PDA

View Full Version : carrier operations worries



xTHRUDx
05-06-2004, 05:35 PM
Luthier has as already commented on my worring about planes blocking the take off.
here are some more worries for luthier to comment on.
-planes blocking the landing (getting outa the way after landing)
-will the carriers start to take damage if too many planes start landing on the carrier in places other than the strip, (the island, the stern, the bow, the sides, etc.)?
-will those annoying plumes of smoke stay there on the deck like they do in FB when taxi accidents occur?
-will online players have the discipline to enter a landing pattern and wait their turn to land or will they just dog-pile the deck?

xTHRUDx
05-06-2004, 05:35 PM
Luthier has as already commented on my worring about planes blocking the take off.
here are some more worries for luthier to comment on.
-planes blocking the landing (getting outa the way after landing)
-will the carriers start to take damage if too many planes start landing on the carrier in places other than the strip, (the island, the stern, the bow, the sides, etc.)?
-will those annoying plumes of smoke stay there on the deck like they do in FB when taxi accidents occur?
-will online players have the discipline to enter a landing pattern and wait their turn to land or will they just dog-pile the deck?

LEXX_Luthor
05-06-2004, 07:49 PM
Be awsum if onwhine simmers could get out of their planes and push somebody off the ship, the equivalent of server BAN. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Since it would take about 6 simmers pushing together, it would be a Team thing, somebody deserving the Push Off would indeed deserve it.

heywooood
05-06-2004, 08:08 PM
I just have general worries - can I post here?

The thing I look forward to most about PF is all the
new and different stuff to worry about. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

I'm sure a thread like this makes Luthier worry too, like
about what the hell he was thinking etc.. when he
started this project. You know, because we all have these reasonable
expectations and all that, if not well met, will cause us to
rant and rail like no ones business. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

The sim has'nt even been much revealed to us and we are worrying 'bout stuff? ... BtW - where IS the AEP patch?... it might
reveal a little more about PF somehow? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif


Ahhh dont mind me.. I wont even remember posting this 5 minutes from now. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

IV_JG51_Razor
05-06-2004, 10:21 PM
I've had the same concerns, but Luthier also commented that there would be no moving AI ships in DF servers, so these concerns may just all be moot. There's no assurance that there will even be CVs in a DF server. If there are, it would indeed be a nut house in a PUBLIC DF server. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

Razor
IV/JG51 Intelligence Officer
www.jg51.net (http://www.jg51.net)

"Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from poor judgement"

owlwatcher
05-06-2004, 11:50 PM
Carrier Operations
What is planned?
Stationary CV in dog fight?
Hope not .
What Japs. CV will we have?
Will 8" guns on Lex damage planes on deck?
Will number of planes avaiable be limted to CVs total in real life?
Will Take off and landing rates be limted to each different CV?
Will different planes have different rearming times?
Can damaged decks be repaired?
Will there be any control over the carrier during game play?

xTHRUDx
05-06-2004, 11:54 PM
carriers usually turn into the wind to help flight operations, my guess is we wont have this wind to help with ours.

a guess, mind you.

XyZspineZyX
05-07-2004, 02:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Be awsum if onwhine simmers could get out of their planes and push somebody off the ship, the equivalent of server BAN. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Since it would take about 6 simmers pushing together, it would be a Team thing, somebody deserving the Push Off would indeed deserve it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Fantastic thought m8

Pentallion
05-07-2004, 03:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by xTHRUDx:
carriers usually turn into the wind to help flight operations, my guess is we wont have this wind to help with ours.

a guess, mind you.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And then they'll complain the FM's are all wrong, you can't take off from a flight deck. Of course, if they fudge the FM's so you CAN take off from a flight deck with no wind, the complaints will, rightly so, be that the FM's are wrong.

