C-130's fly off the USS Essex

[PropStop]

No, really, for sure! I saw it on CNN!

In addition, several C-130 cargo aircraft aboard the USS Essex, which was conducting an exercise in the region, are available for relief missions.

I really...really...really hate CNN. Why do I even go to their site? Maybe I need anger to keep me going.

 

[Vegas]

yeah i dont really see how this is possible given the takeoff run using maximum effort procedures is 1,800 ft and the USS Essex is 844 ft in total leangth, so if it was loaded down with cargo as well...theres no way.

 

[PropStop]

Maybe they use a conveyor belt.

 

[Vegas]

granted there was a time they launched B-25s in the Doolittle raids but they are far smaller than a c-130 and had to have many modifications, wikipedia has a good interesting gouge about the raids http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doolittle_Raid .

 

[Vegas]

Maybe they use a conveyor belt.

to do what??

 

[phrogpilot73]

to do what??

Oh Lord...

 

[PropStop]

to do what??

If you place an aircraft (wheel equipped only) on a huge conveyor belt, moving in the opposite direction of the plane's intended travel, you can take off vertically.

:icon_tong

I'm a terrible person, I know.

edit: this is what happens when I am bored on watch...

 

[MPH]

to do what??

To launch planes of course!

Edit: Apparently afterburner is required...

 

[Vegas]

If you place an aircraft (wheel equipped only) on a huge conveyor belt, moving in the opposite direction of the plane's intended travel, you can take off vertically.

:icon_tong

I'm a terrible person, I know.

edit: this is what happens when I am bored on watch...

ok so this would cause your ground speed to be rather high but the way i see it is that there would be no change in AIRspeed/air flowing around the wing which is what ultimatly matters in generating lift with a wing...i guess you could take off on the conveyor but it would take the same distance, in no case could it take off vertically...correct me if im wrong.....

 

[Pugs]

yeah i dont really see how this is possible given the takeoff run using maximum effort procedures is 1,800 ft and the USS Essex is 844 ft in total leangth, so if it was loaded down with cargo as well...theres no way.

Maybe they brought the FID out of retirement

http://www.theaviationzone.com/factsheets/c130_forrestal.asp

 

[BourneID]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Obviously wasn't around for the thread pertaining to this prior

http://www.airwarriors.com/forum/showthread.php?t=137919&highlight=Conveyor

http://www.airwarriors.com/forum/showthread.php?t=140037&highlight=Conveyor

 

[HeyJoe]

yeah i dont really see how this is possible given the takeoff run using maximum effort procedures is 1,800 ft and the USS Essex is 844 ft in total leangth, so if it was loaded down with cargo as well...theres no way.

Bad gouge, It is possible and was as noted by Pugs so 1,800 feet is way off, but it is highly impractible so was never done operationally. CNN is misinformed or misconstrued the facts. So what's new?

 

[phrogpilot73]

Not to mention, I don't think there'd be enough room for the wings NOT to clip the superstructure on an LHD...

 

[FLYTPAY]

RADM James Flatley

My guest of honor at commissioning. He had a great way of telling the story.

 

[phrogpilot73]

I think it just dawned on me how CNN screwed it up. The C-130's are probably the VMGR det supporting the 31st MEU, which is based on the Essex (the MEU that is, not the C-130's)...