Retired US Navy vice admiral named technology helping "revolutionize" the use of aircraft carriers

Retired American Vice Admiral Lewis Crenshaw has published an article in which he reports on an important direction in the development of an aircraft carrier fleet USA. Attention was drawn to the fact that the United States has recently been paying special attention to this issue (the development of the aircraft carrier fleet) - with publication in various specialized media. More recently, a material appeared in the US press, where it was reported about the possibility of developing an aircraft carrier fleet by putting into service unmanned carrier-based aviation refuellers.

Vice Admiral Crenshaw names another technology that is helping the United States "revolutionize" the use of aircraft carriers. This technology is a retired senior military man who served in the navy for about 37 years, according to EMALS. - an electromagnetic system for taking off carrier-based aircraft from aircraft carriers.

Lewis Crenshaw:

Equipping the latest aircraft carriers such as Gerald R. Ford with EMALS systems makes it possible to increase the number of training missions to 160 per day under normal conditions and up to 270 combat missions in wartime conditions. This is a third more than for Nimitz-class aircraft carriers in peacetime, and 12,5% ​​more than in wartime. This means a significant increase in the efficiency of warships.

Asynchronous motor EMALS

A retired US Navy vice admiral notes that advanced electromagnetic catapult technology (systems for taking off carrier-based aircraft) allows you to launch not only manned aircraft, but also drones, including the very ones - refueling, which were mentioned above.

Vice Admiral Crenshaw:

For example, when fully optimized, EMALS will go from cold start to ready to launch aircraft in about 15 minutes. Steam catapults take hours and significantly more energy to reach the same level of readiness, and this leads to the depletion of critical resources - for example, fresh water on a ship.

Crenshaw said the groundbreaking idea of ​​using EMALS will remain relevant to all Ford-class aircraft carriers (up to 12 planned) for decades.

Comments

[hrych]

The linear electric motor invented our

[astepanov]

The problem is not in the linear motor, but in the energy storage for it. The power during operation of the catapult is comparable to or exceeds the full power of the aircraft carrier's power plant.

[eklmn]

"Linear motor invented ours"
For an Englishman or amer, you have a very good Russian!
Because OUR is related to both England and the United States. In the USSR, they could use other people's patents / inventions for free and with pleasure - no one there really bothered with using someone else's intellectual property.
“The history of linear motors can be traced back at least, from the 1840s to Charles Wheatstone's work at King's College London, but Wheatstone's model was too ineffective to be practical. A possible linear induction motor is described in US patent 782312 (1905; inventor Alfred Zeden from Frankfurt am Main) and is designed to drive trains or elevators. German engineer Hermann Kemper built a working model in 1935. In the late 1940s, Professor Eric Leithwaite of Imperial College London developed the first full-size working model. "

[zwlad]

Did they bring EMALS to mind?

[eklmn]

"Did they bring EMALS to mind?"
Nearly.
“According to James Geerts, a US Navy assistant, the recent problems causing the temporary shutdown of the EMALS on board the USS Gerald R Ford (CVN 78) aircraft carrier during sea trials do not indicate a problem with the system as a whole, the secretary said. research, development and acquisitions.
"Nothing we have seen, nothing I know, and nothing we talk about is a mine or an Achilles heel in the system," Gerts told reporters during a June 18, 2020 teleconference. "
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/emals-problems-do-not-represent-achilles-heel-for-launch-system-us-navy-assistant-secretary-says

[basmach]

One flight every 6 minutes. Almost half an hour to assemble the link. And against whom to fight? Papuans who have no air defense. Isn't it expensive?
Or a group must have at least 2 aircraft carriers.

[venik]

Quote: basmach

One flight every 6 minutes.

=======
Interesting as well how long personnel (including aircraft) such will the regime survive?

[Avior]

About 250 sorties per day, 4 days continuously - such a check was carried out with Nimitz, the report can be found on the network.
They write that the possibilities for the rate of aircraft production are determined by technical personnel.

[ancient]

Quote: Avior

About 250 sorties per day, 4 days continuously - such a check was carried out with Nimitz, the report can be found on the network.

It is possible, only there "tsifirki" completely different 140 flights per day

[Alexey RA]

Quote: venik

I wonder how long the personnel (including aircraft) will withstand such a regime?

Here it is even more interesting - how long will the personnel follow the instructions when working in this mode? And when will he start bypassing them, merging operations and throwing away "unnecessary precautions"?
Last time it ended like this:

[venik]

Quote: Alexey RA

Quote: venik

I wonder how long the personnel (including aircraft) will withstand such a regime?

Here it is even more interesting - how long will the personnel follow the instructions when working in this mode? And when will he start bypassing them, merging operations and throwing away "unnecessary precautions"?
Last time it ended like this:

=========
That's just THIS I also meant !!!

[Alexey RA]

Quote: venik

That's just THIS I also meant !!!

