH

■■ u z <: =■■ -- a

E r' o

& o

c u

g

RAT 200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

SUMMARY OF OPTIMUM WIND-OVER-DECK LANDINGS

USS MIDWAY (CVA-41) USS RANGER (CVA-61) USS CORAL SEA (CVA-i+3) USS SARATOGA (CVA-60)

Aircraft Carrier

Model Ai rplane BuNo

Touch & Go1 s Arrests Bolters

CYA-1+1 F8U-1 1^37^9 42 7 5

Ai+D-2 li+2678 41 8 3

A3D-2P 142668 21 9 3

TF-1 136766 28 2 0

CVA-61 F8U-2 li+5588 49 6 1

A/+D-2 li+2678 44 6 0

F4D-1 139143 28 4 0

CVA-43 F8U-2 145557 59 9 1

F8U-1 143749 51 8 1

Ai+D-2 142678 54 9 0

Ai+D-2 142120 40 7 0

Ai+D-2 142089 59 9 0

CVA-60 F8U-1 143749 3

*14

1

*2

0

*0

Ai+D.2 142089 8

*10

551

1

*2

90

0

*o

TOTAL 14

*Night Lai idings End osure (3)

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

m H CO

cc UJ H S 00

< < u

2 Q ä 2 CO < ,-1 _!

tu rc

a, to S to 5D

O

i 3 ^ rH

*• " g o c 1 2 °. a -. cr S 13 c 3 S 2 S g g ■T u\ 15

^

— ? a ^ c. 3

5 o £ o

O " 00 a. 1« ? C " ' ■

K -

K T

j, «■ -: * s

=. S 0. s 5 *i "<J. R F 3 V g E;

0. J S ": O S o. *;

_j j a i "= v Ä 5 K '-. 2 K °i

1 S s S 0 XJ ^s

H " f ft S

r-- in f; 2 •? * ^ 5 * o

0. 5 ^ c- 5! s s 7 s s ", 2 r - ; •^ * ■J

in j « 1 f- • c 0.

in " ^ u^

H t ' s 8 S 0

1R ^ ■?

o. ^ ^ s - 2 2 S

3 j .: "^ '- o :- £

o

0, JJ ■% 0

■JT 8 5 c 3

r- -. «^ ft R ■n in 5

S i^ 1 S "; -* '. " - Ö rt 2 r. -T ' s 2 13

c •■>

1^ J 5

s - ir U> 1

J -* = J a " SI ir\ m

c c . 2 0 2 -. -

1

! j --. O " , SI

—

I !

j i 1 - i a ° °. r- o •r\ jt t O

c^ S ? C "- p- 2 °. s *

T1 J

"

^ R : = = ^ ^ ^ S « u-v 2 - a 1 IT C c IT S : 5 s " 5 S S 1^

^ ! _4

2 ! " .»' s o j

R - ^. - £ 2 ? § ^ 2 S s its

-I s

5 « C ": m 5 ! ? ■* S" t r^

- ' T 8 ■5 ? S : O O •

f c- t 3 : = "C 5 c

s . - c 2 $ s S c^

: - 2 c 1 0 - s s *

1 £ "* t^ o IT o % 2 m -* s % c- c c ^ p- IT -. S "- 0 Rr

3 h

H

1 ^ s 2

Ifv t^ o

■

r- ■? ~ cv ■ ■

: ; ■_ . c O* S =1 ■?.

7 r" s

g ■c * s f

. r :'■ o s - :. R c « . ' : . 0 r-

Ch s ■n ° S

1C ' S t « « - 2 u-

-: ■

7 v 5 0 c ' c ' 0 0 ^J 2 2 H -O

5

- 5 1 1 1 n o i 2 j s ■ ? g 2 R »\ .: us 1 ^ s ? " s

| R ? a - t^ f .. . i 2 - ; C - m s g R ' r 2 lA >J3

^ s cj -; R

S 3 ~ • " ; ;. j i. ?

. 5 ec ST S 3 R 2

- 2 2 | S 2 .- 5 g

| g

3

g a

g 5

1 i '> C ^ ««.

