A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Naval Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

WWII Japanese Carrier Approach?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 26th 07, 09:21 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
W. D. Allen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21
Default WWII Japanese Carrier Approach?

What type approach did Japanese pilots use for landing on carriers during
WWII? Have any other countries since WWII used other than paddles or mirror
type approaches? If so what was their technique?

WDA

end



Ads
  #2  
Old June 27th 07, 05:28 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
Orval Fairbairn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 824
Default WWII Japanese Carrier Approach?

In article ,
"W. D. Allen" wrote:

What type approach did Japanese pilots use for landing on carriers during
WWII? Have any other countries since WWII used other than paddles or mirror
type approaches? If so what was their technique?

WDA

end


They probably used whatever the British used pre-war, as the British
advised the Japanese Naval aviation at that time.
  #3  
Old June 27th 07, 06:51 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
R Leonard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default WWII Japanese Carrier Approach?

On Jun 26, 4:21 pm, "W. D. Allen" wrote:
What type approach did Japanese pilots use for landing on carriers during
WWII? Have any other countries since WWII used other than paddles or mirror
type approaches? If so what was their technique?

WDA

end


The Japanese used a lighting system . . . no LSO.

  #4  
Old June 28th 07, 06:59 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
W. D. Allen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21
Default WWII Japanese Carrier Approach?

Did they do a flat "paddles" pass or a "mirror" glide slope pass?

WDA

end

"R Leonard" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Jun 26, 4:21 pm, "W. D. Allen" wrote:
What type approach did Japanese pilots use for landing on carriers during
WWII? Have any other countries since WWII used other than paddles or
mirror
type approaches? If so what was their technique?

WDA

end


The Japanese used a lighting system . . . no LSO.



  #5  
Old June 29th 07, 01:32 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
R Leonard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default WWII Japanese Carrier Approach?

On Jun 28, 1:59 pm, "W. D. Allen" wrote:
Did they do a flat "paddles" pass or a "mirror" glide slope pass?

WDA

end

"R Leonard" wrote in message

ups.com...



On Jun 26, 4:21 pm, "W. D. Allen" wrote:
What type approach did Japanese pilots use for landing on carriers during
WWII? Have any other countries since WWII used other than paddles or
mirror
type approaches? If so what was their technique?


WDA


end


The Japanese used a lighting system . . . no LSO.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


The Japanese lighting system for landing: Very briefly, positioned
along the outer edge of the flight deck, on both sides, was a bank of
2 red lights. About 10-15 meters forward of them was a bank of 4
green lights. Lights were of variable intensity, could be adjusted
for the glide angle for type of aircraft approaching, and had
reflectors so as to concentrate their beam. These lights allowed
approaching pilots to judge whether or not they were on the correct
glide path for landing, generally between 5 and 6 degrees. On the
correct path the pilot would see the green lights sitting directly
atop the red. If the green was somewhere above immediately atop the
red, then he was too high. If the pilot saw only red, or, worse,
green below red, then he was too low. A similar set up was on the
forward edges of the flight deck for recoveries over the bow when
necessary. Various other optical clues (paint, deck lighting, etc.)
showed the pilot where he was in relation to the center of the deck
and a lighting signal system on the island told him the ship's speed.
The decision to land was up to the pilot based on his visual input of
the situation. There was one crewman assigned to signal a wave off in
the event there was something obviously wrong . . . no landing
gear . . . no hook . . . fouled deck . . . that sort. This he did by
running out on the deck and waving a flag to attract the pilot's
attention.

There is a much better description in Jon Parshall and Tony Tully's
"Shattered Sword".

Rich

  #6  
Old June 29th 07, 05:44 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
Mike Kanze
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default WWII Japanese Carrier Approach?

Sounds a bit like the FAA's Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VASI) system.

--
Mike Kanze

"Technology is a way of organizing the universe so that man doesn't have to experience it."

- Max Frisch

"R Leonard" wrote in message oups.com...
On Jun 28, 1:59 pm, "W. D. Allen" wrote:
Did they do a flat "paddles" pass or a "mirror" glide slope pass?

WDA

end

"R Leonard" wrote in message

ups.com...



On Jun 26, 4:21 pm, "W. D. Allen" wrote:
What type approach did Japanese pilots use for landing on carriers during
WWII? Have any other countries since WWII used other than paddles or
mirror
type approaches? If so what was their technique?


WDA


end


The Japanese used a lighting system . . . no LSO.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


The Japanese lighting system for landing: Very briefly, positioned
along the outer edge of the flight deck, on both sides, was a bank of
2 red lights. About 10-15 meters forward of them was a bank of 4
green lights. Lights were of variable intensity, could be adjusted
for the glide angle for type of aircraft approaching, and had
reflectors so as to concentrate their beam. These lights allowed
approaching pilots to judge whether or not they were on the correct
glide path for landing, generally between 5 and 6 degrees. On the
correct path the pilot would see the green lights sitting directly
atop the red. If the green was somewhere above immediately atop the
red, then he was too high. If the pilot saw only red, or, worse,
green below red, then he was too low. A similar set up was on the
forward edges of the flight deck for recoveries over the bow when
necessary. Various other optical clues (paint, deck lighting, etc.)
showed the pilot where he was in relation to the center of the deck
and a lighting signal system on the island told him the ship's speed.
The decision to land was up to the pilot based on his visual input of
the situation. There was one crewman assigned to signal a wave off in
the event there was something obviously wrong . . . no landing
gear . . . no hook . . . fouled deck . . . that sort. This he did by
running out on the deck and waving a flag to attract the pilot's
attention.

There is a much better description in Jon Parshall and Tony Tully's
"Shattered Sword".

Rich

  #7  
Old June 29th 07, 05:47 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
R Leonard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default WWII Japanese Carrier Approach?

