Could WW2 carrier aircraft use a ski jump?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Admiral Beez

Major
9,176
10,451
Oct 21, 2019
Toronto, Canada
Could ww2 aircraft use a ski jump on a carrier? Presumably a tail dragger would have prop blade clearance issues, but what about a tricycle gear aircraft like the P-39, B-25 (PBJ) F7F Tigercat, P-38, etc.

avy-v0-YNveyJq1ASHg2-ugDk1gT9Cj8JnimUFslZzpuR5lKWU.jpg
 
I was just thinking of this the other day. It apparently worked successfully for that Barracuda strike against the Tirpitz, but then the concept disappeared until reinvented by the UK in the cold war era for their Harrier equipped light carriers. Why?
 
I was just thinking of this the other day. It apparently worked successfully for that Barracuda strike against the Tirpitz, but then the concept disappeared until reinvented by the UK in the cold war era for their Harrier equipped light carriers. Why?
I think we need a better image of the ramp on HMS Furious. From what we see in the photos and models it appears to be a slight and long incline,, rather than a ski jump.

ns_to_HMS_Furious_during_Operation_Goodwood_A25423.jpg


v21UQfzOD3okfC7afmajMyngM-OlNrf6ilS9urVLP41Xj17shA.jpg
 
I was just thinking of this the other day. It apparently worked successfully for that Barracuda strike against the Tirpitz, but then the concept disappeared until reinvented by the UK in the cold war era for their Harrier equipped light carriers. Why?
The invention of the steam catapult took care of all launching needs until the GT powered Invincible class with its STOVL Sea Harriers. Development began immediately postwar with trials from 1949/50 and first fit of British built units in SBC-27C Essex conversion of Hancock completed in Feb 1954
 
I think we need a better image of the ramp on HMS Furious. From what we see in the photos and models it appears to be a slight and long incline,, rather than a ski jump.
So how steep / long does it need to be before you would be satisfied that a "ramp", which is how the Furious set up was described in WW2, had become a "ski jump" as in the term used in the 1970s? The one design difference is the upwards curve that the modern ski jump has built into it.

The ski jumps originally installed in Invincible & Illustrious were only 7 degrees. Hermes and Ark Royal V got 12 degree ramps. The QE class have a longer 12.5 degree ski jump.

I've never come across any photos of Furious taken from a different angle to the one in the photo you posted, along with several others. All taken from the original port bridge wing. The photo below should give an idea of the length involved.

1707748705637.jpeg
 
You might also be interested in the 1980s US tests of the ski jump

It needs to be remembered that Furious only operated Barracudas for about 9 months in 1944. After that she was taken out of service being worn out. So there was then no need to develop the ramp concept further at that time. The later carriers then in service had no problems operating heavily laden Barracudas.
 
The RAAF Museum has various aviation themed photographs. Starting with the reverse ski jump/ramp
 

Attachments

  • RN Ship HMS Furious - Pic.01.jpg
    RN Ship HMS Furious - Pic.01.jpg
    169.1 KB · Views: 24
  • RN Ship HMS Furious - Pic.02.jpg
    RN Ship HMS Furious - Pic.02.jpg
    149.4 KB · Views: 21
  • RN Ship Hms Furious - Pic.03.jpg
    RN Ship Hms Furious - Pic.03.jpg
    321.3 KB · Views: 23
I was just thinking of this the other day. It apparently worked successfully for that Barracuda strike against the Tirpitz, but then the concept disappeared until reinvented by the UK in the cold war era for their Harrier equipped light carriers. Why?
Was thinking about this myself, but was traveling for work; I wanted to do a video to explain the whole issue. Give me to 'til Monday and I'll have version 1.0 ready for sr6 to edit for us.

p.s. Groundhog will star.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back