PDA

View Full Version : Catapult and CVE



Talos2005
01-18-2005, 11:19 PM
One fact that drew my attention when I first checked ships available in PF was the presence of CVE. Those were widely used not only in the Pacific but also for the Battle of Atlantic. Their top speed was around 20kt (around 37km/h), but they carried and launched mainly F4F, TBF/M, (the String Bag as well for RN),etc. Those planes must be heavily loaded with ammunition, bombs, rockets, and fuel to attack the enemy reported. I remember to read some documents insisting the CVE€s relatively low speed never limited the Allied€s using heavy laden aircraft because they mainly relied on the deck catapult to launch those planes in such cases (not always). The more large CVs were also equipped with the deck catapults, but those are not so widely used because those flattops could make a run around 30kt (around 55km/h) to the wind.
I am not an expert on the subject above mentioned, but it seems plausible to me because IJN failed to develop the effective deck catapult and that made the effective use of its small carriers very difficult in many cases. (Sometimes, those ships are used only as cargo ships to supply aircraft to Japanese occupied islands.)
Therefore, I understand fully some of the default single missions requiring to takeoff heavily loaded F4U from CVE around 20kt or less caused a lot of arguments among the community.
I think there must be in our community some gentlemen who could inform us how was real takeoff operation on CVE and how much extent the catapult was actually used to launch aircraft from the jeep carriers.
If the catapult was widely used on CVE to launch, we would be at least eligible to ask Oleg another favour. Please consider to fit it and get rid of exasperation among some of our fellows.
I am looking forward to your kind suggestions.

Kind Regards,

Talos2005
01-18-2005, 11:19 PM
One fact that drew my attention when I first checked ships available in PF was the presence of CVE. Those were widely used not only in the Pacific but also for the Battle of Atlantic. Their top speed was around 20kt (around 37km/h), but they carried and launched mainly F4F, TBF/M, (the String Bag as well for RN),etc. Those planes must be heavily loaded with ammunition, bombs, rockets, and fuel to attack the enemy reported. I remember to read some documents insisting the CVE€s relatively low speed never limited the Allied€s using heavy laden aircraft because they mainly relied on the deck catapult to launch those planes in such cases (not always). The more large CVs were also equipped with the deck catapults, but those are not so widely used because those flattops could make a run around 30kt (around 55km/h) to the wind.
I am not an expert on the subject above mentioned, but it seems plausible to me because IJN failed to develop the effective deck catapult and that made the effective use of its small carriers very difficult in many cases. (Sometimes, those ships are used only as cargo ships to supply aircraft to Japanese occupied islands.)
Therefore, I understand fully some of the default single missions requiring to takeoff heavily loaded F4U from CVE around 20kt or less caused a lot of arguments among the community.
I think there must be in our community some gentlemen who could inform us how was real takeoff operation on CVE and how much extent the catapult was actually used to launch aircraft from the jeep carriers.
If the catapult was widely used on CVE to launch, we would be at least eligible to ask Oleg another favour. Please consider to fit it and get rid of exasperation among some of our fellows.
I am looking forward to your kind suggestions.

Kind Regards,

Blackdog5555
01-19-2005, 01:02 AM
Yes the CVE's used catapults. I only read one thread that mentioned that the developer is aware of the problem but stated that catapults was/are too difficult to model. it was hearsay, but its common knowldege about the use of catapults on CVEs. they were not omitted by accident. It would be cool if you had a deck crew of about 8 guys setting your plane up for a catapult launch.

IV_JG51_Razor
01-19-2005, 01:13 AM
Talos, they WERE widely used by the CVLs and CVEs, and it is a fact well known by Oleg. He has stated that catapults would not, or could not be implemented in PF. Possibly due to a limitation of the game engine, I don't remember if he said what the reason was.

In any case, the addition of a catapult to PF would definitely eliminate a lot of the problems we are experiencing due to the lack of wind in the game. It seems to me that it could be done much the same way the SPB is done. You taxi up to the catapult and hit a key to "attach" yourself to the cat. Then hit another key when you are ready to launch (maybe the choks key?). Maybe then, the game engine would give the aircraft a sudden acceleration to XXX Kph for the duration of the catapult stroke, then everything would be back to normal. Not being a programer, I would never presume to say it would be easy, but I can't immagine someone with Oleg's talent not being able to figure it out.

This would allow many more aircraft to be "based" on a CV for a coop, and would also make carrier ops in a DF server, not only feasible but, much more realistic.

Talos2005
01-19-2005, 02:31 AM
Thank you, Blackdog555 and IV_JG51_Razor, for making clear my ignorance on the subject. And, I am very pleased to learn that Oleg has already grasped the situation correctly. Oleg, please keep your mind calm, I have no intention to ask things you could not do due to limitations of the game engine.
But, I cannot help to consider why the talent and caliber of Oleg and his staff could not afford to do, agreeing with IV_JG51_Razor. Perhaps, cost judgments matter.
In any case, in the real world, CVL and CVE launched F4U mainly through a catapult.
So, we do not need to worry about F4U takeoff without it from CVE. It is historically not plausible unless we consider it a challenge to prove our flying skill.

Kind Regards,

WWMaxGunz
01-19-2005, 02:44 AM
So the change of takeoff acceleration of carrier planes made in 3.04 is not enough?

IV_JG51_Razor
01-19-2005, 07:10 AM
This is not about the patch.

womenfly
01-19-2005, 07:15 AM
Downloaded 3.04m .... then went to single mission and started the carrier takeoff with a F4U. Default starts off on a CVE, chocks in, takeoff flaps, full throttle with water enable, chocks away and .... in the drink!

No weapons/loadout .... no nothing.
25% fuel
Default Corsair
Realistic settings
http://www.americanaeroservices.com/images/Projects/F4u/rescue/r6.jpg

.... the humility!


What's up! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

Womenfly2 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

joeap
01-19-2005, 07:37 AM
I am pretty sure that F4Us were not used from the small class of CVE carriers we use in the game, but from a somewhat larger class. F4, FM2 and TBF were more common as well as Swordfish. I myself fly IJN or fly the "Hawgs" from the larger RN or USN carriers. We don't actualy want UFOs do we? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

JG54_Lukas
01-19-2005, 07:51 AM
FM-2s still have a hard, if not impossible, time taking off from CVEs with anything heavier than the 2-100lb. bomb loadout (even then, it barely makes it off the carrier).

JG53Frankyboy
01-19-2005, 08:05 AM
by comlaining give always:
weaponloadout
fuelstatus
carrierspeed
kind of carrier

if not, info is sensless

WWMaxGunz
01-19-2005, 05:15 PM
On SimHQ board there was one person who posted apologies on 3.03 carrier takeoffs
for saying "impossible" and then learning how to make it with reasonable load.

Trim nose up and use the flaps just before leaving the deck worked. He had help
in lessons and that was 3.03. How much trim and flaps you will have to find or
just find someone who does know. But don't give up without trying what you can
do by yourself beyond default configuration -- you are doing something not of
the ordinary. How did you get IL-2's with cassettes up back in original IL2?
I needed trim up, and flaps or the hill would eat my plane!

Oh yeah... don't pull up too much or you'll end up draggy as a barn.