1 | as

fc." b" k #" JS

H

0! I«

b"

s | 1

P Is1

a. |

3

V tu ST M

s 1 e

| II «1 i

<

1 M

'I « f

Enclosure (''4)

RA1200001 rRSSH-3100 3) s >i >> >>>»>» >> ^ >. >» >> FT2222- 176 Z

4J +> •H -H

•P -P •rl -rl

-P ■H

-P -P •H -H

-p ■H

4» •H ja

•P •H fl Jl J4 A A

o u o O Ü O ü O U O -P O -P -P +» -p +» of (0 cö td a cd cd cd cd cd b0 cd bO hO bO bO bO ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft B1 ft d ft d d d d d CO cd cö cd cd cd cd cd cd cd <o Cd 4J 4) 4) «) 4> o ü Ü ü ü ü u o ü ü u

■p ■P -P h t) h

■P -P -P

(j u u u u U M (H h h w U V3 V3 WWW cd a cö cd cd cd cd cd cd XI cd cd -Ö 0) A) 0) 0) fl) 4) « 4) 0) 4» a> u 4) ti h b b b • 4) (0

a a O C5 o ca es o o c3 bOO «J es cd cd cd cd cd to ß o> o d • 0) 4) 4) 4) 4) i-3 § bO hO bO ho bO hO hO bO b0 V bOO bOO O C5 C5 O i^ ö Ö Ö d c ö a d d JH d d O -P rH

•rl •H -H •H -H •H •H -H •H ■p •H bO •H bO bO bO bO bO x> d ft •H (0 ■P ■P -P H-> -P -P •p -p ■P CO +> Ö ■P d ß d d d -o O h ^1 ÖJ KJ 10 10 (0 to W m m M M -H (0 -H •H •rl •H -H do •H

3 cd 0) 4) 0) 4) 4) 4) 4> 4) 4> M 9) T) 4) -d -Ö -O Tl -Ö

' h b tn u u U ^ M fa o h d u a a d d d Ä -d

(H (4 t. u u U u u U o u cd H cd cd cd cd cd 0) H < < <! < < < < < < tu <! ^1 < *1 yl iJ ^ i-^ -P 4) 1

to ■p M

43 ft ft hO W H

■rl H 5 rH W) ft

3 a M

J- ON C^- Os^t- K> IN 0J OJ J- m O m O O O VDMD <M d

^ c •H < 3 a* d)

K> fM (M ro nj CVI 0J OJ OJ OJ OM OJ oo oj oj 00 H H 4) bO • fi H tti f\J cd XI bOvD «d d ON to

EH U 4) H 4)

M o •H •H H -P d h ft •H Cd 4)

J Q CO ft B »"J tO

< o H

So TSO J- C^ c^- ON j- KN r-- OVJ CNJ -4- m IA m IA H ITNrH H

cd TH H 00 OO

B 1 EH M •H H

^f^ OJ ro CM (M OJ C\J oo OJ OJ OJ 0J 0J tM 00 oo f\J oo O 4) 4) ft fn X > ON

« X O tu *> •H ft 4J o ■O B O '

t/j O -P

4) O 4) M ■P h <M 4)

O 1 6 j- (^ iH J- ON rH -J" ON H H H ITN H LTN H ITS H H

ü "»H «w TH

cd 4) >H

O T) ti 3" r^N i^ -^- KN KN -a- r<A NN t^ KN KN KN rA KN KN KN KN U Ti <ü

0? ü C ft'O H H rH H H H H H rH rH H H H H H H H H ■P 4J t0 tO

o (U ft a x d ß 4) •H TH -d-

B -P 1

CO -O h 4) ►",

T3 4) 4J rH ft

0) U)^ 4) -P rH

C-] •P ß ^3 O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O ft 4) 3 rH

(0 -H H O O O c o c o o O ITN O O O O ITN O O IA O T) pq 4>

M 4) 73 ^^ O O O o o o c o o tN O IN o IN r-- IN O IN 73

3 x u a •• •• » ^ ^ 0i m i» m m m J3 73 >, O

M cß f-i tß -P <\l r\j O CV OJ o" 0J OJ o KN O ON O ON KN ON O KN O 4) t. S

S <; hj ^ rvj oo ir> 0J CM UN OJ OJ in rH ITN rH U"N H H rH IA H SS SH. ® O -H t» 4) ti 3 O 43

10 OJ OJ (M ro OJ f\j OJ M OJ ft CJ1 O -P

(U i i i i l i 1 1 ft 4) CD

Q ß ft w ft w ft\\ \ \ •N. Cd tl « 10

g rt H H rH rH rH H H H rH OJ H H H rH OJ H H 00 tu rH 1 I | 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ■73 Q -P 73

