DOCSLIB.ORG

Vpa Report 2002-12-05

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Vpa Report 2002-12-05 UNCLASSIFIED NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER AIRCRAFT DIVISION PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND TECHNICAL REPORT REPORT NO: NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 REVIEW OF THE CARRIER APPROACH CRITERIA FOR CARRIER-BASED AIRCRAFT –PHASE I; FINAL REPORT by Thomas Rudowsky Stephen Cook Marshall Hynes Robert Heffley Melvin Luter Thomas Lawrence CAPT Rober Niewoehner Douglas Bollman Page Senn Dr. Wayne Durham Henry Beaufrere Michael Yokell Albert Sonntag 10 October 2002 Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. UNCLASSIFIED DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER AIRCRAFT DIVISION PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 10 October 2002 REVIEW OF THE CARRIER APPROACH CRITERIA FOR CARRIER-BASED AIRCRAFT - PHASE I; FINAL REPORT by Thomas Rudowsky Stephen Cook Marshall Hynes Robert Heffley Melvin Luter Thomas Lawrence CAPT Rober Niewoehner Douglas Bollman Page Senn Dr. Wayne Durham Henry Beaufrere Michael Yokell Albert Sonntag RELEASED BY: 10 Oct 2002 JOHN W. CLARK, JR. / AIR-4.3.2 / DATE Head, Aeromechanics Division Air Vehicle Department Naval Air Systems Command NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 1. REPORT DATE 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED 10 October 2002 Technical Report November 1999 – October 2001 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER N/A Review of the Carrier Approach Criteria for Carrier-Based Aircraft – Phase 5b. GRANT NUMBER I; Final Report 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER Thomas Rudowsky, Stephen Cook, Marshall Hynes, Robert Heffley, 5e. TASK NUMBER Melvin Luter, Thomas Lawrence, CAPT Rober Niewoehner, Douglas Bollman, Page Senn, Dr. Wayne Durham, Henry Beaufrere, Michael 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER Yokell, Albert Sonntag 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER Naval Air Systems Command NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 48110 Shaw Road, Unit 5, Suite 1320B Patuxent River, Maryland 20670-1906 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S) ADDRESS(ES) NAVAIRSYSCOM, PEO(JSF) Naval Air Systems Command 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S) 48110 Shaw Road, Unit 5, Suite 1320B Patuxent River, Maryland 20670-1906 12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 14. ABSTRACT The approach speed criteria used in the design and development of carrier-based aircraft was investigated. This report provides a historical review, analysis of requirements, and an analysis of legacy aircraft relative to the approach speed criteria. The relevancy and adequacy of the carrier approach speed criteria are assessed. Recommendations for future investigations and assessment are presented. 15. SUBJECT TERMS Carrier Approach Speed, Design Crtieria 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON OF ABSTRACT OF PAGES Tom Rudowsky a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE 19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code) Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified SAR 220 301-342-8526 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18 i NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ii NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 SUMMARY The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program Office sponsored a study to review the existing Carrier Approach Criteria (CAC). These criteria are also commonly referred to as the Approach Speed Criteria or Vpa Criteria. The study’s motivation was based on questions surrounding the applicability of the CAC, which have evolved over the past 30+ years, as design tools for the prediction of approach speed. With significant technological advancements during this period, it was questioned if the criteria’s assumptions and application were still valid for design purposes. It is clear that these criteria considerably affect the design space of Naval carrier-based aircraft and reduce the flexibility of the designer for satisfying other mission critical requirements. For these reasons, it is imperative that the Navy have a full understanding of the design impact of these criteria and can clearly justify their application in predicting Vpa. The Joint Service Specification Guide (JSSG) criteria definitions were used as the basis of this study. The CAC include the glide slope transfer (popup) maneuver, small and large throttle response, field of view (FOV), Level 1 flying qualities (FQ) (primarily roll control and flightpath stability), stall margin, and flight control limit speed. Waveoff and bolter performance were also considerations in the Vpa definition and are included as part of the CAC. The results documented in this report represent the first of several planned phases. The focus of this phase was to research and analyze the assumptions behind the JSSG criteria. It is recognized that a variation of the JSSG definitions was used for the JSF Joint Model Specification and those variations are discussed. It was the intent of this phase to identify shortcomings with the existing criteria, conduct analysis and research for criteria development for low risk, high payoff areas that were clearly seen as inadequate, and identify