Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: Frank N. O. on October 05, 2010, 06:04:25 AM
Wow, I was afraid that start would be even wilder but I'm sure the pilot still felt it.
Btw, I love the video-comment: The closest thing to a carrier-launch an air force flyby will experience :D
Frank
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: Oddball on October 05, 2010, 12:08:14 PM
Think I've seen photos of West German F-104G Starfighters useing something like that.....or was it RATO (Rocket Assisted Take Off).
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: cotejy on October 05, 2010, 12:55:05 PM
Everyone in aviation had adrenaline rush. Some more than other...
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: Mike on October 05, 2010, 03:00:17 PM
I was surprised actually how smooth the whole thing looked. And 4 G's can't be all that bad on the body I believe.... Still, I admire the guy who just went " strap a rocket to my plane? Hell, yeah! Light it off, I'll drive that thing, no problem!"
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: chuckar101 on October 05, 2010, 04:50:10 PM
Dang I'm going to go grab some bottle rockets and see if they help out the twin otter in the back country now. ::rofl:: ::rofl::
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: vldflight on October 05, 2010, 04:57:30 PM
That looks like a classic Chuck idea. ::rofl::
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: YawningMan on November 19, 2010, 05:20:55 PM
Rocket assisted take off + whirly bird = ???
I've heard of jets on the tips of the main rotors before. Not exactly the same thing, but it's certainly a similar spirit.
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: Oddball on November 19, 2010, 05:39:46 PM
I think Sikrosky tried it on one of his helo's
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: Ragwing on November 25, 2010, 05:49:32 AM
1953 Hiller YH-32 (Model HJ-1 Hornet) First production tip-jet-powered helicopters (http://www.museumofflight.org/files/imagecache/full_page/HillerHornet_P1.jpg)
The small and simple YH-32 Hornet is unique because of the two ramjets mounted on the tips of its rotor blades. U.S. Army and Navy versions of the Hornet, built in the early 1950s, were the first production tip-jet-powered helicopters in history. The Hornet's engine became the first ramjet-powered unit to be certificated by the Civil Aeronautics Agency (the predecessor to today's Federal Aviation Administration).
The two simple, 12.7-pound (5.72-kg) ramjet engines that noisily keep the Hornet flying have no moving parts and can be disassembled in minutes with only a screwdriver.
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: Jupiter on November 25, 2010, 09:20:38 AM
The dutch also built a similar helicopter around that time, also meant for mass-production, but never was a hit. It was the NHI H-3 "Kolibrie", also equipped with tipjets, designed as a.o. a cropduster. The HJ-1 and H-3 were certainly an unusual sight, but neither is really unique... (http://www.aviastar.org/foto/nhi_kolibri-s.gif) (http://www.aviastar.org/foto/nhi_kolibri_1.jpg) Images from: http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/nhi_kolibri.php, retrieved 25-11-2010
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: gibbo_335 on November 25, 2010, 09:44:00 PM
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: undatc on December 06, 2010, 04:37:23 AM
"Provides our air force a way to launch in the event the runway of our tactical bases are destroyed."
Anyone else see the problem with this statement? ::banghead::
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: Lt.Fubar on December 07, 2010, 07:53:50 AM
Not really, mind you it's Europe, we don't have oceans to keep us away from potential enemies, most of air bases are well withing range of missiles, rockets, and in case of West Germany in the cold war, even artillery. You simply can't protect air base from an attack. That's why those systems were developed, jets were designed with thrust reverser, and Harrier was born. Plus many roads were built with intent of using them as makeshift airstrips in war time. Loses are inevitable to both runways and aircraft, all you can do is minimize the risks of loosing whole air force in the first strike.
BTW there was interesting project for USAFE for the same purpose, it was a hovercraft platform, a fighter jet would ride on to take off from grass fields and water in case the AB was destroyed.
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: Mike on December 08, 2010, 01:07:24 AM
"Provides our air force a way to launch in the event the runway of our tactical bases are destroyed."
Anyone else see the problem with this statement? ::banghead::
we may have to revisit this concept since the Chinese and Koreans are building better long-range missles and the AV-8 is getting old and tired.... ::unbelieveable:: ::sick::
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: undatc on December 08, 2010, 05:00:59 AM
Oh I'm not saying there is an issue with taking off, what about the landing part of the flight?
Yes I'm sure you could ideally refuel mid air, but the whole concept of this program is a quick launch in the event of a surprise attack that destroys your runway, at your base, and I would suspect other bases in the area.
Even at best speeds, tankers could be several hours away. Launch at full throttle, kill the bad guys, get to a safe safety, then hopefully have enough gas to either meet the tanker or land potentially several hundred or thousand miles away.
Seems like a hole in the plan, but maybe its just me.