P^ & & Q 0 1=) Q C3 p Q a Q Q Q Q Q Q ö Q 4> O <M 3

H S

u 00 o~ ro 00 CO KA er oo NN J- rA-d- KN J- J- J- KN-i- T3 3: Cd rH

•H ft ft «a! ft ft «! ft ft < < < ft < ft ^ 43 ^ 4) •H ß cd r^v £ 0) KN cd KN J3 

bO 3 IS d CO 3 cd cd cd • • • d «0 Q TS a a TS T3 p -Ö ß C5 73 4) H f\J KN

■H O ß o cd O -P W 0 Ö o cd O 43 tO +J s c« 0) S P- e S 3 U 2 Cd 4) S ft S CO f-<

to ft > CO t* o 0) ft > C0 > 4) • • - 4) IN O 4) c^ -p s EH fn «) LTs Ä M N Ä M -H 3 J^ if\ .d « OJ Ä « -H cd O

 ON CO X rH C0 s s O ON CO S rH C0 £30

Page 1 of Enclosure

2 (5)

HA1200001 (R3SH-310a5) FT2222-176

d 1 H H H H H JS o A A ji A ,d xi a) X) 0) A « X) « Si 0) CO ■p -p -p -P 4* +> O ■P O -P U •P o ■P u O X) PL) T3 M hO b0 ho hO hO Ü hO U hO O hO U M U O V |ZJ 0) d d d d d d < d < d <! d «< d <: ■o d ^ w i 0) O (U U V fH 0) U 0) f-i a> §5

X3 d « PQ •p ■p .p -p www +> -p d www w § w § w § +> d

W (I) M ■P H H rH H H o < •^ ^ >ä J«! JW .M ** ft M ft AJ ft a ft AJ ft ■P u a o o o o O O h o u o u o Er a u Si

w •H o o o o O O -H O -rl O -H O -H O -H WJ-Ö J w www W W <! w <: w ü m «; W «Ji •H 0)

l-p i-l «) l-^l w O a, o 4) • o 3: x) H hOOJ w » ^-s r^ C VO ft a cr -P VO fM [v. IA -d" O in rH m ON OO j- o m tö -rl ON

•H 0) J«) H H H H H H H H H H H H O hOf-H

^ £ « N*-^ •H (Ö H hO fl

u T3 ft d S EH to ft 0) >-3

tö M T) •P OJ « a A /*«» E •H Ü 0> o +J o IAO ITS o m o in o in o in o in O B 4)

E od M o Ov O (T. O ON O ON O ON O ON O ON «H -H > H B o •*s H H H H H H H •M H -rl W O u 4_3 o o ft T3 a o s ft (UDO)

■P »< <H « ü <M «H p tö «) £ 0)

h -d ■P <]) (0

00 ■fj x d d EH CO 4) M-I i-l

M ,~*. a -P •O ti 4> 2 u a XI O o o o O O o o o o o o o o 4> • ^ •• •• » «. •. ».

CO T) CQ & a S 4-> [>-j- i>--^- [>-J- IN-J- C^-J- tN-d- tN-d- OP" S ^ 31 H t\J H ru H (M H OJ H OJ H OJ H OJ XI X) >,

§ O 4) ti ß ti tu O -H >■

Q w l-i 3 O

9. 4) ft CT1 ü Ö ft 4) 4J

£ 3 m S rA 3 m 3 m 3 r^ 3 tn S K\ « h «

K^J P. lA 1 in 1 in i IXN 1 in i in i in i X3 Q +> ac u 1 fe 1 (x, • fe i fc 1 b i P^ ■ fo 4) O ^ M •H g f\) Q oj Q OJ Q oj « OJ Q oj Q oj X! 3 CO » < •a! w -a; w < w. •flj 00 < w < w d u H ©Bo

B 3 fn ■p a a -H

-p d o -H <; 3 M o w (U m (0 o d o t, X! tn > u Xi (H 4) TH d

K^ J3 « rn -P HJ rn ns fn XS aj m -P «u K\ « S -H 1 -P &1 1 -H ft 1 OJ 1 +> ft 1 -H A 1 0)

K\ rH -H E H S B OJ X! H -rl E H 3 a OJ > hO 3 ns c« w » t« tö s • • d -ö -o Q T! d Q T) -ö => xi d Q X) 4) H OJ

•H O £% O tö O -P w o a O tö O X! M -P U s 4) S ft W > O 4) ft > w > 4J ,, u «J * -w «1 -- rt -xl ft -w tö «- tö -X! ft W tH ü in o- - 0) o- o o IN -p E [>- - - o <u C^ -P E

US < g w m xi S ON w

fad (NJ X! S H W S 3 =1

W in xi S ON w

W OJ XJ S rH W

W -H tO S 3 Q

Pag e 2 of 2 Enclosure (5)

