Tarawa landing . Why land like helicopter? - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-07-2018, 11:36 AM   #1
DmitriKozlowsky
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Northbrook, Ill USA. Haifa, Israel
Posts: 121
Default Tarawa landing . Why land like helicopter?

I get it, that real world NATOPS and USMC Harrier and F-35B Squadrons SOPs dictate a helicopter like approach and landing. Approach to vessel's port (aviator's starboard) side, stabilize at 50 feet above deck, then little side shimmy to stabilize 50' above landing station. Then land vertically, with respect to vessel, around 12-20 knots . Vessel usually steaming into wind, to provide 20-30 knots wind over deck. OK so that is SOP.
I am questioning this process, when it appears , that approaching from vessel's stern, and landing with 5-10 kn IAS using runline, is easier quicker and safer.
DmitriKozlowsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2018, 11:56 AM   #2
ZeroReady
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 55
Default

Not positive, but could it be because the Harrier's wheel brakes are barely functional and the suspension isn't built to handle slamming down on a pitching deck at speed? Just safer and easier on the jet to come down vertically?
ZeroReady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2018, 11:58 AM   #3
USSInchon
Member
 
USSInchon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 328
Default

It is possible to do it the way you suggest, and in certain cases it is done. However, during Case I operations it allows for harrier landings while helicopters are staged on the starboard spots. This means that the Harriers can land be rearmed while helicopters/Ospreys are ferrying Grunts and supplies to the beach without having to protect for a long rollout by a Harrier.
USSInchon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2018, 12:28 PM   #4
DmitriKozlowsky
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Northbrook, Ill USA. Haifa, Israel
Posts: 121
Default

USSInchon. Thats sounds good. But it would not preclude stern straight approach and landing almost vertically with 5 knot ground(deck) speed, on strern station. It takes minimal room, and leaves plenty space for rotary operations. There is no need to slam onto deck with F/A-18 VV .
DmitriKozlowsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2018, 02:16 PM   #5
Shadow_1stVFW
Member
 
Shadow_1stVFW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 436
Default

In the Sim, sure, why not.

In real life
What happens if the brakes fail on roll out?
What happens if a tire blows?
What new approach system will be installed on the ship to accommodate this?
What about all the lessons learned during WWII on straight in approaches to ships?

I could go on.

The ship is designed to accept aircraft in that manner.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
__________________
Aurora R7 || i7K 8700K || 2TB 7200RPM SATA 6Gb/s || 2TB M.2 PCIe x4 SSD || GTX 1080 Ti with 11GB GDDR5X || Windows 10 Pro || 32GB Dual Channel DDR4 at 2667MHz
Shadow_1stVFW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2018, 09:11 AM   #6
Nealius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 2,446
Default

There is also footage showing recoveries of multiple jets parking along the tram line. If you're #2 or #3 and you come in for a rolling landing, you'll smack into the guy parked in front of you. There's simply not as much deck space as a full-fledged carrier.
__________________
YouTube Channel: "Clutch"

ASUS Z170 | i5-7600 | GTX1050Ti | 16GB DDR4 | Windows 10
Nealius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2018, 05:54 PM   #7
CoBlue
Member
 
CoBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 791
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadow_1stVFW View Post
In real life
What about all the lessons learned during WWII on straight in approaches to ships?
I was wondering why the tight CASE I pattern is preferred instead of straight in approaches on the carrier, thinking F-18 here. What was the disadvantages of straight in approaches vs. CASE I pattern?
__________________
Intel i7 7700K @4.5, ASUS Z270A, NZXT Kraken X61, ROG GTX 1070 O8G STRIX, CRUCIAL DDR4 16GB, SSD M.2 250GB, SSD 250GB, HD 2TB, W10Pro x64, ASUS VG248QE 24", TrackIr5, Logitech X-56.
CoBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2018, 06:28 PM   #8
Shadow_1stVFW
Member
 
Shadow_1stVFW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 436
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CoBlue View Post
I was wondering why the tight CASE I pattern is preferred instead of straight in approaches on the carrier, thinking F-18 here. What was the disadvantages of straight in approaches vs. CASE I pattern?
By "straight in" I meant deck style. I should have been more clear. I was specifically talking about the invention of the angled deck.

But, to answer your question the Case I approach is extremely efficient. I allows pilots and controllers to conduct radio silent recoveries, it's simple, and can be translated to ground based airfields which simplifies pilot training.
__________________
Aurora R7 || i7K 8700K || 2TB 7200RPM SATA 6Gb/s || 2TB M.2 PCIe x4 SSD || GTX 1080 Ti with 11GB GDDR5X || Windows 10 Pro || 32GB Dual Channel DDR4 at 2667MHz
Shadow_1stVFW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2018, 06:30 PM   #9
Repth
Junior Member
 
Repth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Arizona
Posts: 97
Default

The CASE I pattern is a modified left hand traffic pattern similar to what you have at your local small airport. It simplifies the work for the controllers and allows proper separation between landing aircraft, Whereas if planes were to come straight in they could potentially be arriving from anywhere in a 180 degree arc and collisions could occur. Using CASE I one ensures that all aircraft are approaching the runway or landing area from the same direction.

Edit: Sniped by Shadow

Last edited by Repth; 11-09-2018 at 06:32 PM.
Repth is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:17 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.