Operating planes off of a ship is tricky. Planes only work well when flying at speed, and unlike on land, there isn't a lot of space for a runway. It turned out that while flying planes off ships was relatively straightforward, landing them back aboard was very difficult. The solution was to attach floats the plane, which allowed it to not only land on the open sea, but also take off while the carrier was anchored, a common condition in the early days of naval aviation.

Seaplane carrier Engadine

But while using the sea as a runway worked well for anchored ships, it was far less suitable for operations with the fleet. The carrier would have to stop and hoist the plane in or out, costing it ground relative to the rest of the fleet, and all of the ships suitable for carrier conversion were too slow to regain position reliably. Also, while an anchored carrier would generally be somewhere protected from the worst of the ocean's waves, this was definitely not the case for a seaplane carrier operating in support of the fleet. In particular, taking off from the open ocean in any sort of sea is extremely tricky, to the point that the wakes of nearby ships might disrupt the operation. These problems were dramatically illustrated by the first serious attempt to use airplanes in concert with the fleet during the Battle of Jutland. Read more...

Before we get into the theory of operating aircraft from a ship, we need to cover some basics of aviation. Fixed-wing aircraft work by moving through the air, and using that movement to create higher pressure on the bottom of their wings, creating a force we call lift.¹ To stay in the air, the plane needs to generate lift to match its weight. The faster the plane moves, the more lift is created,² so there is a speed below which the plane will fall out of the sky, known as the "stall speed".³ One of the key tasks of the pilot involves making sure it never goes below stall speed, at least when you are close to things you don't want to hit, like the ground or the sea.

Forces on an aircraft, a graphic I am legally required to use at this point

For land-based aircraft, this means the task of taking off and landing is simple enough. Get a long, flat piece of ground, put some asphalt on it, and make sure you have a safe margin above stall speed when you don't have wheels on it. Because there's a lot of ground, it doesn't matter too much if the required distance is several thousand feet. But it's annoying to build a ship much over a thousand feet long, so if you want to fly fixed-wing aircraft from ships, you'll need to be clever. First, it's important to realize that the airplane can't tell the difference between air moving past the wings because it's moving through the air, and air moving past the wings because the air is moving past it. If you had an airplane with a stall speed of, say, 30 kts, and there was a 30 kt wind, you could simply point it into the wind and take off straight up without using the engine.⁴ Now, land-based aircraft can take advantage of this, but it would take a lot of land to be able to align with the local winds no matter which way they were blowing, so the people building airports generally just figure out which way they usually blow and build the runways accordingly, with some acceptance of crosswinds.⁵ But ships can move, and thus can both align their runways with the prevailing winds and use their speed to add to the natural wind. This is important because every knot of what is known as "wind over deck" is a knot of airspeed the plane doesn't need to gain before it runs out of deck and falls into the ocean. Read more...

36 years ago today, while conducting gunnery exercises off the coast of Puerto Rico, Turret II exploded aboard Iowa. 47 members of her crew were killed. Every year, a memorial ceremony is held for them, and I was able to attend in 2019 and honor the men who died.