RA1200001 {RSSH-3IOO3) FT2222-176

ANNUAL PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY OF SURFACE WIND IN CARRIER OPERATING AREAS

Operating Area

San Diego-Los Angeles

Los Angeles-San Francisco

East Formosa Coast

East Okinawa Coast

East Japan Coast

Southeast Asia Coast (220N n80E)

(180N 108oE) (120N 1120E) ( 70N 108oE) ( 90N 102oE)

Norfolk-Jacksonvi11e

Jacksonvi11e-Gtmo

East Mediterranean

West Mediterranean

North Atlantic (580N 18^) (530N 330W) (530N 18°«) (I+30N ^2^) (330N 48^) (i+30N 17°«)

ALL ^+3.0 64.5

Data obtained from Naval Weather Service, Anacostia, 1 Feb 1962

Enclosure (6)

10 Kt or Less 16 Kt or Less

k6 75

^3 67

50 69

25 55

37 61

59 59 51 57 73

70 81 63 83 90

27 53

56 82

66 83

61 78

20 21 18 22 35 32

1+2 kk ko 35 63 58

m RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

Model A4D-2 Airplane BuNo 142678, 142120 and 14208 9

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF, AIRPLANE APPROACH SPEED

30 25KTWOD 35 KT WOO

.20 00

<£> 1 10

30

m srm; 33^ .ü» ^5$it&~

MSI mxMt

-vz m&i

S --; y.zr.

2ZE2JÖ

ALL WOO S5^Z22r

a-JTE

^2>/^E :3ir5i-y:

atEHZ

115 125 135 VA-KT

RA1200C01 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-17ü

Model A4D-2 Airplane BuNo 142678, 142120 and 142089

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF DEVIATION FROM RECOMMENDED AIRPLANE APPROACH SPEED

25 KT WOO 35 KT WOD ALL WOD

-10 -5 0 +5 +10 -10 -5 0 +5 +10 AVA-KT

■10 -5 0 +5 +10


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

Model A4D-2 Airolane BuNo 142673, 142120^and 142089

REQUEIiCY DISTRIBUTION OF AIRPLANE SINKING SPEED

25 KT WOD 35 KT WOD ALL WOD

5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 Vs-FPS

0 5 10 15 20


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176


FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF DEVIATION FROM THEORETICAL AIRPLANE SINKING SPEED

CD

i

ä <fv0

I > o LÜ

O UJ or

00 o

50

40

30

20

10

0

50

40

30

20

10

0

50

40

30

20

10

0

50

40

25 K

< 20-

; KB m

1

::^fi.za:

WOD 35 KT WOD ALL WOD

llii

4:

-L_ iin: ;:: ::

:JIEL:. : »M :;;

Ü_^;:: ::::::

SB - tzs

ill

ÄJf - ox>. :

m

LiMi

,:3rj:: Tt^rTE??-

;:;: :

::iVk: a1:::

^ atj

Ixxl

2TJ;=! ssx::::::;; = ffr::±i^

ill

: :A?>: ;4

i'ir:: r :: TTT.

Ll

1

:::::::::

rnx

-10 -5 0 +5 +10 ■10 -5 0 +5 +10 AVS-FPS

-10 -5 0 +5 +10

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176


FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF AIRPLANE OFF-CENTER DISTANCE AT TGUCHDOWN

LEGEND; S tarboard Port


-10 -5 0 +5 +10 -10 -5 0 +5 +10 X-FT

■10 -5 0 +5 +10


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176


FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF AIRPLANE MAIN GEAR TOUCHDOWN DISTANCE FROM RAMP

25KT WOD 35 KT WOD ALL WOD

100 200 300 100 200 300 Z-FT 100 200 300


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176


FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF DEVIATION FROM THEORETICAL AIRPLANE MAIN GEAR TOUCHDOWN DISTANCE

FROM RAMP


-100-50 0 +50+100 -100-50 0 +50+100 AZ-FT

-100-50 0 +50+100


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

Model A4D-2 Airplane BuNo 142678, 142120 and 14208 9

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF AIRPLANE ROLL ANGLE


-10 -5 0 +5 +10 -10 -8 0 +3 +10 0-DEG

•10 -S 0 +5 +10

LEGEND: + Starboard - Port Page 8 of 8

Enclosure (7)

