I also think so - but I want to controll the real place by Google earth and so I ask for the place
PLAN Naval Aviation Training Facility
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
danielchin
Junior Member
a clearer picture posted in cjdby, also speculated it as a catapult device but most viewers not convinced.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Why not? Where else would you put it?
Intrepid
Major
If I miss a wire, I would prefer to have plenty runway in front of me and not behind me.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
As would we all, but that's not going to be an option for what these pilots are training for and where they will be going.
These are not novice greenhorns. They are top pilots flying naval carrier fighters, and would only be doing practice landings there near the end of their land based conversion training, shortly before they start doing it for real.
They should all be able to land on that tiny piece of real estate very consistently at that point, and if they missed a wire, they should know what they need to do to get off the deck again before they run out of runway.
If they cannot do the above 100% of the time, they would never have progressed far enough to be given a shot at trying to land there.
This stage of the training is all about nerves, so you are far better off placing the mock up where it is and have someone wash out of the program with a few blown tyres rather than find out someone doesn't have what it takes when they dump a brand new bird in the drink.
Maybe it's done this way to instill pilots the instinct of "miss wire, full throttle airborne" and not "miss wire, ok la, still plenty of run way"?
Intrepid
Major
On a carrier I am 20 meters above ground. Is it the same on land?
plawolf
Lieutenant General
They could easily load the planes with minimal fuel to give them better TWR than under most normal operational conditions to account for that.
In addition, its not like they built a wall in front of the mock up (or built it 20 meters off the ground
). I would expect the area in front to be prepared to a certain extent such that a jet could taxi along it for a fair distance without any real danger.
I have to agree with Intrepid in this case... there's just no reason for that additional danger for land based training, even considering that the pilots would be experienced.
If we look at clear photos of the training base, we can see that there are two simulated carrier runways which are used for practice, and both are arranged in the middle, parallel down the main runway such that pilots would not have to face the additional and unnecessary danger and complexity of lacking additional runway in front of them.
I also think that the original picture that is being discussed is not real -- the blown up image seems to display a flight deck which is reminiscent of the HMAS Melbourne (the carrier that China scrapped all those years back). Obviously that carrier is no longer part of China's plans for the future.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
They start off with the carrier in the middle for maximum safety, but once they have been through all the training, I think it is less of a transition, and thus safer, for the pilots to practice landing on a carrier sized deck on land, knowing there is no more runway in front of it to bail them out.
In addition, it will be very different the first time they try to land on that simulated carrier deck at the end of the runway, compared to those in the middle of the runway, both visually and mentally, and that is precisely why there is value in doing that.
It is infinitely better for pilots to get virgin nerves and mess up there compared to if the same thing happened when they are trying to land on a carrier for real.