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: Lt.Fubar on December 08, 2010, 06:53:18 AM
As the system was developed for war in Europe - the landing part is not an issue:
1. Mid-air refueling - tough one for the USAFE jets since the Phantom II as that one and all new use rigid boom system and require big tankers, for air forces not using F-16s here, many other aircraft could be used as tankers, some even wouldn't need a runway for takeoff and landing (C-130).
2. For a fighter jet you actually need less space for landing than to takeoff - in US jets the arrestor hook is present since the F-104, even though meant for emergences it will stop a jet in few hundreds feet - a space that could be a part of the air base that was intact, and was inspected after the attack - it could be a taxi way, or even a ramp. Some European made jets were purpose build to have very short landing rolls - like the Panavia Tornado and the Saab Viggen that actually had thrust reverser.
3. Civilian airports are less likely to be completely destroyed by conventional attack and long taxiways would be suitable to receive military aircraft
4. At the time the eastern block didn't had any deep penetrating munition, that could be used to heavily damage the airstrip, like the western 1000lb / 2000lb BLUs and Durandals so most damage would be superficial and could be repaired in less than an hour, giving the engineering equipment would survive the first strike.
5. Throw a stone, and you'll hit a foreign speaking neighbor, chances are high, that he could be neutral in that particular conflict... although that's a one way trip, the military aircraft landing at foreign - neutral airstrip would be interned, and would not be allowed to take off again.
6. Roads, in Europe many were build wide enough, with lane dividers, lights etc that could be easily taken apart, with long straights with big parking areas - all specially made to become a makeshift airstrip. The Sweden excelled in that aspect, so did the West Germany with their autobahns of which 70% could be used in this fashion.
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: Fabo on December 09, 2010, 02:58:33 AM
Many roads in eastern bloc have been designed in that fashion.One particularly known is near Vyskov in Czech Rep. There are several more in the highway system of the Czech rep, as well as other eastern bloc countries. I have seen such for ex. in Bulgaria. Plus there are or were many normally unused runways specifically for the possibility of opening a makeshift airbase there, complete with radio navigational equipment.
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: Lt.Fubar on December 09, 2010, 07:22:06 AM
Those were build all over Europe, east block, or west, the idea was the same. For example, here's a map of Poland, that would be dated 1990: Map (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/Polskie_lotniska-mapa_(2008).jpg)
The triangles are "DOL" (Drogowy Odcinek Lotniczy) - the "highway strips", officially there were 21 in total, all having straights of more than 2000 meters (6500ft), some reaching 3300m (11000ft), all were build in the same way as typical military airstrip (same design and materials), all able to accept every fighter jet of the east (MiG-31 included), and transport aircraft. Bombers, except for Su-24 would not land here.
There are not many left today though, I use one for winter driving practice - one that is actually not on that map, it's 2400m long, 30m wide, the road uses actually only 800m of the strip, so I have a mile to play with practicing driving on snow and ice ;)
During the cold war scramble take off was something that was practiced religiously, up to the point that very risky maneuvers were incorporated, for example the MiG-23 used as interceptors could evacuate base in less than 5 minutes, and we're talking about 30+ aircraft here, from airbase that had only two runways. Both runways and taxiways would be used for take off, simultaneously, getting all the planes in the air in a matter of seconds, the jets would takeoff in pairs from runways, crossing each other paths by wingspan length... no margin for error.
Believe it or not, the nuclear strike was not a concern ;)
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: Busdriver on December 09, 2010, 08:42:43 AM
Altough in german, here's an article from a german website with some fotos:
During the cold war scramble take off was something that was practiced religiously, up to the point that very risky maneuvers were incorporated, for example the MiG-23 used as interceptors could evacuate base in less than 5 minutes, and we're talking about 30+ aircraft here, from airbase that had only two runways. Both runways and taxiways would be used for take off, simultaneously, getting all the planes in the air in a matter of seconds, the jets would takeoff in pairs from runways, crossing each other paths by wingspan length... no margin for error.
English translation http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=de&tl=en&u=http://www.geschichtsspuren.de/artikel/41-luftwaffe-luftfahrt/113-autobahn-notlandeplaetze-nlp.html&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&usg=ALkJrhhYzj8E2EEca4h7BVvvb8NNq1qc2Q (http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=de&tl=en&u=http://www.geschichtsspuren.de/artikel/41-luftwaffe-luftfahrt/113-autobahn-notlandeplaetze-nlp.html&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&usg=ALkJrhhYzj8E2EEca4h7BVvvb8NNq1qc2Q)
Title: Re: F-100 "Zero Length Launch"
Post by: G-man on December 12, 2010, 04:23:49 PM
Problem is....y'all are using the wrong aircraft to land on the road.. ::whistle:: ::whistle:: ::whistle:: ::whistle:: ::whistle::