Only solution is to give us some wind http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.simops.com/249th/sigs/Wildcard.jpg

yerpalal
05-07-2004, 04:47 AM
Well, a moving carrier will obviously generate it's own wind so I would be happy with a simplified "constant wind bow to stern" on all carriers.

Tully__
05-07-2004, 06:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by yerpalal:
Well, a moving carrier will obviously generate it's own wind so I would be happy with a simplified "constant wind bow to stern" on all carriers.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Which seems to be how the "severe weather crosswind" in IL2/FB is already modelled... 'cept it's across the runway.

=================================================


http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/legalsig.jpg

IL2 Forums Moderator
Forum Terms of Use (http://www.ubi.com/US/Info/TermsOfUse.htm)
Tully's X-45 profile (SST drivers) (http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/fb.zip)

Salut
Tully

heywooood
05-07-2004, 08:09 AM
And there you go - no worries.

luthier1
05-07-2004, 08:48 AM
What I worry about is coming to the forums and seeing threads like these http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

We can't police the behavior of online pilots. Unfortunately if you're flying with idiots and they behave like idiots, you're going to end up in idiotic situations. What else can I say?

If you have some SOLUTIONS I'm certainly all ears, but other than that I certainly have no idea how to get everyone online to intelligently land on carriers in groups.

http://www.il2center.com/PF.jpg

Gunner_361st
05-07-2004, 09:03 AM
I like Luthor's idea of a number of people in the server being able to call for someone to be kicked out. For example, a vote system, where if say 60% or more of the people in the server vote for a troublesome player to be kicked out, they are.

The host of course can always kick troublesome types, but the host of servers is not always around. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I think people are actually going to need to communicate more and make use of landing lights/navigation lights and calling out their intentions of taking off or landing on a Carrier.

Though, some people surely won't, and it'll be hilarious watching carrier airplanes crash into each other on take-off and landing runs commensing at the same time. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif

Major Gunner of the 361st vFG

http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1087.jpg

IV_JG51_Razor
05-07-2004, 09:39 AM
You're absolutely right Luthier, about the behavior of some online pilots that is http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif But please, don't let that influence your decision about putting CV's in DF servers! There are several groups out here that set up private DF servers for online battles, and we are very much looking forward to PF giving us the ability to fight an online carrier war.

I don't see the wind over the deck as a problem. I'm sure you've figured that one out already. The one really big problem I see, is the people spawning on top of one another. You've got to figure out a way to prevent someone from actually spawning after they hit fly, until a spawn point is clear. To allow for more spawn points, you could have the planes spawn with their wings folded - but then, what do you do about those that choose the SBD? In a "full real" server, where outside views are disabled, it will be just about impossible to taxi without hitting something if your wings are folded. Would it be possible to enable the outside view of only your plane whenever the wheels are on the ground? This might be analogus to the outside view you get when you bail out. This would go a long way towards helping the pilot out in a multiplay environment. Would it also be possible to adjust the DM so that the slightest touch of a plane's wingtip on another object doesn't result in an explosion?

Oh well, I'm quite confident that you will get these problems sorted out. Getting there is half the fun, eh? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Are ya having fun yet?!!

Razor
IV/JG51 Intelligence Officer
www.jg51.net (http://www.jg51.net)

"Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from poor judgement"

heywooood
05-07-2004, 09:39 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by luthier1:
What I worry about is coming to the forums and seeing threads like these http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

We can't police the behavior of online pilots. Unfortunately if you're flying with idiots and they behave like idiots, you're going to end up in idiotic situations. What else can I say?

If you have some SOLUTIONS I'm certainly all ears, but other than that I certainly have no idea how to get everyone online to intelligently land on carriers in groups.

-------------------------------------------

Like I was saying.... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

Luthier - thanks again for todays' update!!

Capt._Tenneal
05-07-2004, 09:59 AM
It won't be any different from flying online in FB-AEP now. You just have to "shop around" for a server or host that plays honestly or has some amount of discipline .

