Jump to content

Shipborne rolling vertical landing: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
F-35B: official source not social media
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Shipborne rolling vertical landing''' ('''SRVL''') is a method used to land a [[V/STOL]] aircraft that uses both the vertical [[thrust]] from the jet engine and [[lift (force)|lift]] from the wings.
'''Shipborne rolling vertical landing''' ('''SRVL''') is a method used to land a [[V/STOL]] aircraft that uses both the vertical [[thrust]] from the jet engine and [[lift (force)|lift]] from the wings.


A V/STOL aircraft normally either lands vertically or it makes a conventional runway landing. For a vertical landing it uses downward thrust from the [[Lift jet|lift fan]] and/or rotated [[Propelling nozzle|jet nozzle(s)]], while for a runway landing the jet nozzle(s) are pointed rearward. With a rolling vertical landing the aircraft uses downward jet thrust to hover while it is still moving fast enough to also generate wing lift. This allows for a rolling landing with a significantly reduced approach speed and landing distance.
A V/STOL aircraft normally either lands vertically or it makes a conventional runway landing. For a vertical landing it uses downward thrust from the [[Lift jet|lift fan]] and/or rotated [[Propelling nozzle|jet nozzle(s)]], while for a runway landing the jet nozzle(s) are pointed rearward. With a rolling vertical landing the aircraft uses downward jet thrust to fly slowly forward while it is still moving fast enough to also generate wing lift. This allows for a rolling landing with a significantly reduced approach speed and landing distance. This landing method was created because hovering and true vertical landings are impossible over and on moving vessels.


With an SRVL manoeuvre, a V/STOL aircraft can make a rolling landing on an [[aircraft carrier]] and come to an effective stop with the [[disc brakes]] in the [[landing gear]]. Unlike a conventional rolling landing on a carrier, this does not require the use of an [[Arresting gear|arrestor wire]] and [[tailhook]]. The operational advantage of this technique is that it can increase the landing payload capacity of a V/STOL aircraft, which can be restricted when it lands vertically. It can also reduce the level of wear on the lift engines and extend their operational life. Similarly, it can reduce the amount of wear upon the deck surface of a carrier caused by the downward jet exhaust from vertical landings.
With an SRVL manoeuvre, a V/STOL aircraft can make a rolling landing on an [[aircraft carrier]] and come to an effective stop with the [[disc brakes]] in the [[landing gear]]. Unlike a conventional rolling landing on a carrier, this does not require the use of an [[Arresting gear|arrestor wire]] and [[tailhook]]. The operational advantage of this technique is that it can increase the landing payload capacity of a V/STOL aircraft, which can be restricted when it lands vertically. It can also reduce the level of wear on the lift engines and extend their operational life. Similarly, it can reduce the amount of wear upon the deck surface of a carrier caused by the downward jet exhaust from vertical landings. The primary "advantage", however, is that neither the aircraft or the carrier have to come to a standstill with zero forward speed for aircraft recovery.

The operational disadvantage is that a damaged aircraft and/or injured pilot unable to "match speed" with the carrier and/or maintain control during or reach the correct low speed for a "rolling landing" cannot be safely and quickly recovered. Unlike modern CATOBAR carriers and aircraft with instrument landing systems, arresting wires as well as barriers available to stop aircraft and an open deck moving full-sized into any available headwind effectively reducing the aircraft's "stall speed" relative to the ship by dozens of knots, a "rolling landing" with a V/STOL aircraft depends entirely on the aircraft and pilot successfully landing on a low-speed, ski jump-blocked deck with limited and/or unstable airflow back over the flight deck and potentially damaged or disabled brakes to get the aircraft "safely" recovered or the ship itself coming to a halt or dramatically reducing speed to allow the aircraft to "hover" prior to landing.

Regardless, while modern CATOBAR carriers can and do conduct launches and recoveries simultaneously in all weather and light and sea conditions and "lose" an aircraft during recovery even less frequently than during launch, ski-jump carriers and V/STOL aircraft have a limited, fair-weather and spotty history of flight operations in "combat" conditions at best.

Explaining why the UK - supposed inventor of the aircraft carrier and pioneer of "combat" V/STOL and STOVL aicraft in general and carrier-based operations in particular - is only slowly, intermittently and nearly imperceptibly "developing" it's carrier V/STOL capability with "help" from the United States Navy, which apart from being the "parent force" of the USMC, has no history or experience operating V/STOL aircraft and none at all with ski-jump carriers. As long as the RN plays the "rookie" and appears to "need" the U.S. to operate its "supercarriers" while the USMC and its F-35Bs and "baby carriers" fill in for the UK and perform its "NATO" role while the RN gets its carrier(s) "operational", the UK can blame its failures on the USN and take full credit for its "achievements" such as finally getting a carrier "operational" without losing any aircraft and/or aircrews belonging to the UK.