Well, this is a classic: connecting the PU NAR connectors on the catapult is long and dangerous, let's connect them immediately when the NAR is suspended - we will save time.
OK, hooked up. After that, when the aircraft switches to on-board power, the pulses arising in the aircraft network pass to the launcher - and launch the NAR into the Skyhawk standing opposite. But the instruction was written precisely to prevent this: if its instructions were followed, the launcher was physically connected to the plane's network after the "transient processes" had calmed down, and even when there was only an empty deck and an ocean in front of the plane.

[Sergey39]

Quote: basmach

And against whom to fight?

Not against whom, but for what. For a safe continuation of cutting the budget.

[tlauicol]

Quote: basmach

One flight every 6 minutes. Almost half an hour to assemble the link.

about ten minutes per squadron. it takes time for refueling and armament, then every half-minute takes off. And it will be faster

[ancient]

Quote: Tlauicol

about ten minutes per squadron.

At the bottom of the "movie" laid out ... there are 6 minutes for 5 planes, with a take-off interval of 30 seconds.

Quote: Tlauicol

then every half-minute departure. And it will be faster

Then it will only take longer ..... the cycle increases from 4 to 10 minutes.
Calculation (catapult number 3).
1. Minute thirty-three takes time from the start of the movement, from the cutoff of the soft starter to the stop at the 3rd catapult.
2. 4 sec raise the shield.
3 sec the shuttle arrived and the plane became hooked (the shuttle was traveling 34-35 sec) - (at the moment of the hook to the shield
rolled up another plane)
4. Thirty minutes - checking and preparing for takeoff - (here I think it will be possible to shorten the time if
"fix")
5 sec - take off
Total, excluding start-up and warm-up - the whole cycle took 4 minutes. (And the extreme ones also pull with tractors)

[basmach]

Where did you get such nonsense, 10 minutes for the exadril? Preparing for a second flight (taking into account wartime and combining some operations and canceling some) - about 20 minutes. And if the suspension is normal, then all 30-35. The number of technical staff is limited, especially the lack of gunsmiths.

[ancient]

Quote: basmach

Where did you get such nonsense, 10 minutes for the exadril?

From the reports of the combat work of aircraft carrier wings

Quote: basmach

Preparing for a second flight (taking into account wartime and combining some operations and canceling some) - about 20 minutes. And if the suspension is normal, then all 30-35

If you are talking about an aircraft carrier, then it takes 2 to 2,5 hours to prepare for a repeat flight.

Quote: basmach

The number of technical staff is limited, especially the lack of gunsmiths.

The reason is not the lack of technical staff, but the lack of technical training positions and the incomplete possibility of using elevators, since they are also used as positions for pre-flight training.
Once again, please ... study .. "hardware"

[ancient]

Quote: basmach

One flight every 6 minutes. Almost half an hour to assemble a link

Where do you get such data .... "from the ceiling" ... reports on exercises from aircraft carriers and a video posted long ago on the network.
Sit back, watch (including a stopwatch) and after watching ... read your opus and ..... "knock on your piece of wood"

[Maki Avellevich]

one and a half minutes between takeoffs

[basmach]

The admiral has given you time, or with mathematics badly 240 sorties (training) per day, 10 sorties per hour. Then count yourself. And this is takeoff-landing. To make it clear. In the regiment (any) flight shift is 12 hours (direct flight time is 8 hours). We planned 6 sorties on each side - with almost every sortie a B-P (P-50-75 -1 piece + 15 shells) or NRS-P (4 P-5 + 15) range. but there was max 5 on board. Preparation for a second - about 25 minutes. At the same time, gunsmiths have a soapy bottom. Combining any work with the work of gunsmiths (when suspended) is strictly prohibited, suspension is an extreme type of work, after which only takeoff

[ancient]

Quote: basmach

The admiral brought you time, or with mathematics badly-240 sorties (training)

Your admiral wrote to you .. "Wishlist" - in fact it is written that "Ford" can make up to 160 sorties, and if they use "magnets", then maybe 240 ... though due to what he "gave birth" this figure. ...... not substantiated.

Quote: basmach

In the regiment (any) flight shift is 12 hours (direct flight time is 8 hours).

You will be surprised ..... but I "created" so many PTPs ("planned") that you did not serve for months

Quote: basmach

We planned 6 sorties on each side - with almost every sortie a B-P (P-50-75 -1 piece + 15 shells) or NRS-P (4 P-5 + 15) range.

It is more correct to indicate the type of aviation and its KBP, well, it is desirable .. "mate part".

Quote: basmach

Combining any work with the work of gunsmiths (when suspended) is strictly prohibited, suspension is an extreme type of work, after which only takeoff

You are trying to ... remind me of the fundamental truths on security measures

[basmach]

Sure, not a problem. 523 Orsha apib. The materiel is Su-17m4. Position - engineer of PrNK squadron, then engineer at TEC. Graduated from the Tambov VVAIU them. Dzerzhinsky, specialty-armament. And you? Apparently, your "creation" did not go well. Yes, and if 160 per hour then one and a half times less departures, only 4

[ancient]

Quote: basmach

And you? Apparently, your "creation" did not go well.

