|
Post by Adseria on Apr 5, 2020 15:46:17 GMT -6
I was under the impression that giving carriers flight-deck catapults removed the necessity to turn into the wind for launching aircraft. However, my carriers are still turning into the wind. Was I wrong, or is my carrier design wrong somehow? Or is there some other factor that I'm not aware of?
And no, they aren't only turning into the wind to recover aircraft; I've seen multiple instances of them turning into the wind when the only flight operations in progress were launches (such as launching CAP at the start of a battle).
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Apr 5, 2020 16:00:39 GMT -6
It might have something to do with the number of aircraft you're trying to put up all at once - if you're launching a dozen fighters and bombers for CAP and reconnaissance but only have two catapults, it's probably faster to turn into the wind so that the planes can do a rolling take-off than to put them onto the catapults two at a time and launch them that way.
|
|
|
Post by director on Apr 5, 2020 16:00:42 GMT -6
My understanding of carrier catapults is that the catapults enhance the launching ability but do not replace it. I do not know if carriers can launch aircraft while in port; my belief is that every knot of wind they can generate is useful.
In WW2 the Japanese did not operate catapults, as far as I know, hence the high speed of the 'Shokaku' class. I do not know if they used catapults on their slower carriers like 'Junyo' (the Wiki says not). US carriers were fitted with side-catapults in the hangar-deck openings but these were found unusable in ordinary operations. Many of the tween-wars carriers experimented with multi-level 'flying-off decks' forward and a lot of those had catapults, but the practice was abandoned.
So, in general, my thought is that catapults help, especially with heavily-loaded planes, but do not eliminate the need for good old wind-over-the-deck speed.
|
|
|
Post by Adseria on Apr 5, 2020 16:11:07 GMT -6
It might have something to do with the number of aircraft you're trying to put up all at once - if you're launching a dozen fighters and bombers for CAP and reconnaissance but only have two catapults, it's probably faster to turn into the wind so that the planes can do a rolling take-off than to put them onto the catapults two at a time and launch them that way. It may be faster, but does it excuse turning and charging at full speed directly towards the line-of-battle engagement happening just up-wind? I don't think so.
I'd rather it take slightly longer to launch an attack if it means you don't lose 2 brand new fleet carriers.
Also, I wasn't "launching a dozen fighters for CAP and Recon," certainly not all at once. They turn into the wind, launch a couple of planes, then turn back to their ordered course. Then they repeat the process until all CAP is airborne. Most of the time, I don't even use carrier-borne aircraft for recon; I prefer to use land-based recon, supported by floatplanes.
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Apr 5, 2020 16:20:20 GMT -6
My understanding of carrier catapults is that the catapults enhance the launching ability but do not replace it. I do not know if carriers can launch aircraft while in port; my belief is that every knot of wind they can generate is needed. Generally speaking, every additional knot is useful, but depending on the aircraft and how heavily loaded it is it may not be strictly necessary. For example, the first aircraft to launch from a warship did so from a ship at anchor in harbor with a temporary platform erected on its forward deck. Carriers have never been able to launch air strikes without turning into the wind in the game, and there's nothing in the manual which would suggest that they could do so through the use of catapults - the text says that flight deck catapults allow the launching of fighters on CAP and other aircraft on reconnaissance missions without turning into the wind, both of which are light-load missions. There might be real-world examples of carriers doing it, but it'd be extremely unusual and would likely involve launching aircraft with a particularly light load rather than the sort of load you'd want to send against heavily-armored battleships.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 5, 2020 16:53:40 GMT -6