On Jun 29, 12:44 pm, "Mike Kanze" wrote:
Sounds a bit like the FAA's Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VASI) system.

--
Mike Kanze


Hey Mike!

Not sure when the FAA started theirs. The Japanese system was in use
as far back as 1932, I believe.

Rich

  #8  
Old June 29th 07, 07:01 PM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
W. D. Allen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21
Default WWII Japanese Carrier Approach?

Sounds similar to the VFR panel system used at Crows Landing, Miramar, etc.,
back in the 1950s where two sign boards painted with horizontal bars, were
aligned by an approaching pilot to assist in achieving the correct glide
slope angle for carrier landing practice.

WDA

end

"R Leonard" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jun 28, 1:59 pm, "W. D. Allen" wrote:
Did they do a flat "paddles" pass or a "mirror" glide slope pass?

WDA

end

"R Leonard" wrote in message

ups.com...



On Jun 26, 4:21 pm, "W. D. Allen" wrote:
What type approach did Japanese pilots use for landing on carriers
during
WWII? Have any other countries since WWII used other than paddles or
mirror
type approaches? If so what was their technique?


WDA


end


The Japanese used a lighting system . . . no LSO.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


The Japanese lighting system for landing: Very briefly, positioned
along the outer edge of the flight deck, on both sides, was a bank of
2 red lights. About 10-15 meters forward of them was a bank of 4
green lights. Lights were of variable intensity, could be adjusted
for the glide angle for type of aircraft approaching, and had
reflectors so as to concentrate their beam. These lights allowed
approaching pilots to judge whether or not they were on the correct
glide path for landing, generally between 5 and 6 degrees. On the
correct path the pilot would see the green lights sitting directly
atop the red. If the green was somewhere above immediately atop the
red, then he was too high. If the pilot saw only red, or, worse,
green below red, then he was too low. A similar set up was on the
forward edges of the flight deck for recoveries over the bow when
necessary. Various other optical clues (paint, deck lighting, etc.)
showed the pilot where he was in relation to the center of the deck
and a lighting signal system on the island told him the ship's speed.
The decision to land was up to the pilot based on his visual input of
the situation. There was one crewman assigned to signal a wave off in
the event there was something obviously wrong . . . no landing
gear . . . no hook . . . fouled deck . . . that sort. This he did by
running out on the deck and waving a flag to attract the pilot's
attention.

There is a much better description in Jon Parshall and Tony Tully's
"Shattered Sword".

Rich



  #9  
Old June 30th 07, 01:10 AM posted to rec.aviation.military.naval
R Leonard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default WWII Japanese Carrier Approach?

Jeez, the only boards I remember ever seeing painted were on the roof
of an old warehouse on the approach to Oceana . . .

"WHEELS!"

Of course, in my case, my point of view was always from the ground.

Regards,

Rich
,
On Jun 29, 2:01 pm, "W. D. Allen" wrote:
Sounds similar to the VFR panel system used at Crows Landing, Miramar, etc.,
back in the 1950s where two sign boards painted with horizontal bars, were
aligned by an approaching pilot to assist in achieving the correct glide
slope angle for carrier landing practice.

WDA

end

"R Leonard" wrote in message

oups.com...



On Jun 28, 1:59 pm, "W. D. Allen" wrote:
Did they do a flat "paddles" pass or a "mirror" glide slope pass?


WDA


end


"R Leonard" wrote in message


roups.com...


On Jun 26, 4:21 pm, "W. D. Allen" wrote:
What type approach did Japanese pilots use for landing on carriers
during
WWII? Have any other countries since WWII used other than paddles or
mirror
type approaches? If so what was their technique?


WDA


end


The Japanese used a lighting system . . . no LSO.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


The Japanese lighting system for landing: Very briefly, positioned
along the outer edge of the flight deck, on both sides, was a bank of
2 red lights. About 10-15 meters forward of them was a bank of 4
green lights. Lights were of variable intensity, could be adjusted
for the glide angle for type of aircraft approaching, and had
reflectors so as to concentrate their beam. These lights allowed
approaching pilots to judge whether or not they were on the correct
glide path for landing, generally between 5 and 6 degrees. On the
correct path the pilot would see the green lights sitting directly
atop the red. If the green was somewhere above immediately atop the
red, then he was too high. If the pilot saw only red, or, worse,
green below red, then he was too low. A similar set up was on the
forward edges of the flight deck for recoveries over the bow when
necessary. Various other optical clues (paint, deck lighting, etc.)
showed the pilot where he was in relation to the center of the deck
and a lighting signal system on the island told him the ship's speed.
The decision to land was up to the pilot based on his visual input of
the situation. There was one crewman assigned to signal a wave off in
the event there was something obviously wrong . . . no landing
gear . . . no hook . . . fouled deck . . . that sort. This he did by
running out on the deck and waving a flag to attract the pilot's
attention.


There is a much better description in Jon Parshall and Tony Tully's
"Shattered Sword".


Rich- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -



 




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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Under Entirely New Management, pt 2 - Japanese P-40 b.jpg (1/1) Mitchell Holman Aviation Photos 0 November 8th 06 01:35 PM
Under Entirely New Management, pt 2 - Japanese P-40 a.jpg (1/1) Mitchell Holman Aviation Photos 0 November 8th 06 01:35 PM
Completing the Non-precision approach as a Visual Approach John Clonts Instrument Flight Rules 45 November 20th 03 06:20 AM
Vitre d'avion de la WWII ? WWII planes panes ? Dessocea Simulators 0 August 15th 03 07:07 PM
Vitre d'avion de la WWII ? WWII planes panes ? Dessocea Military Aviation 0 August 15th 03 07:07 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2022 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.