Japanese carriers and landing aids

So, I saw this video… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djR63vwT6Mo

It’s short, no clickbait, no commercials and it is informative…

BUT

Watch it first and then answer me because I’m dumb…

If the steam plume is at the end of the carrier where planes are landing at, and the carrier is sailing into the wind, then wouldn’t the steam plume travel backwards instead of forward into the arrows?

Oh he nevermind, I’m not so bright this morning… That stuff is at the opposite end of the carrier, at its front!

Damn… Sorry.
I’m going to leave up my dumb statement and take the L.
:salute:

5 Likes

:grin:
Now I have to watch that vid! :wink:

1 Like

It’s honestly really good

1 Like

I saw this a few weeks ago myself. I remember seeing them on model kits and never understood what they were.

It’s a very Japanese solution, as in a solution to a problem that doesn’t really exist. I’m unaware of similar features on any Allied carriers of the period, and I doubt pilots are constantly referencing windsocks during takeoff and landing when on shore. It seems logically suspect when you consider the tactile feedback “in the pants” from wind changes will be processed by a pilot’s brain faster than a visual indicator.

I mean it’s cool, but it reminds me of so many other “solutions” that are drummed up in this culture when the problem that’s being “solved” is only a percieved problem, and not an actual problem.

2 Likes

Informative and to the point without anybody showing their face. Just the way I like it.
And, this was news to me! Gotta love a simple solution like that!

1 Like

I’d say, that depends.
When we operate out of STOL fields, that have 800m runways, we often look at windsocks and get wind readings from both runway thresholds.
In fact, during winter operations, I get a lot of information from the drifting snow, on the runway.
Not for making minute corrections, but to decide if it’s safe to take off or land, or not.
Seeing the conditions live, at the runway, gives me a much faster feedback than asking the controller for a windcheck and listen to Wind, Threshold two two, one three zero degrees, one niner knots, gusting three zero, variation between zero eight zero and one five zero degrees and then listen to a similar readout for the other threshold.

When I saw this video I thought that we could actually use steam generators along the runway centerline…

This is of course airports with challenging wind conditions where we have special turbulence charts, generated every hour and strict wind limitations. So, this is not as important for regular airline operations.

And, just like different airline operations have different challenges, landing on a carrier presents its own unique challenges, compared to landing on a runway.

3 Likes

But do you constantly reference that windsock all throughout your takeoff/landing like you would an IFLOLS, or do you reference it once before starting the takeoff/landing phase? My understanding of the carrier steam is the former, while my understanding of windsocks is the latter.

The Japanese system seems to be designed so that the pilot is constantly monitoring and referencing that steam like a primary instrument of sorts all throughout his approach, and that steam tells him when to adjust for wind instead of leaving “that pilot ■■■■” up to the actual pilot.

No, that would be impossible as the windsock is too far out in your peripheral vision, when close in. This is why I think smoke over the runway surface would be a much better idea. Just like drifting or blowing snow helps me visualize the wind in realtime, in my field of vision.

And I don’t think the youtuber is correct in his assumption that the IJN pilots used the steam to make corrections as there’s no point in correcting your flightpath in advance, when dealing with shifting wind conditions, like gusts. Especially when landing on a boat where the very structure you’re landing on, creates most of the turbulence.
I think the pilots used the steam to make a last minute decision to land or go around.

So, while the youtuber may be off in his assumption of the tactical use of the steam, I still think it seems like it would provide pilots with valuable information.

5 Likes

I was curious if the YouTuber’s assumptions were correct as well, especially since the markings/steam are all the way at the bow. So I did some digging in Japanese.

Natively it’s called 風向標識 (lit. “wind direction sign”) and it’s normally only on the bow of the carriers, but some of them (evidently only 3 of them: Kaga, Akagi, Zuikaku) had a second one slightly aft of center. Interestingly Kaga’s middle wind indicator was a mirrored pair because it was designed to accommodate emergency landings from the opposite end of the deck. I couldn’t find any explanation of the wind indicator’s use except this:

風向標識というのは空母の艦首に描かれた矢印状のもので、矢印の先端から蒸気を出し、空母かきちんと風に正対して走っているかどうかを確認するものです
飛行機の発着艦の際は空母は風に正対して走ります。

Which basically says it was used to ensure the ship was orientated properly into the wind. I can’t find anything saying that pilots used it at all.

To my ealier pondering of why Allied carriers didn’t have something like this, the USN had these indicators since the 1930s or so:

4 Likes

I was also thinking it could just as easily be used by the helmsman or whomever gave the steering commands.

But I would say that if it ensures the ship is in the wind, then it also ensures the pilots that the ship is in the wind…? :wink:

2 Likes

Now I’m in the mood to build a model of an IJN carrier despite having Yorktown, Yamato, and a DDG waiting to be built.

2 Likes