![]() |
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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
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 08:07 PM |
Vitre d'avion de la WWII ? WWII planes panes ? | Dessocea | Military Aviation | 0 | August 15th 03 08:07 PM |