How Difficult Is Landing A Fighter Plane On A Moving Ship?

[rangerrebew]

How Difficult Is Landing A Fighter Plane On A Moving Ship?
Story by Avinash Chikte • 7h ago

 
Indian Navy’s MiG 29 carried out a first ever night landing on INS Vikrant.

Heartiest congratulations to the pilot, and to the entire team.

What’s the big deal? Let me explain.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/how-difficult-is-landing-a-fighter-plane-on-a-moving-ship/ar-AA1bN9Tv?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=66124c3ac9ca458e95732dad0d500fd5&ei=22

[PeteS in CA]

We ‘land-lubbers,’ as the Navy likes to call us, take off and land on runways that are about 2600 meters (8500 feet) long, and INS Vikrant is 262 meters (860 feet).
...
A modern fighter lands at about 250 KMPH, which is 70 meters per second.

That means at the landing speed, the plane will cross the entire length of the ship in less than 4 seconds!

There are 3 arrester wires on the deck, and the aircraft has a hook behind the landing gear. The hook engages the wire, and the wire stops the aircraft, rather violently.

Vikrant is also 62 meters (203 ft) wide. The length of the zone with arrester wires is just a part (small?) of the total length, so a landing has to be pretty precise aboard a relatively small deck (by way of a modern comparison, a Nimitz class carrier is 1,092 feet long and 252 feet wide). An Essex class (WW2 vintage!) carrier with the angled deck upgrade would be similar in landing area size to Vikrant.

And then there's this, "first ever night landing". Oceans don't have street lights, obviously. The only lights are on the plane and on the ship. And while the lights aboard the ship are helpful/essential, I'm pretty sure they mess with the pilot's depth perception.

Vikrant is the first carrier built in Indian shipyards. It'll be interesting to see how its reliability compares to Russia's Admiral Kuznetsov (woof! woof!) and China's Fujian (or France's Charles De Gaulle, woof! woof!).

[Elderberry]

Our compartment on the Lex was right under the 4th arresting gear cable. When that first jet on nite ops landed, when its tailhook hit the deck, I've seen poker chips fly from a greenhorn.

[rangerrebew]

Our compartment on the Lex was right under the 4th arresting gear cable. When that first jet on nite ops landed, when its tailhook hit the deck, I've seen poker chips fly from a greenhorn.

I was under number 3 on the Ranger, and after about 2 days at sea, we would have to get the electricians in to rewire our lights because they had been shaken loose and were just hanging.

[PeteS in CA]

Our compartment on the Lex was right under the 4th arresting gear cable. When that first jet on nite ops landed, when its tailhook hit the deck, I've seen poker chips fly from a greenhorn.

IIRC, the Lexington was an Essex class carrier, "small" in the age of jets. Essex class carriers were relegated to secondary roles and retired as jet attack and fighter planes grew larger and heavier.

[Elderberry]

IIRC, the Lexington was an Essex class carrier, "small" in the age of jets. Essex class carriers were relegated to secondary roles and retired as jet attack and fighter planes grew larger and heavier.

Yes, the Lex was smaller than current carriers. So pilots had to know their stuff when certifying on the Training Carrier CVT16. It also became one of the top public relation ships of the Navy. Russian and other foreign officers were often touring our, as told, "State of the Art" US Carrier.

[PeteS in CA]

Y... It also became one of the top public relation ships of the Navy. Russian and other foreign officers were often touring our, as told, "State of the Art" US Carrier.

  That the Essexes were useful as long as they were says much of ship planning in WW2, but the next class, the Midways were almost double their size and almost served in WW2.