In our Afterburner Club meet-up on board the U.S.S. Midway, our members who attended got to see a lot of what goes into U.S. Navy aircraft carrier operations.
(Our Annual meetup is free to all active members. Click Here to become a member)
From the hangar deck to the flight deck to the bridge to the briefing rooms, it is a process that has been evolving ever since the first Naval-launched air raids took place in World War I.
Today, aircraft carrier operations on the flight deck is a very serious game of musical chairs with each individual having to perform his duty to the best of human ability.
As a fighter pilot on an aircraft carrier hangar and flight decks, you’ll see a number of guys in purple shirts (called “grapes”) fueling your plane, some guys in red arming it, guys in blue handling or towing it, yellow shirts on the flight deck directing where you need to go just before you take off, and when you get back there will be guys in white helping to signal you down.
It doesn’t take a genius to see that all of these people are critical to the safety of aircraft carrier operations.
Also important is the need for redundancy and backups in case anything goes wrong. One of the key issues in this regard is the Navy’s insistence that aircraft that launch and land on carriers have more than one engine. That way, if one fails, it’s not a big deal because the other(s) can serve as backup.
Soon, the Navy will be replacing a lot of its F/A-18 C’s & D’s with the F-35C, a carrier-borne version of America’s newest single-engine fighter. The idea of the Navy’s newest (and very expensive) fighter having only one engine has some in the Navy wincing, and Lockheed has been hard at work increasing the reliability of the sub-systems around the engine.
Do you think that having a single-engine fighter landing on carriers increases the risk to pilots and carrier personnel? Why or why not?
howard says
In our area of business, redundancy or backup is a BIG thing
in those areas of operations where single point of failure
is a hazard or risks people and safety.
I can so totally appreciate the Navys longstanding desire
to have twin engine aircraft. Those techs on duty had better
make sure the eject seats are in GOOD order.
Jon Wilson says
I suppose it depends on the track record of the engine in the F-35. Though, while you cannot land a fighter on the water, obviously, it seems that your only engine in a plane going out over any terrain would be an awfully big deal, no?
skyhawk says
greetings from southern africa. two engines are good when there is a landing error and afterburner is required to ensure the aircraft takesoff to safety. F35 can land vertically thereby eliminating any landing difficulties
Anonymous says
The importance of a pilots skill set will even be more important when they go back to a single engine for the Navy. I think the carrier personnel level of readiness won’t change. But for the pilot the level of readiness will be higher and probably more alert. The F-18 pilots who have been shot at, lost an engine, ingested a bird, and babied it home to the carrier won’t have that option anymore. We have all seen the YouTube videos of F-16’s ingesting birds, tree limbs, etc. and don’t make it back to base. Then there’s the story of the missile exploding off the tail totaling one engine and still making it home. Now obviously single engine attack aircraft isn’t a new territory for the Navy; remember they and the USMC flew the A-4 Skyhawk heavily in the 60’s – 70’s and they built that aircraft to make emergency landings with the drop tanks attached.
Joe Burlas says
The reliability of dual engines is sometimes overtaken by the complexity of the system. I don’t think that the lack of redundincy causes a reduction of safety if the systems are simple enough. Complexity can be almost as dangerous at times.
Bill Boehne says
I’ve seen more that one twin engine fighter lose one engine and the crew have to punch out even though they still had one good engine still powered up. How well does an F-15, F-16, FA-18, or F-22 fly on one engine during the approach and landing phase?
Almos says
I think that single-engine fighters are not a problem because the Royal Navy uses the Harrier and has no problems, the Marines use them too so there is no preoblem from my point of view.