ElAurens
05-07-2004, 10:59 AM
Well, those of us who fly with a squad, (or in my case a movement) will be on comms and sort it out. Seems simple enough.

A bit of a bummer about the lack of moving ships in DF servers, but totally understandable. Perhaps have the DF map carriers sail in a non-modifiable rectrangular plattern? Or "orbit" an island?

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/avatars/Curtiss_logo.gif

BlitzPig_EL

IV_JG51_Razor
05-07-2004, 01:32 PM
The fact that carriers won't be moving in a DF server is a disapointment for sure, but one I can certainly live with, provided that they are available with wind over the deck. With map icons off it will be challanging enough to find the enemy flat top. With the minimap path off, it will be just right!! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Razor
IV/JG51 Intelligence Officer
www.jg51.net (http://www.jg51.net)

"Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from poor judgement"

LEXX_Luthor
05-07-2004, 05:18 PM
If carriers could move, Sweet would be a volunteer simmer/simmerette who is agreed upon to command strikes and who alone recieves info found by (player flown) recce planes. The "commander" would decide where to sail the carrier and defending ships.

Of course that would take a New Sim designed for this from the first code written, it can't be added onto an old sim (we are getting old you know). Maybe Oleg/Luthier and their carrier sim after BoB and The Meds. It would take alot of programming to really sim warfare beyond just plane FM and the usual stuff.

VW-IceFire
05-07-2004, 05:30 PM
Thing is ...people can be just as dangerous to carriers as they are to standard airstrips. The confines are closer but no less deadly...

Its not surprising that carriers will not move in DF's. Tanks, vehicles, and trains also don't move in DF's.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

james8325
05-07-2004, 05:42 PM
i hope i can land on a carrier within my first couple tries. ive gotten quite good at landing in aep. i can do 3 point landings with most planes, and land a hurricane on a dime.

GR142_Astro
05-07-2004, 06:31 PM
I'll bet most of us will be able to land on the deck while munching a Dorrito with practice. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif I used to successfully bring in the F/A18 Hornet on a regular basis. That sim was cool because the landings were not a given. You always sat up in your seat and got "up on the stick" on final. I hope this is true in PF.

I know I'm looking forward to PF carrier landings for another reason: I ALWAYS come in too fast so I need a tailhook or net even on land. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif My wingman Pipper is retired USN and 142 "Ghost Riders" was his squadron so this should be mucho fun for us. Only thing is, I hope the Hellcat is a worldbeater, or else I'll never get him out of that !@#$%^& Yak3. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

http://members.cox.net/kinetic/SigImages/LockheedLightningMed.jpg

____________________________

"If Adolf Hitler flew in today, they'd send a limosine anyway." ~TheClash~

[This message was edited by GR142_Astro on Sat May 08 2004 at 05:44 PM.]

heywooood
05-07-2004, 06:43 PM
Luthier -

please put tailhook on Yak 3

sincerely, Heywooooooooood

LEXX_Luthor
05-07-2004, 07:54 PM
What kind of training techniques and equipment were used to train carrier pilots to land? A specially equipped runway with arrester gear for training? If that is what they did, Luthier should add one of these to a small onwhine dogfight map so we can practice on land.

--------

However, on the other hand, I hope FP is releaced with NO ONWHINE dogfight maps but all the maps are the size of...CHINA http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Korolov
05-07-2004, 08:05 PM
You willing to chuck the money in to buy everybody a NASA mainframe then, so we can run a China sized map? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

AcesHigh_AVG
05-07-2004, 08:08 PM
I hope we will be able to land on carriers in PF DF rooms, that would be sweet, even if it does cause headaches. Besides I love landing and I think alot of other people do too! I think that in the full real servers it would be more likely that people would fly a pattern.

LEXX_Luthor
05-07-2004, 08:22 PM
Luthier~1 said the Objects like buildings placed on map are what creates the memory problems. You could have a single Europe size map with no buildings (or plam trees lol) and it would run fine. That would be fun to navigate with P~51 and...