"Training" just off the east coast of the U.S. in early to mid-Fall when the Atlantic and North American weather are typically at their calmest will do nothing whatsoever to prepare the RN for carrier aviation in the North Sea or South Atlantic in winter any other "rough" seas and/or inclement weather, but having its "supercarriers" docked in a home port they can only navigate in and out of in "perfect" sea, tide, wind and water depth conditions with assistance from a fleet of tugs and only after "lowering" various equipment on top the island superstructurers and then having to coordinate with the RAF and/or RN "Fleet Air Arm" to actually deploy carriers with "combat" airplanes on board will definitely increase the chances any NATO "conflict" will be "resolved" long before the UK "supercarrier" can sail into "harm's way".

Even though the UK currently has the "world's largest" fleet of F-35Bs and a brand-new purpose-built "supercarrier" to deploy them on while the USMC has only 10 operational aircraft on a converted amphibious landing support ship and has never operated it's own aircraft carriers ever, the USMC has deployed its carrier and aircraft to the Persian Gulf and successfully carried out "combat" operations against "ISIS" there at the same time the UK deployed its "supercarrier" to Florida, Virginia, Maryland and New York to conduct "flight operations" and "training" with two "UK" F-35Bs allegedly conducting 500 successful landings after inventing the "rolling" landing described here over several days during a multi-month "deployment" during which the UK "supercarrier" Departed the UK bound for Patuxent River Naval Air Station in Maryland, USA and first made landfall on the U.S. east coast weeks later in...Florida.
After several days of "intensive" training and practice in how to land and park V/STOL aircraft on a "supercarrier" and at least three "visits" to U.S. ports to no doubt "show the flag", the HMS Queen Elizabeth eventually returned to its "home port" of Plymouth for several months before and sans aircraft and ultimately was sent to Rosyth for "scheduled maintenance" in dry dock next to its "sister ship" and after being "committed" to a deployment to the South China Sea to "show the flag" and exercise "freedom of navigation" rights in Chinese-claimed "territorial waters" just as soon as it's "operational". Which could be as early as "2020". Or not.


==History==
==History==

Revision as of 11:08, 5 May 2019

Shipborne rolling vertical landing (SRVL) is a method used to land a V/STOL aircraft that uses both the vertical thrust from the jet engine and lift from the wings.

A V/STOL aircraft normally either lands vertically or it makes a conventional runway landing. For a vertical landing it uses downward thrust from the lift fan and/or rotated jet nozzle(s), while for a runway landing the jet nozzle(s) are pointed rearward. With a rolling vertical landing the aircraft uses downward jet thrust to fly slowly forward while it is still moving fast enough to also generate wing lift. This allows for a rolling landing with a significantly reduced approach speed and landing distance. This landing method was created because hovering and true vertical landings are impossible over and on moving vessels.

With an SRVL manoeuvre, a V/STOL aircraft can make a rolling landing on an aircraft carrier and come to an effective stop with the disc brakes in the landing gear. Unlike a conventional rolling landing on a carrier, this does not require the use of an arrestor wire and tailhook. The operational advantage of this technique is that it can increase the landing payload capacity of a V/STOL aircraft, which can be restricted when it lands vertically. It can also reduce the level of wear on the lift engines and extend their operational life. Similarly, it can reduce the amount of wear upon the deck surface of a carrier caused by the downward jet exhaust from vertical landings. The primary "advantage", however, is that neither the aircraft or the carrier have to come to a standstill with zero forward speed for aircraft recovery.

The operational disadvantage is that a damaged aircraft and/or injured pilot unable to "match speed" with the carrier and/or maintain control during or reach the correct low speed for a "rolling landing" cannot be safely and quickly recovered. Unlike modern CATOBAR carriers and aircraft with instrument landing systems, arresting wires as well as barriers available to stop aircraft and an open deck moving full-sized into any available headwind effectively reducing the aircraft's "stall speed" relative to the ship by dozens of knots, a "rolling landing" with a V/STOL aircraft depends entirely on the aircraft and pilot successfully landing on a low-speed, ski jump-blocked deck with limited and/or unstable airflow back over the flight deck and potentially damaged or disabled brakes to get the aircraft "safely" recovered or the ship itself coming to a halt or dramatically reducing speed to allow the aircraft to "hover" prior to landing.

Regardless, while modern CATOBAR carriers can and do conduct launches and recoveries simultaneously in all weather and light and sea conditions and "lose" an aircraft during recovery even less frequently than during launch, ski-jump carriers and V/STOL aircraft have a limited, fair-weather and spotty history of flight operations in "combat" conditions at best.

Explaining why the UK - supposed inventor of the aircraft carrier and pioneer of "combat" V/STOL and STOVL aicraft in general and carrier-based operations in particular - is only slowly, intermittently and nearly imperceptibly "developing" it's carrier V/STOL capability with "help" from the United States Navy, which apart from being the "parent force" of the USMC, has no history or experience operating V/STOL aircraft and none at all with ski-jump carriers. As long as the RN plays the "rookie" and appears to "need" the U.S. to operate its "supercarriers" while the USMC and its F-35Bs and "baby carriers" fill in for the UK and perform its "NATO" role while the RN gets its carrier(s) "operational", the UK can blame its failures on the USN and take full credit for its "achievements" such as finally getting a carrier "operational" without losing any aircraft and/or aircrews belonging to the UK.