areas for future research and assessment. It was not the intent to emerge from this phase with a new set of criteria. However, with the background information provided, the designer and the acquisition community are in a better position to make informed program decisions relative to the criticality of the individual criteria. It is intended that further investigation will yield new and/or improved criteria. The study developed formal definitions to rate the adequacy and relevancy of each of the criteria. In general, the criteria were found to lack traceability to the approach task. Based on these definitions, the FOV criterion was found to be adequate. The stall speed margin, GS transfer (popup) maneuver, and small throttle response were rated as inadequate. The remaining criteria were rated as marginally adequate. Significant conclusions from this phase of the investigation are: a) Many of the existing criteria are not well-founded. The majority of the criteria are based on empirical data from aircraft designs that are in some cases 40 years old. b) Current application of the CAC (to define Vpa) is not consistent with the intent of early pioneers of CAC development. iii NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 c) Analysis of Naval Safety Center data from January 1980 through May 2001 concluded that there is no longer a credible correlation between mishap rate and Vpa within the scope of aircraft reviewed and therefore should not be used as an indicator of safety. d) Because Naval aircraft programs almost always involve competition between two or more design concepts, it becomes extremely difficult from an industry perspective to fail to satisfy any of the CAC to meet the Vpa requirement prior to System Development and Demonstration (SDD). Therefore, the criteria, although not specifically defined as requirements, in practice become “hard requirements” to the designer. e) The practice of separately defining a limit Vpa, arresting gear limit speed, and the wind over deck limit overspecifies the problem, which leads to incompatible requirements. The key recommendations from this phase of the investigation are: a) A Phase II investigation should be conducted to develop criteria that are traceable to the approach task. b) NAVAIRSYSCOM should define a process for periodic review and assessment of the CAC that includes both government and industry representatives. c) Further analysis of Key Performance Parameter (KPP) selection should be conducted in a Phase II study. Further discussion between the program manager, requirements community, and engineering should address KPP selection if it is desired that a KPP is warranted for the approach task. iv NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 Contents Page No. Summary......................................................................................................................................iii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................xiii List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. xv Acknowledgements...................................................................................................................xvii Introduction...................................................................................................................................1 Background .............................................................................................................................1
Load more

Recommended publications
  • US COLD WAR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS Forrestal, Kitty Hawk and Enterprise Classes
    US COLD WAR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS Forrestal, Kitty Hawk and Enterprise Classes BRAD ELWARD ILLUSTRATED BY PAUL WRIGHT © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com NEW VANGUARD 211 US COLD WAR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS Forrestal, Kitty Hawk and Enterprise Classes BRAD ELWARD ILLUSTRATED BY PAUL WRIGHT © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 4 ORIGINS OF THE CARRIER AND THE SUPERCARRIER 5 t World War II Carriers t Post-World War II Carrier Developments t United States (CVA-58) THE FORRESTAL CLASS 11 FORRESTAL AS BUILT 14 t Carrier Structures t The Flight Deck and Hangar Bay t Launch and Recovery Operations t Stores t Defensive Systems t Electronic Systems and Radar t Propulsion THE FORRESTAL CARRIERS 20 t USS Forrestal (CVA-59) t USS Saratoga (CVA-60) t USS Ranger (CVA-61) t USS Independence (CVA-62) THE KITTY HAWK CLASS 26 t Major Differences from the Forrestal Class t Defensive Armament t Dimensions and Displacement t Propulsion t Electronics and Radars t USS America, CVA-66 – Improved Kitty Hawk t USS John F. Kennedy, CVA-67 – A Singular Class THE KITTY HAWK AND JOHN F. KENNEDY CARRIERS 34 t USS Kitty Hawk (CVA-63) t USS Constellation (CVA-64) t USS America (CVA-66) t USS John F. Kennedy (CVA-67) THE ENTERPRISE CLASS 40 t Propulsion t Stores t Flight Deck and Island t Defensive Armament t USS Enterprise (CVAN-65) BIBLIOGRAPHY 47 INDEX 48 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com US COLD WAR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS FORRESTAL, KITTY HAWK AND ENTERPRISE CLASSES INTRODUCTION The Forrestal-class aircraft carriers were the world’s first true supercarriers and served in the United States Navy for the majority of America’s Cold War with the Soviet Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Pilot Stories