• Tung Thanh Adams - Fire Controlman 3rd class (FC3) Alexandria, VA
• Robert Wallace Backherms - Gunner's Mate 3rd class (GM3) Ravenna, OH
• Dwayne Collier Battle - Electrician's Mate, Fireman Apprentice (EMFA) Rocky Mount, NC
• Walter Scot Blakey - Gunner's Mate 3rd class (GM3) Eaton Rapids, MI
• Pete Edward Bopp - Gunner's Mate 3rd class (GM3) Levittown, NY
• Ramon Jarel Bradshaw - Seaman Recruit (SR) Tampa, FL
• Philip Edward Buch - Lieutenant, Junior Grade (LTjg) Las Cruces, NM
• Eric Ellis Casey - Seaman Apprentice (SA) Mt. Airy, NC
• John Peter Cramer - Gunners Mate 2nd class (GM2) Uniontown, PA
• Milton Francis Devaul Jr. - Gunners Mate 3rd class (GM3) Solvay, NY
• Leslie Allen Everhart Jr. - Seaman Apprentice (SA) Cary, NC
• Gary John Fisk - Boatswains Mate 2nd class (BM2) Oneida, NY
• Tyrone Dwayne Foley - Seaman (SN) Bullard, TX
• Robert James Gedeon III - Seaman Apprentice (SA) Lakewood, OH
• Brian Wayne Gendron - Seaman Apprentice (SA) Madera, CA
• John Leonard Goins - Seaman Recruit (SR) Columbus, OH
• David L. Hanson - Electricians Mate 3rd class (EM3) Perkins, SD
• Ernest Edward Hanyecz - Gunners Mate 1st class (GM1) Bordentown, NJ
• Clayton Michael Hartwig - Gunners Mate 2nd class (GM2) Cleveland, OH
• Michael William Helton - Legalman 1st class (LN1) Louisville, KY
• Scott Alan Holt - Seaman Apprentice (SA) Fort Meyers, FL
• Reginald L. Johnson Jr. - Seaman Recruit (SR) Warrensville Heights, OH
• Nathaniel Clifford Jones Jr. - Seaman Apprentice (SA) Buffalo, NY
• Brian Robert Jones - Seaman (SN) Kennesaw, GA
• Michael Shannon Justice - Seaman (SN) Matewan, WV
• Edward J. Kimble - Seaman (SN) Ft. Stockton, TX
• Richard E. Lawrence - Gunners Mate 3rd class (GM3) Springfield, OH
• Richard John Lewis - Fire Controlman, Seaman Apprentice (FCSA) Northville, MI
• Jose Luis Martinez Jr. - Seaman Apprentice (SA) Hidalgo, TX
• Todd Christopher McMullen - Boatswains Mate 3rd class (BM3) Manheim, PA
• Todd Edward Miller - Seaman Recruit (SR) Ligonier, PA
• Robert Kenneth Morrison - Legalman 1st class (LN1) Jacksonville, FL
• Otis Levance Moses - Seaman (SN) Bridgeport, CN
• Darin Andrew Ogden - Gunners Mate 3rd class (GM3) Shelbyville, IN
• Ricky Ronald Peterson - Seaman (SN) Houston, MN
• Mathew Ray Price - Gunners Mate 3rd class (GM3) Burnside, PA
• Harold Earl Romine Jr. - Seaman Recruit (SR) Brandenton, FL
• Geoffrey Scott Schelin - Gunners Mate 3rd class (GMG3) Costa Mesa, CA
• Heath Eugene Stillwagon - Gunners Mate 3rd class (GM3) Connellsville, PA
• Todd Thomas Tatham - Seaman Recruit (SR) Wolcott, NY
• Jack Ernest Thompson - Gunners Mate 3rd class (GM3) Greeneville, TN
• Stephen J. Welden - Gunners Mate 2nd class (GM2) Yukon, OK
• James Darrell White - Gunners Mate 3rd class (GM3) Norwalk, CA
• Rodney Maurice White - Seaman Recruit (SR) Louisville, KY
• Michael Robert Williams - Boatswains Mate 2nd class (BM2) South Shore, KY
• John Rodney Young - Seaman (SN) Rockhill, SC
• Reginald Owen Ziegler - Senior Chief Gunners Mate (GMCS) Port Gibson, NY

They came to the Navy as strangers. Served the Navy as shipmates and friends and left the Navy as brothers in eternity. - George H.W. Bush

One aspect of military space warfare that I haven't previously covered is space-based missile defense, an omission that has become important as President Trump has floated a proposal to build just such a system as an "Iron Dome for America". It's worth taking a brief overview of the history of such plans before we get into the weeds of how such a plan would work.

Missile defense is generally divided into three phases: boost, midcourse, and terminal. Boost-phase is actions taken before the missile burns out and/or releases its warheads, while midcourse defense is targeted at warheads before they enter the atmosphere and terminal defense takes place afterwards, although the line between the two is somewhat fuzzy. Obviously, boost-phase defense is the best option if it can be arranged. A single interceptor can take out multiple warheads and the thrusting ICBM is a lot more vulnerable than a warhead. But it is also the most difficult, because there's a narrow window in which to act and people tend to object if you try to put interceptors next to their ICBM silos. Read more...

First, last Saturday, the USN commissioned its newest submarine. Normally, I would not bring this up, but SSN-797 bears the name Iowa. This is slightly bittersweet, as my ship is no longer the one and only, but I wish the new Iowa and her crew all the best as they take the name back into the active fleet.

Second, apologies for missing the OT two weeks ago, though I may drop the frequency to monthly given the low traffic they typically see.

Third, the Naval Gazing meetup starts in exactly four weeks. You should come, because it will be a lot of fun.

Overhauls are my review of Dayton, Auxiliaries Part 5, the South Dakota class and for 2024, Air Attack on Ships Parts one and two, Aurora 2.2+ Missile Warfare, Aurora Beam PD Allocation and my attempts to find out what AI thought about me.