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

Model F8U-2 Airplane, BuNo 145557 Model F8U-1 Airplane, BuNo 143749

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF AIRPLANE APPROACH SPEED

xn 25 KT WOD 30 mm 35 KT WOD ALL WOD

140 VA-KT

140 150

Page 1 of 8 Enclosure (8>

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176


FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF DEVIATION FROM RECOMMENDED AIRPLANE APPROACH SPEED

25 KT WOD 35 KT WOD

O +5 +10 10 -5 0 +5 +10 AVA-KT

-10 -5 0 +5 +10


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176


FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF AIRPLANE SINKING SPEED

25 KT WOD 35 KT WOD

O 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 i5 20 Vs-FPS

0 5 10 15 20


RA1200001 rRSSH-31003) FT2222- 176


FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF DEVIATION FROM THEORETICAL AIRPLANE SINKING SPEED

25 KT WOD mm. 35 KT WOD ALL WOD

-10 -5 0 +5 +10 -10 -5 0 +5 +10 AVs-FPS

-10 -5 0 +5 +10


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) ¥12222-176


FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF AIRPLANE OFF-CENTER DISTANCE AT TOUCHDOWN

25 KT WOD 35 KT WOD

-10 -5 0 +5 +10

ALL WOD

LEGEND: +

•10 -5 0 +5 +10 X-FT

S tarboard Port

-10 -5 0 +5 +10


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176


FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF AIRPLANE MAIN GEAR TOUCHDOWN DISTANCE FROM RAMP

100 200 300 100 200 300 Z-FT

100 200 300


RA1200001 (RBSH-31003) FT2222-176


FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF DEVIATION FROM THEORETICAL MAIN GEAR TOUCHDOWN DISTANCE FROM RAMP

-100-50 0 +50+100 -100-50 0+50+100 AZ-FT

-100-50 0 +50+100


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176


FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF AIRPLANE ROLL ANGLE

50

40

rLao lO 20

10

0

50

^_ 40

2<J>30 UJ sf

UJ en 10

50

40

_j30

<C 20

10 -

2^ KT WOP

j 'M-iZZi-

'. l&i rZ.P

ay?: 4.,s.

JLl

i ;

:::; 1-44-

35 KT WOD aap

r:-5.o::

"7175 *r-

^TVT

ALL WOD . . , .

11L

m :J-a:: :rr:r:

■97^

-111

:;:;

:::;

r* ^

_ul

:-<r-5: : 3B:

:::; ^rr

:: ...

; j&Ezac accTCjt aJ s-ffiT

3<n->: 5;Q

::::

^ E 5^

Al.

.- -2.i- :3^4: f.s 7\n^72rs

d ttü

*—

-10 -5 0 +5 +10

LEGEND: + Starboard Port

-10 -5 0 +5 +10 0-DEG

-10 -5 0 +5 +10

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

Model A4D-2 Airplane BuNo 142678 BuNo 142120 BuNo 142089

COMPARISON OF PER CENT ULTIMATE SINKING SPEED/ROLL ANGLE ENVELOPE

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 16 20 22 24 AIRPLANE SINKING SPEED-FPS

LEGEND: X 25 kt WOD 35 kt WOD Page 1 of 2

Enclosure (9)

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

Model F8Ur2 Airplane, BuNo 145557

Model F8U-1 Airplane, BuNo 143749

COMPARISON OF PER CENT ULTIMATE SINKING SPEED/ROLL ANGLE ENVELOPE

UJ Q

US _l

z <

o IE

a.

<

fl-5

i 4

•

¥7;.* aaj ftf/itV iui* IP* l : : ■ 1 1 »»• 1 4? ?"«►

**' y?' w liaii. "aw- ■^

: •v^_ ; :V s; p

: • \ < N. .' : 1 •i.^J» k

. " \\ 4 1 M \; * öS sy^l* ip •fi iwt.^i .:.

4 • • k»!^ i ix "« •*} ;\

K »if : B « i i

i '■■ | f •r i ; ■;

1 1 +1

:

^fl- *r M 03I ^ veAA '• «A fjc M '•" s«.

■X> i 17: V, ca»! J WEW 0^

E .. 4= ipi -...i— ...;.... ~H—

■ i N \ i

j V ...j.... 1 i-# id V. -

Siajitj

.' j .