My understanding of carrier catapults is that the catapults enhance the launching ability but do not replace it. I do not know if carriers can launch aircraft while in port; my belief is that every knot of wind they can generate is useful. In WW2 the Japanese did not operate catapults, as far as I know, hence the high speed of the 'Shokaku' class. I do not know if they used catapults on their slower carriers like 'Junyo' (the Wiki says not). US carriers were fitted with side-catapults in the hangar-deck openings but these were found unusable in ordinary operations. Many of the tween-wars carriers experimented with multi-level 'flying-off decks' forward and a lot of those had catapults, but the practice was abandoned. So, in general, my thought is that catapults help, especially with heavily-loaded planes, but do not eliminate the need for good old wind-over-the-deck speed. The Taiho had two accelerators on her deck until the Japanese developed rocket assisted take-off. Japanese aircraft were specifically developed to be light with a low take-off speed. It wasn't until 1944 and later, that the heavier aircraft and their ordnance loads required accelerators. Just a note: one distinct advantage of the catapult was that the whole task force did not have to change course when the carrier was ready to launch. It also made it easier for the first aircraft in the strike to take-off since they did not have the longest part of the deck to launch from. This was why fighters took off first, then dive bombers, then torpedo bomber.s
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 6, 2020 8:53:25 GMT -6
One of the reasons for the development and use of the accelerators(catapults) was because the bombers got heavier with their ordnance loads. However, the main reason, IMHO, was because we, the US, learned through trial and error that the force that detected the enemy first, launched first and struck first, would win the battle. This was the reason we had a scout bomber squadron included in our air wings on the carriers. They were designed SB in designations. Evidence and factual data proves that in the first four carrier battles of the war, we detected our enemy first, launched first and struck first. In the Battle of Santa Cruz, but were late in launching first, which cost us Hornet. However, it still proved the point. The catapult will decrease launch times for the air wing by clearing the decks faster and the heavier bombers will join up and the air strike will proceed to the target quicker. It also allowed the combat air patrols and inner patrol to be recovered and re-launched faster. With the catapult the time lost trying to get the whole carrier force turned into the wind is eliminated. The carriers notify the plane guards (destroyers), launch the air strike and then proceed to the prearranged point of recovery. This whole procedure is accelerated by the catapult.
|
|
|
Post by rimbecano on Apr 6, 2020 22:42:52 GMT -6
There might be real-world examples of carriers doing it, but it'd be extremely unusual and would likely involve launching aircraft with a particularly light load rather than the sort of load you'd want to send against heavily-armored battleships. [/div][/quote] The thing is, "very unusual" in terms of day-to-day carrier operations, is not necessarily "very unusual" in combat during an all-out war, and given that we only ever see carriers at work in-game during combat, the game probably should implement some emergency scenarios. As to when and whether launches not into the wind are possible, it's highly dependent on the weather, the aircraft, and the initial heading of the carrier relative to the wind. The bare minimum wind speed down the deck you need is determined by the aircraft's stall speed,the carrier's forward speed, and the speed the aircraft can gain in the amount of deck available. There will also be a maximum crosswind the aircraft can take off with. With a performant aircraft in a reasonably strong wind, it actually may be possible to take off with a following wind, but not with the wind on the beam. If these limits (especially the first) are not met by the situation at hand, it will not be possible to launch aircraft, period. Within those limits, there are considerations like how gusty the wind is, how rough the seas are, aircrew experience, etc, that will all affect the accident rate if you're pushing close to the limit. Regulations for everyday flying will give a good enough margin of error to the accident rate low, and doctrine for combat will give a tighter margin, but if the tactical situation is dire enough I imagine that commanders would press as close to the limit as possible.
|
|
|
Post by jwsmith26 on Apr 7, 2020 10:13:19 GMT -6
Regarding the ability to launch planes while at anchor, there is the passage quoted below from Lundstrom's "The First Team" ( page 161 of the PDF version). While at anchor in Nukualofa Roads off Tongatabu in 1942, Lieutenant Commander Pederson, commander of VF-42 on the Yorktown took certain precautions:
"Pederson put two F4F-3s on alert, to be shot off from the hangar deck catapults in the unlikely event the Japanese showed up. "
The catapults mentioned were the hangar deck catapults that were installed in the Yorktown class and the first few ships of the Essex class (so not actually flight deck catapults). These catapults came about largely as a result of the American deck park. They allowed lighter planes such as fighters to be launched directly from the hangar deck without the need to disrupt the deck park and without the need to to have the carrier turn into the wind. They were powerful enough that they could launch a light plane while the ship was anchored. They were eventually removed because they took up too much hangar space, were seldom used and because the pilots really disliked them.