...mission builders can place buildings where they want for the appropriate region where their mission takes place and offer their mission files for download. Now we are talking. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Latico
05-07-2004, 09:12 PM
Lexx Luther ~
"What kind of training techniques and equipment were used to train carrier pilots to land? A specially equipped runway with arrester gear for training? If that is what they did, Luthier should add one of these to a small onwhine dogfight map so we can practice on land."

Not sure what they did during WWII, but I suspect that they started with touch and go landings at land bases.

When I was a kid, I spent several weeks one summer at my Uncle's who was a Chief Petty Off. at Millington Naval Base north of Memphis. All day long there were these F-86 sabers that flew over the trailer park my Uncle and Aunt lived in. They were doing T&G at the airbase. Uncle Jack said that the runway had a block marked off on the runway about 50 feet long that the pilots had to touch down within. There was an approach signalman at the edge of the runway.

YOu could do the same thing with FB. The trick is to set your plane down within a specified spot without collapsing your undercarriage. Don't worry about bouncing a bit. All of the old footage of trap landings I've seen, the planes almost always bounced at least once. The main thing is to catch a wire when you touch down on the carrier deck.

IV_JG51_Razor
05-08-2004, 02:14 AM
Try putting a couple of truck convoys with waypoints alongside the runway to simulate a ship underway. Then come overhead, and land on the runway abeam the trucks, say, the third or fourth truck from the back end of the column. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Start out with the A6M2, then try the Brewster Buffalo, then the FW190A-4. Once you think you've got it down pat, grab a D-10 Jug (with Leadspitter's Navy paint job on it just for atmosphere) and put a belly tank on it with 100% fuel. Now you'll know you're in the Navy!! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Razor
IV/JG51 Intelligence Officer
www.jg51.net (http://www.jg51.net)

"Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from poor judgement"

JG7_Rall
05-08-2004, 08:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Latico:
Lexx Luther ~
"What kind of training techniques and equipment were used to train carrier pilots to land? A specially equipped runway with arrester gear for training? If that is what they did, Luthier should add one of these to a small onwhine dogfight map so we can practice on land."

Not sure what they did during WWII, but I suspect that they started with touch and go landings at land bases.

When I was a kid, I spent several weeks one summer at my Uncle's who was a Chief Petty Off. at Millington Naval Base north of Memphis. All day long there were these F-86 sabers that flew over the trailer park my Uncle and Aunt lived in. They were doing T&G at the airbase. Uncle Jack said that the runway had a block marked off on the runway about 50 feet long that the pilots had to touch down within. There was an approach signalman at the edge of the runway.

YOu could do the same thing with FB. The trick is to set your plane down within a specified spot without collapsing your undercarriage. Don't worry about bouncing a bit. All of the old footage of trap landings I've seen, the planes almost always bounced at least once. The main thing is to catch a wire when you touch down on the carrier deck.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, carrier pilots, like all pilots, started landings doing touch and goes. Then they started concentrating at bringing the plane in at a certain airspeed and landing at a specific spot, as stated. But to answer your question lexx, they did indeed have arresing cables across the runway to simulate a carrier landing.

"Son, never ask a man if he is a fighter pilot. If he is, he'll let you know. If he isn't, don't embarrass him."
Badges!? We don't needs no stinkin' badges!

IV_JG51_Razor
05-08-2004, 03:40 PM
Rall, I don't think the Navy used arresting cables on runways for training back in those days. In fact, I don't think they have ever used them for training. They would go out to an outlying field to do what they called FCLPs, which stands for Field Carrier Landing Practice, where they would practice approaching the carrier and landing on a specific spot on the runway utilizing an LSO. This was to get the pilots used to controling their airspeed and altitude during the approach. They still do it today.