;;.., fäiteü — i :■

■ j it it

I t \ \ mm- 4' |

Ip

M'" :

|

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 AIRPLANE SINKING SPEED-FPS

LEGEND: X - 25 kt WOD f - 35 kt WOD Page 2 of 2

Enclosure (9)

RAI200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

DETERMINATION OF EQUATIONS UTILIZED IN THE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF AIRPLANE LANDING PAHAHETERS

MK VI, HOD 0 FLOLS SÜßE SLOPE

i- r r -""''" 11»

■T- I »;■ J

4 A' M^t .-t_

XiAL &EGH-

'C&6.& ■ >J Jr ■. .f/.1 c/ P'rr.w

-i.^ ■-/,

^1

^ _ *.!:rjre/9 QrwrcH '

figure J

Figure 1 wes extracted f'onn NAFF Dra»ii''.g No 318325 which shows the ^cation of the FLOLS aboard CVA U3 with respect to the flight deck and the pttch ard roll axes. The stabilization systerr, wi1! stablflze the glide slope at a point 2500 ft aft of the unit as a result of pitch and roll signals which It receives frorr the ship's »table eleroents.

Assuming a stern pitch downs

Page 1 of 8 Enclosure (10.'

RA120000] (RSSH-31003) ^12222- 176

Figure 2

Where, ß = OLS glide slope setting, deg

^ = glide slope angle with respect to the axial deck resultmg from pitch, deg

G = d'ecCdeg^ an9]e W1"th reSPeCt t0 the ^X1a,

"= zfs\:::z^Tnew 9,ide s,ope sn9ie and the

c^ter'Hni^ ^^{ %£* fJ^ P-P-dicular to the and horizontal trans a ion'of t e FLOLS55^,'hSt ^ VertiCal

It is also assumed in Figure 2 that the angle between the


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222-176

axial deck centerline and the horizontal (8) is equal to the angle between the angle deck centerline and the horizontal which is nearly correct for small values of 9. Therefore, 9 is equal to the new glide slope angle with respect to the angle deck centerline.

ßp-ß±e ; where, 9 is positive for a stern pitch down and negative for a stern pitch up.

The preceding assumptions will result in approximately 0.03-0.05 deg error in determining the value of 9„ The new glide slope angle resulting from ship's r9l]tß'r with respect to the angle deck centerline takes into consideration the vertical displacement of the FL0LS and the fact that the centerline of the angle deck does not coincide with the axis of roll. The stern to bow view for a port roll is as follows:

siotS

(1)

a b

c

0

Figure 3

vertical displacement of the FL0LS, ft vertical displacement of the angle deck centerline opposite the FL0LS, ft vertical displacement of the angle deck centerline at the ramp, ft ship's rol 1 angle^, deg


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222476

Figure 3 athwartship view;

where, ^ =

A =

■ 'p, =

Figure k

angle new g and h deg angle horlz angle cente g 11 de with cente angle sultl roll,

between 1 i de si ope orlzontal.

between ontal and deck

rline, deg slope angl

respect to rltne of deck re-

ng from deg

From Figure ^:

ir = (9-f ^-'(^

A-=. sr\ JLfLJj\

\4-2? I j

?öO; -to

Determining the values of a, and substituting in equation is as follows:

b and c for small values»© W, ehe approximate value

ßrmp + ä. where, X 1s positive for a starboard roll and negative for a port rol1.

(2)

(3)

f t, Off'r

(5)

The error in equation (5) is approximately 0o008 deq To determ ne the glide slope angle with respWt to the ' le deck centerline resulting from a combination of pitch and roH ß'


RAJ 200001 (RSSH.3IOO3) FT2222™ 176

equations (l) and (5} were combined as followss

lMBMn^tLMI^MtLS^!^2!ä Q^STANCE FROM THE RAHP CMGTDT}

JllrTnh?0ret1^a1 wel^ gear touchdown distance from the ramp IHGTD^ waö determined by first taking into consideration th vacation In the optical touchdown distance (OPTD) as a function of the ship's pitch and roil ana the eye to ramp lt/KJ clearance in the foil owing manners

OPTD« -f^ (7

Where, ß fs the re= sultant gHde slope determined from equation (6),

e

~ -igle In the FLOLS a-d It was assumed whe- this condition existed and the deck was steady ,0° snip's pitch and -ol1) the 0PT0 Is 439 ft ^orwa'-d of the ^snp or the location of the FLOLS. Thus equation {7) was expa-ded as foli'owss

Where, d Is the vertical displacement of the glide slope at

the FLmf ?? 0f fhe ar9le deCk wMch re5üIts fr^ adjusting FLLS ?«?t 0l,ian9U W1th the type of «fplan«. From the FLOLS roll angle settings and Figure I, the valueof d is as fol1owss