I have already laid out my "scans" of my flight book and any evidence here ... I will not repeat myself.
He left for "retirement" from the post of deputy committee for flight work.
To be rude .... I do not advise

[basmach]

Oh, I see. First, you started to be rude first. Or is it not visible behind you? Well you are a flyer, where are we, tech is up to you. And secondly, these are the "scholars" that made up the PTP-1st flight with a bomb, 2nd with C-5, 3rd bomb again, 4th again C-5. that UB-32 must be hung, removed, hung again. At the same time, also check its work.
So really not good.
And I don't need to advise. Such "zealous" were quickly broken off. After all, it was always possible to enter a slightly wrong data (characteristic time by 250, day pressure is different, excess, etc.) - that would be bombed nearby. Or "find" a malfunction to break off the flight .. Hamov techno also knows how to "heal"

[ancient]

Quote: basmach

Well you are a flyer, where are we, tech is up to you.

After this phrase of yours I stop all communication with you
The definition that characterizes you as an Air Force serviceman, and even more so as an officer ... is prohibited by the rules of the site ... I have the honor,

[ancient]

Quote: basmach

And I don't need to advise. Such "zealous" were quickly broken off. After all, it was always possible to enter a slightly wrong data (characteristic time by 250, day pressure is different, excess, etc.) - that would be bombed nearby. Or "find" a malfunction to break off the flight .. Hamov techno also knows how to "heal"

Further .. after reading your "libel" .. really got into a stupor ...... I hope the engineers and specialists TS. will express to you their opinion about you .... I have already expressed mine ... unfortunately you cannot "sharper"

[basmach]

Stop naturally. For you have nothing to answer in essence. It remains, according to Ostap Ibrahimoviv, to take position 3 and be silent with a proud air.

[Pete mitchell]

Wow, what manners did you practice in

Quote: basmach

523 Orsha apib.

, it remains to be glad that fate did not bring them together without allowing them to plunge into. And who offended you that you were ready to shit at your own work? So on the offended, they carry water.
Do not disgrace the service, "Healer"...

[ancient]

Quote: Maki Avellievich

one and a half minutes between takeoffs

Add a clarification to your phrase - the takeoff interval from a 4-1 catapult, but from the 3rd I have already given you the calculation ..

[basmach]

This is the FIRST crash. So I advise you to knock. As an "expert" in AVIATION. THE AERODROME IS VISIBLE "SOFA". I described that briefly, what and how. I will add that in preparation for the re-run, TWO lanes should be free on the deck - takeoff and MANDATORY landing. Then look at the plan of the aircraft carrier and think how many planes can be placed on the remaining free space for preparation and repeated flight, taking into account the distance between the planes of 1-1,5 m.

[Cyril G ...]

considers EMALS. - an electromagnetic system for taking off carrier-based aircraft from aircraft-carrying ships.

Does it work even at the level of steam catapults?

[Real Pilot]

To increase the frequency of departures by a third is not critical. It’s just an evolution of existing capabilities, without a radical breakthrough.

This improvement does not correct the main disadvantages of aircraft carriers in the form of a limited range of aircraft (compared to modern anti-ship missiles), vulnerability to modern means of attack, the impossibility / difficulty of using AUG against an equal or nearly equal enemy.
Even unmanned tankers are a half measure.

[novel66]

so, no shit

equal or nearly equal opponent.

while they are in charge

[ancient]

Quote: RealPilot

Increase the frequency of departures by a third

There will be no drift in departure frequency ... as the procedure for preparing for takeoff remains the same ....... (so what if the shuttle returns faster)

[kventinasd]

EMALS will remain relevant for all aircraft carriers of the Ford class (and they are planned to build up to 12 units) for decades

Hey Americans, who are they going to fight with? Given the development of hypersonic systems, in ten years all these 12 units will be easy targets even for Iran and North Korea.

[venik]

"....A retired US Navy vice admiral called technology helping to “make the revolution"In the field of application of aircraft carriers.... "
=======
Lord! How many "revolutionaries"it got divorced !!

[silverwolf88]

it's not a general, but a captain - obvious

[halpat]

Quote: silberwolf88

it's not a general, but a captain - obvious

vice admiral obvious :)
When I saw the title, I thought that I decided to cut all the aircraft carriers and make pans, pots, forks / spoons / bowls.
and THIS IS NOT a revolution.

[petrol cutter]

Forgive God.
And then there are revolutions in application and use ...
The latest doctrines for use during and after the revolution ...
We are only talking about plans for the further development of catapults ...

[_Ugene_]

and 12,5% ​​more than in the military

well, straight revolution