    PILOT STORIES DEDICATED to the Memory Of those from the GREATEST GENERATION December 16, 2014 R.I.P. Norm Deans 1921–2008 Frank Hearne 1924-2013 Ken Morrissey 1923-2014 Dick Herman 1923-2014 "Oh, I have slipped the surly bonds of earth, And danced the skies on Wings of Gold; I've climbed and joined the tumbling mirth of sun-split clouds - and done a hundred things You have not dreamed of - wheeled and soared and swung high in the sunlit silence. Hovering there I've chased the shouting wind along and flung my eager craft through footless halls of air. "Up, up the long delirious burning blue I've topped the wind-swept heights with easy grace, where never lark, or even eagle, flew; and, while with silent, lifting mind I've trod the high untrespassed sanctity of space, put out my hand and touched the face of God." NOTE: Portions Of This Poem Appear On The Headstones Of Many Interred In Arlington National Cemetery. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 – Dick Herman Bermuda Triangle 4 Worst Nightmare 5 2 – Frank Hearne Coming Home 6 3 – Lee Almquist Going the Wrong Way 7 4 – Mike Arrowsmith Humanitarian Aid Near the Grand Canyon 8 5 – Dale Berven Reason for Becoming a Pilot 11 Dilbert Dunker 12 Pride of a Pilot 12 Moral Question? 13 Letter Sent Home 13 Sense of Humor 1 – 2 – 3 14 Sense of Humor 4 – 5 15 “Poopy Suit” 16 A War That Could Have Started… 17 Missions Over North Korea 18 Landing On the Wrong Carrier 19 How Casual Can One Person Be? 20 6 – Gardner Bride Total Revulsion, Fear, and Helplessness 21 7 – Allan Cartwright A Very Wet Landing 23 Alpha Strike
    [Show full text]
  • Writing to Think
    U.S. Naval War College U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons Newport Papers Special Collections 2-2014 Writing to Think Robert C. Rubel Follow this and additional works at: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/usnwc-newport-papers Recommended Citation Rubel, Robert C., "Writing to Think" (2014). Newport Papers. 41. https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/usnwc-newport-papers/41 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Special Collections at U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Newport Papers by an authorized administrator of U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NAVAL WAR COLLEGE NEWPORT PAPERS 41 NAVAL WAR COLLEGE WAR NAVAL Writing to Think The Intellectual Journey of a Naval Career NEWPORT PAPERS NEWPORT 41 Robert C. Rubel Cover This perspective aerial view of Newport, Rhode Island, drawn and published by Galt & Hoy of New York, circa 1878, is found in the American Memory Online Map Collections: 1500–2003, of the Library of Congress Geography and Map Division, Washington, D.C. The map may be viewed at http://hdl.loc.gov/ loc.gmd/g3774n.pm008790. Writing to Think The Intellectual Journey of a Naval Career Robert C. Rubel NAVAL WAR COLLEGE PRESS Newport, Rhode Island meyers$:___WIPfrom C 032812:_Newport Papers:_NP_41 Rubel:_InDesign:000 NP_41 Rubel-FrontMatter.indd January 31, 2014 10:06 AM Naval War College The Newport Papers are extended research projects that Newport, Rhode Island the Director, the Dean of Naval Warfare Studies, and the Center for Naval Warfare Studies President of the Naval War College consider of particular Newport Paper Forty-One interest to policy makers, scholars, and analysts.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating Fixed Wing Aircraft in the Aircraft Carrier Environment
    EVALUATING FIXED WING AIRCRAFT IN THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER ENVIRONMENT by Mr. C. P.Senn STIKE AIRCRAFT TEST DIRECTORATE NAVAL AIR TEST CE/TER PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND 20670-5304 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Aircraft Carrier Flieht Deck Layout Operating fixed wing aircraft from today's modern aircraft carrier is a demanding task. Evaluation of aircraft/ship compafi- The flight deck layout of today's modem aircraft carrier is bility, both during the concept development phase and FullScale shown in figure 1. Two steam powered catapults are located Development (FSD) ground and flight tests presents the evaluation forward (bow catapults) and two catapults are located amidships on team with unique challenges. The capabilities and characteristics the port side (waist catapults). Retractable let Blast Deflector of high performance carrier based tactical aircraft must be quanti- (JBD)panels are located aft of each catapult. The centerline of the flied for the catapult launch and subsequent flyaway, and the carrier landing area is angled relative to the ship's centerline, permitting approach and arrested landing tasks. Catapult launching involves simultaneous catapult launch operations from the bow catapults determining the minimum safe launch airspeeds while maintaining and arrested landing operations. Four arresting gear cables, acceptable flight characteristics in this low altitude, high angle of connected to arresting engines are located in the landing area. The attack (AOA) regime. Approach and landing requires the slowest first is approximately 170 ft (51.8 m) from the stern with approx. possible approach airspeeds while retaining the performance and imately 50 ft (15.2 m) between each arresting gear cable.