To my knowledge, the Navy didn't start putting arresting cables across runways until after jets came along, and then it was for emergencies only. They were strung across each end of the field, attached to destroyer anchor chains. The chain was laid out along each side of the runway so that, as the arresting cable was caught, it would begin dragging the chain along behind it, getting heavier and heavier as it pulled more of the chain out onto the runway behind it. The arresting cable was attached to the approach end of the chain. This became pretty much standard equipment at most military airfields by the 60's. Even the Air Force used them. You will notice that just about every Air Force tactical jet has an arresting hook installed now days. Although, I believe they have gotten a bit more sophisticated now, and have done away with the chain. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Back in the 60's, the Marine Corps experimented with a sort of portable arresting system that they could bring ashore with then in order to set up a forward operations base for jets when operating out of a short field. Don't know whatever happened to that project. The Harrier probably eliminated the need for it.

Razor
IV/JG51 Intelligence Officer
www.jg51.net (http://www.jg51.net)

"Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from poor judgement"

tsisqua
05-08-2004, 04:26 PM
I spent week after week trying to carrier land in CFS3. Believe it, or not, it was some of the best fun that I had. I was in the Aces High squadron at the time, and it took me two tries to carrier qualify. I can only imagine how it will be with PF. At any rate, at least one dogfight map with carriers would make me very happy . . . I guess that people will actually have to learn to take their turn. No more taking off across an apron, running over your mates in the process. No more ignoring other planes at the base when landing. Quite simply, if people want to enjoy this, they are going to have to learn common courtesy . . . oh yeah . . . and they are going to have to learn how to FLY.

Tsisqua

Latico
05-09-2004, 03:43 AM
Tsisqua,

You just had to go a do it, didn't ya. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

You just to go and use the seven words that most combat flight simmers disdain greatly. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

"they are going to have to learn " http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif

It's been my experience so far that it is really hard to get sim pilots to adhere to realistic flight procedures. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

Oh well..........we can hope, I guess. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

NW-LiteBulb
05-09-2004, 06:21 PM
Well i was a CFS2 pilot for a long time befor il2 came out..

I used to fly in a squad called the skuls and we used to get VERY organised carrier ops. we used to have mass landings if we were in shape we could get about 20 hellcats and corsairs aboard in about 5 minuites, Thats about 10 seconds per aircraft per trap.

We could get it down to a fine art. It got to the stage that the whole front of the deckwas covered with parked aircraft and there was just enough space to get a plane down IF you caught the first wire.. If u missed the first wire you would just go charging into parked planes.. Good fun.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif anyway...

But the main point is.. Generaly poeple will lurn to deal with challenges like carrier landings.. Most ppl in CFS2 got to grips with it pretty well.. I certainly hope its a bit harder in PF thought http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.


Hay i just had an idea.. If we get a flyable B25. What about a 'Dolittle Special' version. You know, no armor, guns or bomb sites. Just so we could re-inact the old Dolittle raids http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif. That would make a interesting Coop mission wouldnt it http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Regards

BSS_Vidar
05-09-2004, 07:26 PM
Your worries are over.
Some concerns about landing groups (I presume you mean formations) of aircraft on the flight deck without colliding like a bunch of 12 year olds with a twisty stick.
The Blacksheep will be hosting rooms when PF hits the streets to train anyone or any squadron how to conduct flight ops around the boat.
I have written a comprehensive carrier/formation flight guide which we have been using in CFS2 for the better part of 3 years now. Please feel free to download or print out this guide.

http://www.blacksheep214.com/cq/cq.htm

and some screenshots with some CQ ops

http://www.blacksheep214.com/screenshots/cfs2/page_01.htm

Any questions or comments are welcome. This guide is based off actual flight operations referenced from the US Navy's CV NATOPS Manual. I am a retired Navy aircrewman with over 2000 hours in Vikings and 526 arrested landings. If I or any of the Blacksheep can help, don't hesitate to ask.

S!

