Why don't they use those catapults the had in the 60s?
Posted on 07/27/2017 6:24:46 AM PDT by ImJustAnotherOkie
A new electromagnetic launch system for aircraft carriers that has faltered when attempting to launch heavier planes is now sound thanks to a software fix, Navy officials announced this week. However, it won’t reach the Navy’s new carrier for more than a year.
The Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System, or EMALS, is one of several brand-new technologies installed aboard the first-of-class supercarrier Gerald R. Ford, which was commissioned July 22.
The system has drawn the ire of President Donald Trump, who said in a memorable May 11 interview with Time Magazine that he wanted the Navy to return to “goddamned steam” for its carrier catapults, as the new “digital” technology was unreliable and inexpensive.
Navy officials have said plans to install EMALS on the two other carriers in the Ford class are proceeding regardless.
The problems with EMALS came to light in spring 2014, when testers found the launch system exceeded operational limits when accommodating aircraft with wing-mounted external fuel tanks, causing “excessive vibrations” of the tank.
This significantly limited the air missions the carrier could accommodate. Fighters including the F/A-18 Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler, which will launch from the Ford, frequently depart the ship with additional fuel stores.
But now the Navy says they have found a fix that will eliminate those limitations. Testing completed at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey earlier this summer validated the software fix, according to a news release from Naval Air Combat Command.
In all, 71 EMALS launches were completed by a designated EMALS test team and Air Test and Evaluation Squadron 23, according to the release. They confirmed that both the Super Hornet and the Growler could launch with wing-mounted 480-gallon external fuel tanks without exceeding the aircraft’s stress limits, officials said.
“We were confident since the day that the issue was uncovered that it was solvable,” George Sulich, EMALS integrated program team lead, said in a statement. “The beauty of the system is that issues such as these can be accomplished with software updates instead of major hardware changes to machinery.”
Development of a software fix that fine-tuned the EMALS control algorithm was completed in 2015 and loaded into the system this April to test compatibility with other software loads.
Officials said the final test of the fix, complete with aircraft launched, was delayed a year because there were other systems that needed to be evaluated, but that all testing for the EMALS fix has now been completed.
However, the Ford won’t get the latest software improvements until 2019, according to officials. The software that will enable shipboard launches of Super Hornets with external fuel tanks will be installed following the ship’s post-shakedown availability, a maintenance period that follows a new ship’s first cruise.
“Test is a time for discovery and while schedules often shift, the EMALS team has done excellent work to further improve the system’s controls software, eliminating concerns about undue stress to the aircraft, regardless of external fuel tank configuration, during launch,” Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment Program Manager Capt. Stephen Tedford said in a statement.
“This small test victory gets us that much closer to launching an aircraft with a new technology aboard America’s newest aircraft carrier,” he added.
I saw the headline and was waiting for a new Crown Victoria to take advantage of this new feature.
So the carrier is non functional for another two years?
The military procurement system is broke. I was allowed by urgent release to give soldiers in Iraq a vastly more capable software upgrade, but I was not allowed to give it to that same unit in a shelter 20 feet away because they were not included in the release.
It took so long to get software released that it was obsolete by time approved, and new testing/paperwork requirements were added further delaying process.
As for steam catapults, they are simply not viable for the new carrier class with its intended high rate of operations and the wide range of aircraft sizes, types, and weights it will have to accommodate. So, EMALS it is, and it must and will be made to work. As for the "delay" referred to, my guess is that it is a matter of contract terms and scheduling issues --- which can be solved of course through a costly add on order to the contractor. Presidential anger though may mitigate the usual price gouging.
We’ve created a technology monster that must be fed constantly.
Not a Crown Victoria Police Interceptor.
But the same thing, only different.
I basically have a MS in Software Engineering, the fact is that there are always errors, and new ones popping up as you say the technology monster comes out with a new computer.
Luckily sometimes the right guy is in charge. We had a system the appeared to work far better than anything else but lacked comprehensive testing, I passed on the to the Commander that he could force its deployment in combat if he accepted the combat risk (which my provided opinion was it would save more soldiers than possible issues). He approved and the system was deployed over the objections of the Pentagon. And was immediately effective.
Reminds me of Excalibur when it was leaving Space Dock to stop the Enterprise. It bleeped the bed....
My experience has been that the R&D process is over-controlled.
Instead of developing and deploying a software fix, the contractor has to go through an excruciating line-by-line software design review process. This is done even though the bulk of the software is not changed but one "critical" aspect is. So they have to, by contract, go back to square one and repeat...repeat...repeat.
In this case they have a fix they just can't beat the system to get it onto the carrier and make it useful now.
Why don't they use those catapults the had in the 60s?
One such example was John Boyd, the maverick Air Force colonel who revolutionized fighter aircraft procurement by conceiving of a theory of aerial combat and reducing it to an equation that was incorporated into an innovative, results driven contract for the development of what became the F-16 and F-18. The success and longevity of both designs is a testament to his success. Yet Boyd's example is rarely emulated.
If those programs were under congessional scrutiny today, we would be mired in sub committee reviews and toxic rhetoric, just like the F-35.
Schreiver recognized that part of getting on top of the ICBM learning curve was failure and risk taking. Those concepts are beyond congress critter and puzzle palace mentalities today.
In the meantime just build an Evil Kinevil Ramp on the Bow like the Ruskies and Brits use.
The Plywood and 4x4’s shouldn’t cost too much if they go to Home Depot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.