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) n2222- 176

Glide Slope Angle, deg

Airplane Type

H F8U A4D

FLOLS Roll Angle,, deg

d, ft

^ 3A

i Predicted Hook to Ramp Distance, ft

-2.0

F8U A4D

6 3A 3

0.3

n.i n.3

"4,0

4 3A

■2.0

12.9 12.8

I^6 SoJn1^5 assumPt1on that the center line of the FLOLS is Irt I J0' a !teady deck is not ^rrect because of the athwartship camber of the flight deck. According to Aircraft

FLQLS^l ^ let1H V0"2.the C3mber at the ^«allltion of the rLULb is 6 in, and the horizontal datum bars are 3^ In. below the flight deck. This error is present in the statistical analysis of the MGTD and will vary from 10-15 ft depending upon the 0LS glide Ilope setting and the pitch and roll of the ship. p,^rn

Equation (8) is then combined with the geometry of the ai plane and the actual airplane pitch attitude (6 ) at tou P down

r - ch-

<Di=TO -

Figure 6

RAI200001 CRSSH^31003) FT2222-176

In figure 6 the variables are £ and 0/ j ß and p are constant depending on the airplane type. Combining equation (8) and Figure 6a the following equation is the ^GTDTg

MGTDT = «P ± A^. - R^Ll^ . s,n «o-S- cj

The values of R and p are as follows«

Airplane Type F8U A4D

R, ft 30,0 16,7

P, deg 22J 39.5

The angle £ was determined from camera coverage of the landing area and ß' from the ship's pitch and roll.

BOLTER RATE FOR TOUCH AND GO LANDINGS (BR)

The Bolter Rate for touch and go landings (BR) was found by determining from the airplane geometry the MGTD required for the arresting hook to land 235 ft forward of the ramp (last cross deck pendant). Since the pitch and roll of the ship was negligible, a constant gli4e slope angle was assumed. Since the MGTD does not vary appreciably with the airplane pitch attitude, it was also assumed constant.

Airplane Type F8U Al+D

P' * deg H k 3i —

£ , deg k k 9 9 i MGTDhook2^ ft 251 250.5

1

263 260.5

Page 7 of 8 EncJosure (10)

RA1200001 CRSSH^3!003} ^12222- 176

BR was determined from the standard deviation { (f } and the average MGTD (HGID) as followsa

BR M$Tohook 23, - mw

0*mro 10)

THEORETICAL AIRPLANE SIWKIH6 SPEEO (Vst)

he theoret from the g the alrpla-e engaging speed as follows

tlcal airplar.e sinking speed C^c,-) was determined Ijae slope angle calculated by equation (7} and ne engag

vst * vs 0-w) 6">P n

PERCENT OF ULTIMATE SINKIMG SPEED/RQIL ANGLE ENVELOPE j^Vs/j^

MIL-A-8629 (Aer } specifies that with 7° of airplane "-oil with respect to the landing surface, the airplane must be designed to withstand 50% of the ultimate sinking speed and that the relationship between roll angle and sinking speed for design purposes Is to be as follows:

/oo

Figure 7

The combs nation of V^/0 for each landing was plotted on Figure 7 and the %V^/^wa.-i determined as foPows utilizing ^o 0U rol'a angle and C fps sinking speed as the common points

%&&* f (12)


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS

T&G - Touch and go landing

B - Bolter

A - Arrested Landing

VA - Approach Speed, kt

AvA Actual approach speed minus recommended approach speed from applicable flight handbooks, kt

Vs - Sinking speed (average of Mitchell Camera and Cameraflex Readings) fps

AV< Actual sinking speed minus theoretical sinking speed, fps

/tydf//t~ Main gear to ramp clearance, ft

X - Off-center distance at touchdown, ft

Y - Off-center distance at the ramp, ft

Z - Main gear touchdown distance from ramp (Cameraflex when Mitchell Camera data are not available), ft

AZ - Actual main gear touchdown distance minus theoretical main gear touchdown, ft

p - Airplane roll angle with respect to angle deck, deg

e - Pitch attitude with respect to the horizontal, deg

N - Number of landings

(T - Standard deviation

> - Greater than /,, _, . , . . ,„» < - Less than (Used on enclosures (7) and (8) to designate

the % landings outside the limits of the curve)

)/E NOTE: A bar over symbol designates the mean. Enclosure (11)

RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF SELECTED REPORTS PERTINENT TO "BURBLE" AND WOD VARIATION

1. WIND DIRECTION AND SPEED ACROSS THE FLIGHT DECK OF USS RANGER (CVA 61) (CVA 59 class) (Unclas) by T. K. Kjellman and R. B. Colt. Survey rept Apr 58 by Friez Instrument Div., Bendix Aviation Corp., Baltimore Md. (ASTIA file ref No. AD-162 463 Div. 31.2) . ,

PyrP^S?' Tests at conditions representative of aircraft operations were run aboard USS RANGER to determine how the relative wind direction and velocity differs at various locations on the ship with respect to the yardarra wind detectors .

