US Navy will fire fighter jets into the air with electromagnets

US Navy will fire fighter jets into the air with electromagnets

I've been wondering when this was going to come about.
I know the catapults are workhorses. But with EMALS they should be able to launch more planes in the air without having to wait for the steam system to build up.

Now when does the EMCanon come out?

For the last 60 years, the US Navy has launched fighters from carrier decks using steam catapults. While that made for some atmospheric Top Gun shots, the jerky motion adds wear-and-tear to aircraft and pilots alike. The military is now ready to test the next generation Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) aboard the new USS Gerald R. Ford after successful land trials (see the video below). EMALS uses a prescribed dose of electromagnetic energy to smoothly launch a variety of aircraft at the precise speeds needed, reducing stress on airframes. It's more adaptable to different aircraft and launch conditions than current catapults, and is well-suited for lightweight drone systems like the X-47B now aboard US carriers.

Starting in June, the Navy will start catapulting "dead loads" into a river. Eventually, EMALS will launch F/A-18 Super Hornets, EA-18G Growlers, E2D Advanced Hawkeyes and other craft aboard Ford-class ships, which can pump out three times the voltage (13,800 volts) of older carriers. It will also catapult the controversial F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which has already been tested with EMALS at the Lakehurst land proving ground. The Navy's F-35C Lightning II variant recently went through a two-week sea trial with 124 successful "cat shots" on a regular steam launcher and is scheduled to go into service by 2018.

a reply to: grey580

Old news.

The biggest advantages to EMALS is that they can launch heavier aircraft, with longer time between maintenance. It'll be a smoother launch as well.

It's being installed on the Ford now.

Now all they have to do is bring all the carriers back for refit.

And above or beneath them all, lurk subs, rocket mines, torpedoes, and hypersonic cruise missiles.

Dinotopia of warfare.

a reply to: intrptr

They're not putting it on the older carriers, and the ones they do retrofit will have it done during normal maintenance.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: intrptr

They're not putting it on the older carriers, and the ones they do retrofit will have it done during normal maintenance.

Sorry Zaphod, nothing 'normal' about carrier operations. Unless you consider endless war 'normal'.

A railgun that fire fighter jets? sweet

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: grey580

Old news.

The biggest advantages to EMALS is that they can launch heavier aircraft, with longer time between maintenance. It'll be a smoother launch as well.

It's being installed on the Ford now.

old news or not Its still ****ing cool

I thought the new joint strike fighter jets were supposed to land and take off like the harrier jets? Wasn't that the whole idea of the design so it could also be adapted to land and take off vertically from aircraft carriers?

a reply to: WeRpeons

The Naval version F-35C will operate like a traditional fighter, the F-35B is the Marine Corps variant to replace the Harrier and that's the VTOL. The F-35Bs were intended to be used off the USMC`s Wasp assault ships like the AV-8B`s which don't need catapults.

This link the engineer talks about the original 'Electropult' from 1946.
It was a linear motor being tested to launch carrier planes.

Well, from space. a specialized satellite might be able to interfere with that launch somehow by interfering lightly with the electromagnetic launch. Just an idea of a possible flaw.

a reply to: WeRpeons

There are three versions of the Lightning.

The F-35A for the Air Force. Conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL). Requires a fixed airfield to operate from.

F-35B for the Marines. Short Take-Off Vertical Landing/Vertical Take-Off and Landing (STOVL/VTOL). Designed to operate off both small deck carriers that carry an MEU as well as full deck carriers (Nimitz and Ford classes). For anything but an airshow the vertical takeoff is useless, so the short takeoff ability is required.

F-35C for the Navy. The largest of the three, designed to operate from both fixed base installations and full deck carriers.

a reply to: rickymouse

It's shielded in a big way. A carrier deck has a huge amount of EM interference. Navy aircraft have to undergo anechoic chamber testing at a level four to five times what other aircraft have to undergo. And that's the lower end of the testing range.

a reply to: Autorico

The Ford class is just about the closest thing I can think of to a real-life battlestar (short of the Russian carriers that also had the missile armament of a heavy cruiser, that is)

The EMALS is an incredible piece of technology, let's just hope they're able to iron the kinks out of it in a timely fashion.

a reply to: Barnalby

EMALS is pretty much debugged barring something in the operational check.

Dammit!!!


...I thought I was gonna see BattleStar Galactica here.

I wish the UK would fit them to the QE class and get some C models or navalised Typhoon.

I just cant see the B lasting that long, lift fans are not the future IMO the Harrier design was much better, if you have one of the most powerful engines ever made the should diver some thrust not drive a lift fan.

I prefer the X-32 VTOL solution somehow shoed into the F-35 body. Then instead of making 3 jets you just make one and replace the vecoring lift fans with extra fuel on the non vtol version.

Hmmm. Makes me wonder if they ever considered adapting the launcher as a gun? If they put rail guns on there as well it would make another revolutionary change.
I was on the USS America CV-66 for 3 1/2 years back in the eighties. My 4 year old daughter thought it was real fun to walk over the hot cats. Took my wife out on a dependents cruise. The CO Leigton Smith had F-14s landing on the slanted landing area while dependents were on the normal flight deck. If any of the pilots loused up he could hang up his career.
Big ocean is the best place to work from. Supposedly if we were in the Mediterranean and things hit the fan we would have time to launch 4 aircraft before they took us out. Out in deep water it's a completely different thing. We once ran a long range hit on the new admiral off of Gibraltar while we were in the Red Sea. Only used aircraft from the America for fueling as well. That was a long range exercise. Apparently we caught him in a helicopter transferring from ship to ship. Nothing fired just an exercise.
Other tales as well but that's enough for now.

Why does the use of electromagnets to launch fighter jets remind me of this...



So Say We All!