Ramps on US amphibs

[Stan]

Just wondering why on earth they dont have them?

Was reading this article which I found very interesting after our dicussions about flight ops from British carriers with the Harriers.


‘Lusty’ is a refined carrier, U.S. pilots say - Military News, Navy News, opinions, editorials, news from Iraq, photos, reports - Navy Times

Seems they marines had a great time, I would hope with our issues we could in the future have more visits from the marines on board.

Would any one see any major issues with this in an operational situation?

[VarSity]

Nice link. Glad the yanks had a good time :D

[rickusn]

"Just wondering why on earth they dont have them?"

Because they would take up too much valuable deck space for the main task of operating USMC Assault Helicopters .

It was considered and rejected AFAIK.

Ill see if I can scare up any discussion of the topic in my archives or elsewhere.

[wabpilot]

Just wondering why on earth they dont have them?

Two reasons:

1. A ski jump would take away at least one, and possibly two landing spots for helos which would in turn markedly reduce the number of troops that could be sent ashore by air at any one time, and

2. Our 'phibs are big enough that the Harriers can deck launch at acceptable weights without the ski jump.

[Stan]

they seemed to like the ramps though Wabpilot.

I understand about losing possible helo spots, its interesting I guess.

"Another philosophical difference is that the British are open to ideas that to Americans seem goofy, but work, such as the 12-degree ramp at the bow of the ship that dramatically improves Harrier operations. Senior U.S. naval officers over the decades have vetoed the idea, saying they don’t like how it looks and that it takes up three helicopter landing spots. British and Marine officers say only one deck spot is lost to the “ski jump.”

To a man, Marine pilots want the ramps installed on their ships to improve operational flexibility and safety.

“We’re all in love with the ski ramp because when you come off that ramp, you’re flying,” Bradicich said. “From our ships, if you’re fully loaded, you need 750 feet, and even then you’ve got some sink once you clear the deck. Here, you can do the same thing in 450 feet and you’re climbing.”

I think it would be worth losing one slot if the amphibs could me multi role ships. Maybe not all of them but half of the fleet installed witht hem would provide you with even more strike capabilities.

[pdf27]

I think it would be worth losing one slot if the amphibs could me multi role ships. Maybe not all of them but half of the fleet installed witht hem would provide you with even more strike capabilities.

Not really - the US can afford to use proper carriers for strike and proper LPHs for amphibious work. It's only relatively poor countries like the US which have to combine ships to be able to do at least something.

[Stan]

you me like us rather than like the US.

I understand what you saying but still the more there are the better? hey ho just wondering, Not me saying they should its the marine pilots and they know what their job is.

[wabpilot]

they seemed to like the ramps though Wabpilot.

Yes they did. But, we don't make decisions based on what every 2LT or even every LTC wants. There is more than naval aviation to consider.

I understand about losing possible helo spots, its interesting I guess.

Ask an infantry 2LT or an Battalion Operations Officer which he would prefer. Dollars to doughnuts the S2 and the Infantry Platoon Leader would take those helo spots. When NAVAIR and Naval Sea Systems Command are weighing those matters, they take both desires into account. NAVAIR and NavSea came down in favor of helo spots mainly because we don't operate LHAs and LHDs without the support of CVNs. To be fair, an F-18 can do a lot more damage than an AV-8B even with a couple of extra bombs bombs because they had a ramp.

To a man, Marine pilots want the ramps installed on their ships to improve operational flexibility and safety.

If AV-8Bs were being lost due to launch mishaps, I might be persuaded about ramps. But, that's not where the mishaps occurr.

“We’re all in love with the ski ramp because when you come off that ramp, you’re flying,” Bradicich said. “From our ships, if you’re fully loaded, you need 750 feet, and even then you’ve got some sink once you clear the deck. Here, you can do the same thing in 450 feet and you’re climbing.”

The Brits don't have 750 feet, they only have 550.

I think it would be worth losing one slot if the amphibs could me multi role ships. Maybe not all of them but half of the fleet installed witht hem would provide you with even more strike capabilities.

If you mean we by the US, I have to disagree. The USN has plenty of room aboard its CVNs for additional aircraft. We, the USN, don't need multi-role ships. In fact, we probably need more LHDs doing gator stuff than we need LHDs trying to host VMFAs. The war we are in calls for lots of helos.

[RustyBattleship]

Quote:
To a man, Marine pilots want the ramps installed on their ships to improve operational flexibility and safety.

And I always thought that it was because Marines always overload the planes thus negating the capability of vertical take-off.