Planes launched by these catapults did not require a head wind, in fact no wind at all was required. They would likely have encountered a strong side wind during the launch, which was probably quite harrowing. There is not much information about these catapults and I'm not sure how powerful they were compared to the flight deck catapults of the time. Most images of these catapults in action show Wildcats being launched but there is one image of a Dauntless being launched. I doubt they could launch torpedo bombers.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 7, 2020 10:17:26 GMT -6
Regarding the ability to launch planes while at anchor, there is the passage quoted below from Lundstrom's "The First Team" ( page 161 of the PDF version). While at anchor in Nukualofa Roads off Tongatabu in 1942, Lieutenant Commander Pederson, commander of VF-42 on the Yorktown took certain precautions: "Pederson put two F4F-3s on alert, to be shot off from the hangar deck catapults in the unlikely event the Japanese showed up. "
The catapults mentioned were the hangar deck catapults that were installed in the Yorktown class and the first few ships of the Essex class (so not actually flight deck catapults). These catapults came about largely as a result of the American deck park. They allowed lighter planes such as fighters to be launched directly from the hangar deck without the need to disrupt the deck park and without the need to to have the carrier turn into the wind. They were powerful enough that they could launch a light plane while the ship was anchored. They were eventually removed because they took up too much hangar space, were seldom used and because the pilots really disliked them. Planes launched by these catapults did not require a head wind, in fact no wind at all was required. They would likely have encountered a strong side wind during the launch, which was probably quite harrowing. There is not much information about these catapults and I'm not sure how powerful they were compared to the flight deck catapults of the time. Most images of these catapults in action show Wildcats being launched but there is one image of a Dauntless being launched. I doubt they could launch torpedo bombers. Those hangar deck catapults were removed in late June 1942 from Hornet and Enterprise. www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/11821/the-crazy-aircraft-carrier-hangar-catapults-of-world-war-ii
|
|
|
Post by enioch on Apr 7, 2020 15:10:38 GMT -6
I was under the impression that giving carriers flight-deck catapults removed the necessity to turn into the wind for launching aircraft. However, my carriers are still turning into the wind. Was I wrong, or is my carrier design wrong somehow? Or is there some other factor that I'm not aware of?
And no, they aren't only turning into the wind to recover aircraft; I've seen multiple instances of them turning into the wind when the only flight operations in progress were launches (such as launching CAP at the start of a battle). Hello there.
From the Manual, p.56:
p.70:
Flight deck catapults do not allow you to launch any plane against the wind. They only allow you to launch fighters on CAP or recon.
What seems to be missing from the manual is the clarification that TBs are too heavy to use catapults. If you're launching TBs (not fighters) on recon, carrier needs to turn into the wind. If you're launching a strike, carrier needs to turn into the wind. If you're recovering, carrier needs to turn into the wind.
|
|
|
Post by jwsmith26 on Apr 7, 2020 16:09:39 GMT -6
Flight deck catapults can launch torpedo bombers.
|
|
|
Post by christian on Apr 8, 2020 5:29:00 GMT -6
Flight deck catapults can launch torpedo bombers. oh really are you sure about this ? the manual states otherwise but the manual might need an update if tbs can be launched via catapults
|
|
|
Post by aeson on Apr 8, 2020 5:52:43 GMT -6
the manual states otherwise but the manual might need an update if tbs can be launched via catapults Page 70 of the manual:
Torpedo bombers can fly reconnaissance missions, and planes flying reconnaissance missions can be launched from catapults without the carrier needing to turn into the wind.
|
|
|
Post by christian on Apr 8, 2020 6:44:09 GMT -6
the manual states otherwise but the manual might need an update if tbs can be launched via catapults Page 70 of the manual:
Torpedo bombers can fly reconnaissance missions, and planes flying reconnaissance missions can be launched from catapults without the carrier needing to turn into the wind.
oh i thought you meant torpedo bombers for strike missions so if they are doing strike missions they cant be launched from catapults is that correct ?
|
|