    [Show full text]
  • Vpa Report 2002-12-05
    UNCLASSIFIED NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER AIRCRAFT DIVISION PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND TECHNICAL REPORT REPORT NO: NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 REVIEW OF THE CARRIER APPROACH CRITERIA FOR CARRIER-BASED AIRCRAFT PHASE I; FINAL REPORT by Thomas Rudowsky Stephen Cook Marshall Hynes Robert Heffley Melvin Luter Thomas Lawrence CAPT Robert Niewoehner Douglas Bollman Page Senn Dr. Wayne Durham Henry Beaufrere Michael Yokell Albert Sonntag Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. UNCLASSIFIED DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER AIRCRAFT DIVISION PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 REVIEW OF THE CARRIER APPROACH CRITERIA FOR CARRIER-BASED AIRCRAFT - PHASE I; FINAL REPORT by Thomas Rudowsky Stephen Cook Marshall Hynes Robert Heffley Melvin Luter Thomas Lawrence CAPT Robert Niewoehner Douglas Bollman Page Senn Dr. Wayne Durham Henry Beaufrere Michael Yokell Albert Sonntag NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
    [Show full text]
  • F/A-18A-D Hornet Current and Future Utilization of Mode I Automatic Carrier Landings
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 5-2007 F/A-18A-D Hornet Current and Future Utilization of Mode I Automatic Carrier Landings Brian T. Schrum University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Navigation, Guidance, Control and Dynamics Commons Recommended Citation Schrum, Brian T., "F/A-18A-D Hornet Current and Future Utilization of Mode I Automatic Carrier Landings. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2007. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/323 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Brian T. Schrum entitled "F/A-18A-D Hornet Current and Future Utilization of Mode I Automatic Carrier Landings." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Aviation Systems. Robert B. Richards, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Peter Solies, Rodney Allison Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Brian T.
    [Show full text]
  • Sidestick Controllers During High Gain Tasks
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2002 Sidestick Controllers During High Gain Tasks Brian J. Goszkowicz University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Systems Engineering and Multidisciplinary Design Optimization Commons Recommended Citation Goszkowicz, Brian J., "Sidestick Controllers During High Gain Tasks. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2002. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/2060 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Brian J. Goszkowicz entitled "Sidestick Controllers During High Gain Tasks." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Aviation Systems. Dr. R. Kimberlin, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Dr. U. P. Solies, Dr. Fred Stellar Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Brian J. Goszkowicz entitled “Sidestick Controllers During High Gain Tasks.” I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Aviation Systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Natops Landing Signal Officer Manual
    THE LANDING NAVAIR 00-80T-104 SIGNAL OFFICER THE LSO WORKSTATION NATOPS NORMAL LANDING SIGNAL PROCEDURES OFFICER MANUAL EMERGENCY PROCEDURES EXTREME WEATHER CONDITION OPERATIONS THIS PUBLICATION SUPERSEDES NAVAIR 00-80T-104 DATED 1 MAY 2007. COMMUNICATIONS NATOPS EVAL, PILOT PERFORMANCE RECS, A/C MISHAP STATEMENTS DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C — Distribution authorized to U.S. Government Agencies and their contractors to protect publications required for official use or for administrative or operational purposes only, effective (01 May 2009). Other requests for the document shall be referred to COMNAVAIRSYSCOM, ATTN: NATOPS Officer, Code 4.0P, 22244 Cedar Point Rd, BLDG 460, Patuxent River, MD 20670−1163 DESTRUCTION NOTICE — For unclassified, limited documents, destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document. ISSUED BY AUTHORITY OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS AND UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE COMMANDER, NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND. INDEX 0800LP1097834 1 (Reverse Blank) 1 MAY 2009 NAVAIR 00-80T-104 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND RADM WILLIAM A. MOFFETT BUILDING 47123 BUSE ROAD, BLDG 2272 PATUXENT RIVER, MD 20670-1547 1 May 2009 LETTER OF PROMULGATION 1. The Naval Air Training and Operating Procedures Standardization (NATOPS) Program is a positive approach toward improving combat readiness and achieving a substantial reduction in the aircraft mishap rate. Standardization, based on professional knowledge and experience, provides the basis for development of an efficient and sound operational procedure. The standardization program is not planned to stifle individual initiative, but rather to aid the Commanding Officer in increasing the unit’s combat potential without reducing command prestige or responsibility.