2. WIND DIRECTION AND SPEED ACROSS THE FLIGHT DECK OF THE USS TICONDEROGA (CVA 14) (CVA 19 Angled Deck Class) (Unclas) by T. K. Kjellman and R. B. Colt. Survey rept Aug 57 by Friez Instrument Div., Bendix Aviation Corp., Baltimore, Md. (ASTIA file ref No. AD-162 465 Div. 31,2).

Purpose; Same as paragraph 1.

,3. WIND DIRECTION AND SPEED ACROSS THE FLIGHT DECK OF THE USS VALLEY FORGE {CVS 45) (CVS 9 (Ex CVA 9) Class) (Unclas) by T. K. Kjellman and R. B. Colt. Survey rept Feb 58 by Friez Instrument Div., Bendix Aviation Corp., Baltimore, Md. (ASTIA file ref No. AD-162 464 Div. 2,31).

Purpose; Same as paragraphs 1 and 2.

4. WIND SURVEY OF CVA TYPE CARRIER (Unclas) bv T. K. Kjellman. Final Engineering rept on Phase I for Jun 56 - May 58 by Friez Instrument Div.,. Bendix Aviation Corp., Baltimore, Md. (ASTIA file ref No. AD-162 621 Div. 2,31).

Purpose; Test conditions were chosen to represent winds significant for aircraft operations and true meteorological com- putations using wind direction and speed across the flight decks of the USS RANGER, USS TICONDEROGA and USS VALLEY FORGE.

5. CARRIER CROSSWIND LAUNCHING AND LANDING OPERATIONS WITH CURRENT NAVY AIRPLANES (Conf), special rept 3 Jan 58. Naval Air Test Center, Patuxent River, Md. Proj. TED No. PTR SI 4291 ser No. FT35-04. (ASTIA file ref No. AD-153 660 Div. 1/2).


RA1200001 (RSSH-31003) FT2222- 176

Purpose; (Confidential report) .

6. CARRIER CROSSWIND LAUNCHING AND LANDING'OPERATIONS WITH CURRENT NAVY AIRPLANES (Conf), rept No. 1, 19 Aug 58 by J. J. Olenski and T. P. Dankworth. Naval Air Test Center, Patuxent River, Md. Proj. TED No. PTR SI-4291 ser No. FT35-093. (ASTIA file ref No. AD-307 340L Div. 1/4).

Purpose: (Confidential report).

7. CARRIER CROSSWIND LAUNCHING AND LANDING OPERATIONS WITH CURRENT NAVY AIRPLANES (Conf), rept No. 2 (final) 18 Nov 58 by K. deBooy and T. P. Dankworth. Naval Air Test Center, Patuxent River, Md. Proj. TED No. PTR SI-4291 ser No. FT35-0137. (ASTIA file ref No. AD-305 621L Div. 1/4).

Purpose; (Confidential report).

8. A COMPARISON OF AIRFLOW WITH AND WITHOUT CONSIDERATION FOR ANGULARITY EFFECTS IN THE WAKE OF A CVA-(N)65 AIRCRAFT CARRIER MODEL (Conf) by W. F. Barnett and M. P. Schultz 23 May 60 David Taylor Model Basin Aerodynamics Laboratory Aero. Test A-479.

Purpose: (Confidential report).

9. CARRIER AIRFLOW ANALYSIS CVA 66 GLIDE PATH STUDIES (Unclas) by C. S. Hoover 28 Sep 61. Naval Air Engineering Laboratory (Ship Installations) ENG-6829.

PVJTPO^e; The results of a study conducted in the Naval Air Engineering Laboratory (Ship Installations) three-dimensional wind tunnel to investigate the airflow in the wake of the CVA 66, particularly in the glide path of a landing aircraft. Causes of undesirable effects as well as possible corrections are included in the study.

10. NOTE ON THE AIRFLOW OVER AN AIRCRAFT CARRIER (Unclas) by F. 0. Ringleb. Naval Air Engineering Laboratory (Ship Installa- tions) SE-05:FOR:mf, undated.

Puypoge; Observations and experiments carried out in the three- dimensional smoke tunnel at the Naval Air Engineering Laboratory (Ship Installations) to determine principal factors influencing the airflow astern of the aircraft carrier.


An 281 862

Documents

Transcript of An 281 862