"Training" just off the east coast of the U.S. in early to mid-Fall when the Atlantic and North American weather are typically at their calmest will do nothing whatsoever to prepare the RN for carrier aviation in the North Sea or South Atlantic in winter any other "rough" seas and/or inclement weather, but having its "supercarriers" docked in a home port they can only navigate in and out of in "perfect" sea, tide, wind and water depth conditions with assistance from a fleet of tugs and only after "lowering" various equipment on top the island superstructurers and then having to coordinate with the RAF and/or RN "Fleet Air Arm" to actually deploy carriers with "combat" airplanes on board will definitely increase the chances any NATO "conflict" will be "resolved" long before the UK "supercarrier" can sail into "harm's way".

Even though the UK currently has the "world's largest" fleet of F-35Bs and a brand-new purpose-built "supercarrier" to deploy them on while the USMC has only 10 operational aircraft on a converted amphibious landing support ship and has never operated it's own aircraft carriers ever, the USMC has deployed its carrier and aircraft to the Persian Gulf and successfully carried out "combat" operations against "ISIS" there at the same time the UK deployed its "supercarrier" to Florida, Virginia, Maryland and New York to conduct "flight operations" and "training" with two "UK" F-35Bs allegedly conducting 500 successful landings after inventing the "rolling" landing described here over several days during a multi-month "deployment" during which the UK "supercarrier" Departed the UK bound for Patuxent River Naval Air Station in Maryland, USA and first made landfall on the U.S. east coast weeks later in...Florida. After several days of "intensive" training and practice in how to land and park V/STOL aircraft on a "supercarrier" and at least three "visits" to U.S. ports to no doubt "show the flag", the HMS Queen Elizabeth eventually returned to its "home port" of Plymouth for several months before and sans aircraft and ultimately was sent to Rosyth for "scheduled maintenance" in dry dock next to its "sister ship" and after being "committed" to a deployment to the South China Sea to "show the flag" and exercise "freedom of navigation" rights in Chinese-claimed "territorial waters" just as soon as it's "operational". Which could be as early as "2020". Or not.

History

Harrier

VAAC Harrier

An SRVL development program was undertaken with the Harrier by the UK defence manufacturer, Qinetiq.[1] In 2007 the company used their Vectored-thrust Aircraft Advanced Control (VAAC) Harrier test aircraft to demonstrate the feasibility of the landing technique on the French navy carrier Charles de Gaulle. A series of landing approach trials were also flown with the Royal Navy carrier HMS Illustrious in 2008. The carrier was fitted with a visual landing aid called a “Bedford Array”, which provides glidepath information to the pilot through a helmet-mounted display.

Yak-38

The Yak-38 used rolling landings on Soviet Navy carriers in the 1980s

The Yak-38 "Forger" became operational with the Soviet Navy in the early 1970s. The aircraft was initially flown from carriers using VTOL only, but in the early 1980s trials were made with rolling landings on the Kiev class aircraft carriers.[2] The Yak-38 had a separate pair of lift engines with a very high fuel consumption, which reduced the range when it was flown with vertical take offs and landings. SRVL landings gave an improved range performance and were conducted with the use of a safety net. The aircraft was withdrawn from service in the 1990s.

F-35B

The F-35B will use SRVL landings with the Royal Navy

SRVL landing is under development for use with the F-35B when it enters service with the Royal Navy in 2018.[3] The aircraft will operate in the STOVL mode on the new Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers. Rolling landings will enable the F-35B to land on these carriers with an increased weapon and fuel load and will use the aircraft's computer controlled disc brakes. On the weekend of 13/14 October 2018, the Royal Navy announced that British test pilot Peter Wilson made history when he conducted the first ever shipborne rolling vertical landing (SRVL) in an F-35B (test aircraft BF-04) onto HMS Queen Elizabeth.[4]

V-22

In October 2015, NAVAIR tested rolling landings and takeoffs with the Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey tiltrotor on a carrier, preparing for Carrier onboard delivery.[5]

References

  1. ^ "Qinetiq-led team demonstrates carrier landing system for JSF". flightglobal.com. Retrieved 10 June 2012. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  2. ^ "f-35 stovl has soviet roots yak 38 a". www.defence.pk. Retrieved 10 June 2012. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)[unreliable source?]
  3. ^ "Lockheed gets funds for UK F-35 landing modification". flightglobal.com. Retrieved 10 June 2012. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  4. ^ "F-35 pilot makes history with revolutionary method of landing jets on HMS Queen Elizabeth". Royal Navy. 15 October 2018. Retrieved 15 October 2018.
  5. ^ Tony Osborne (12 November 2015). "V-22 Osprey Testing Could Lead To Higher Takeoff Weights". Aviation Week.