    [Show full text]
  • The Airbus X In
    Aerosoft F-14A/B Volume 7 Carrier Operations Version 12 January 2014 RECORD OF REVISIONS Revision Issue date Release Description 0 Nov 25, 2014 1.0 Initial Release Aerosoft Vol 2-1-2 Carrier Operations F-14A/B Tomcat X 2 30 November 2014 CONTENTS Carrier Operations .................................................................................................................................. 3 Catapult ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Fresnel Lens Optical Landing System (FLOLS) .............................................................................................. 4 Introduction to Carrier Approach ................................................................................................................. 5 Flying by AOA ............................................................................................................................................... 6 VFR Approach ............................................................................................................................................... 7 Carrier Pattern ............................................................................................................................................. 9 Landing Signal Officer (LSO) ......................................................................................................................... 9 USS Kitty Hawk ....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Supercarrier Operations Guide]
    Operations Guide Updated 24 May 2020 DCS [Supercarrier Operations Guide] Contents LATEST CHANGES ........................................................................................................................................................................... 4 QUICKSTART GUIDE ....................................................................................................................................................................... 5 How do I install this module? ....................................................................................................................................................... 6 How do I know the module is installed? ....................................................................................................................................... 6 How do I select a Supercarrier mission? ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Creating Your Own Mission ......................................................................................................................................................... 8 Catapult Start .............................................................................................................................................................................11 Taxi to Catapult ..........................................................................................................................................................................12 Returning
    [Show full text]
  • Cvn Flight/Hangar Deck Natops Manual This Manual Supersedes Navair 00-80T-120 Dated 1 April 2008
    NAVAIR 00-80T-120 CVN FLIGHT/HANGAR DECK NATOPS MANUAL THIS MANUAL SUPERSEDES NAVAIR 00-80T-120 DATED 1 APRIL 2008 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C — Distribution authorized to U.S. Government agencies and their contractors to protect publications required for official use or for administrative or operational purposes only, determined on 15 December 2010. Additional copies of this document can be downloaded from the NATEC website at https://mynatec.navair.navy.mil. DESTRUCTION NOTICE — For unclassified, limited documents, destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document. ISSUED BY AUTHORITY OF THE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS AND UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE COMMANDER, NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND. 0800LP1113205 15 DECEMBER 2010 1 (Reverse Blank) NAVAIR 00−80T−120 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND RADM WILLIAM A. MOFFETT BUILDING 47123 BUSE ROAD, BLDG 2272 PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND 20670‐1547 15 December 2010 LETTER OF PROMULGATION 1.The Naval Air Training and Operating Procedures Standardization (NATOPS) Program is a positive approach toward improving combat readiness and achieving a substantial reduction in the aircraft mishap rate. Standardization, based on professional knowledge and experience, provides the basis for development of an efficient and sound operational procedure. The standardization program is not planned to stifle individual initiative, but rather to aid the Commanding Officer in increasing the unit's combat potential without reducing command prestige or responsibility. 2.This manual standardizes ground and flight procedures but does not include tactical doctrine. Compliance with the stipulated manual requirements and procedures is mandatory except as authorized herein. In order to remain effective, NATOPS must be dynamic and stimulate rather than suppress individual thinking.
    [Show full text]