BSS_Vidar
Blacksheep Skipper

Latico
05-09-2004, 11:03 PM
That's some good stuff there, Vidar. I saved the Carrier Ops on my puter for later refference.

Have you checked out the Action Reports on the CV6.org site. Quite a few reports from the Bombing and torpedo squadrons that give you a good idea of their tactics during the raids.

Are you guys flying off of an Essex or Midway Class CV? I don't believe the Yorktowns were big enough for the F4U's as I haven't found anything about those planes ever flying off the CV6.

IV_JG51_Razor
05-10-2004, 12:43 AM
I don't think the old Yorktown was still around by the time the Navy started operating Hogs off of carriers. In any case, size of the deck certainly wasn't a problem. By the end of the war, Corsairs were based on Jeep carriers (CVEs) as well as CVLs and almost all of the Essex class ships.

Razor
IV/JG51 Intelligence Officer
www.jg51.net (http://www.jg51.net)

"Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from poor judgement"

Latico
05-10-2004, 10:59 AM
Yes, I know. The Yorktown and Hornet were both gone by the time the Navy started using the Corsairs. What I meant was, that according to the CV6.org site, The Enterprise never carried the F4U. Only planes that seem to have served on her was Wildcats, Hellcats, Dauntlass, Helldivers, Devastators, and Avengers.

BSS_Vidar
05-10-2004, 11:54 AM
I'm not too convinced with the accuracy of Microsofts modeling of aircraft carriers, but I think the US carriers looked pretty close to Essex class flat tops.CFS2's IJN carriers were modeled way undersized. Some of their carriers were significanly longer than the US boats. But Lexington/Saratoga (B4 their demise) were the longest flat tops ever made in that time period. Akagi was huge too.

If anyone is wanting to learn CV NATOPS with the Blacksheep, You WILL be required to be up comms. Zip-lip recovery's will come with time, practice, and experience.

We use Teamspeak with a dedicated server so not to bogg down PC's. Let us know you want to participate, and we'll pass you the IP and password.

BSS_Vidar

BSS_Vidar
05-11-2004, 03:56 PM
Lexx_Luthor,
Training for carrier ops were/are done at a Naval Air Station on a runway with a flightdeck painted on it. I practice doing carrier approaches in my Piper Seneca all the time at the now closed NAS Cecil Field between the ladder lines that are still on the runways http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif
The LSO stands out there at the end of the runway and grades every pass. These sessions are called FCLP's (Field Carrier Landing Practice). You can bounce as much as 15 times in the pattern in one session with as many as 6 aircraft in the pattern with you.(Great spacing/timing practice.)
Arresting at the beach is not important and wasn't/isn't excersised. Shorbase arresting gear is recserved for emergencies (prevent runway over-run), and testing airframe stresses to certify new aircraft designs for carrier ops.
It's the technique behind the ship that gets you on board. The more you do it in repetion, the faster the learning curve, hence, the FCLP pattern at the beach.Veterene pilots spend weeks prepareing, practicing, and regaining currency before even looking at the boat.

S!

BSS_Vidar

Fliger747
05-11-2004, 10:27 PM
The F4U flew off of the CVL's regularly, which were based on 10,000 (nominal) ton cruiser hulls, almost a third the tonnage of an Essex.

I know that VF101(N) flew their F4U 2 Night Corsairs off of the Enterprise, though the Hornet and Yorktown were peacefully at rest by that time.

You can always add a bit of spice to flt ops by flying the F4U-4 for repeated trapps with two (full) drop tanks. The extra weight is quite noticable.

Latico
05-12-2004, 06:41 PM
Ok, I had to go back a check the CV6 site. Yes it appears that there were 4 F4U-2(N)'s flown off the Big E at some point during 16 Jan to 15 July 1944. This was during NAG 10's second deployment. VF10 flew the F6F's. I suspect that the VF-101's assignment to the Enterprise may have been a tempary one. Probably while their own carrier was in for repairs or something like that.