The Suez Canal is one of the world's vital transport links, cutting thousands of miles off the trip between Europe and East Asia. In 1956, Egyptian dictator Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the canal, enraging the British and French, who had owned it and depended on it for their oil. Diplomatic attempts to regain control of the Canal failed, and they began to conspire with Israel to stage a war between Israel and Egypt, which the European powers would then "intervene" in, giving them an excuse to recapture the canal and humiliate Nasser. Unfortunately, this failed to take into account such minor factors as Arab public opinion, the opposition of the United States and the likely response of the Soviets.

Ariel Sharon (left) with his paratroopers

Things kicked off on October 29th, 1956, with Israel citing terrorist attacks out of the Egyptian-controlled Gaza Strip as the reason for its invasion.⁶ A deception plan intended to make it look like they were about to attack Jordan had worked, and the Egyptians, and the rest of the world, were taken by surprise, to the point that they weren't even sure it was a real attack and not another reprisal operation for about 24 hours. P-51 Mustangs were dispatched to cut Egyptian telephone wires with their wings and propellers, sowing confusion in the face of a three-pronged Israeli attack. In the south, the 9th Infantry Brigade seized Ras an-Naqb on the Gulf of Aqaba, infiltrating through rough terrain to bypass Egyptian positions, while the 4th Infantry Brigade struck al-Qusaymah in the north, opening the way to attack Egyptian positions in Gaza and northern Sinai. Both of these were at least in part to secure the flanks of the main action, a thrust through the central Sinai by the 202nd Paratroop Brigade, under the command of an officer named Ariel Sharon. Most of his men would walk or ride, but a battalion was dropped on Mitla Pass, two-thirds of the way across the peninsula, in an attempt to secure the chokepoint before the Egyptians could respond, and to make the threat to the Canal credible as part of the pretext for Anglo-French intervention. Unfortunately, a navigational error placed them several miles from their objective, and they dug in on the east side of the pass instead of the western end, while Sharon's plans to reach Mitla within 24 hours fell victim to inadequate transport. In the end, he would arrive in the evening of October 30th, a creditable performance given that three Egyptian strongpoints had to be overrun in the process and they were faced with Egyptian air attacks.⁷ Read more...

Recent geopolitical events have seen a shift in emphasis on the part of the US Navy with regards to the reloading of missiles at sea. While this was a significant concern in the Cold War, the end of that conflict saw the capability abandoned, with the cranes installed on many early VLS ships being landed in the late 90s and 2000s. But the growing understanding that a war with China could involve massive expenditure of munitions without the ability to retreat and reload has made the issue once again salient. While the main plan is to use a transportable crane system on the deck of a receiving ship, this has competition from a far more ambitious system tested in secret last year.

The transportable crane system is tested aboard Chosin

By far the easiest way to transfer cargo between ships is vertical replenishment or VERTREP, where a helicopter moves the load. No need to come alongside or string lines, with all of the tactical implications that brings. But missiles are big and heavy enough that a VERTREP solution would only fit one or two at a time, and there would still be the problem of moving the missile canisters from the VERTREP area into the cells themselves. The new solution, developed under the codename Dipole Pyton, bypasses all of these problems by transferring the missiles directly, using a revolutionary upgrade to the rocket booster already needed to launch from a VLS cell. By replacing the traditional solid-fuel boost motor with a thrust vector controlled liquid rocket system, the munition can be flown to and landed vertically inside a specially-modified VLS canister on the receiving ship. This modified canister is expected to receive and fire up to 17 missiles before requiring maintenance ashore. Read more...

I'm going to post a couple of shorter reviews today, of very different things.

Pensacola Lighthouse and Museum

First, while in Pensacola last month, I also visited the Pensacola Lighthouse and Museum, across the street from the Naval Aviation Museum. The lighthouse dates back to 1859 and is still operational today. It’s on the smaller side, basically just a walk through the lighthouse keeper’s old house and then the chance to climb the 177 steps to the top of the lighthouse. The museum portion was well-done, and I have to give them props for using every available space to deliver exhibits, as there was a display on the chamber pot in their bathroom. There was some interesting stuff on the history of the Pensacola area and the development of lighthouses, mixed with a lot of fairly typical historic house.

Bulbasaur quite enjoyed his visit

Website Read more...

By 1956, the British Empire was crumbling. They had left India almost a decade earlier, removing the main rationale for their control over the Suez Canal, but the growing dependence of Europe on Middle Eastern oil had made Suez more important than ever. But British actions in Egypt had left a lot of bitterness, bitterness that was exploited by Gamal Abdel Nasser, who had risen to power in a coup. Anthony Eden, the British Prime Minister, had become obsessed with Nasser, and when Nasser nationalized the Canal in July, Eden ordered plans drawn up for military action.

Anthony Eden and John Foster Dulles

The French, whose private investors still held a major stake in the Canal, were quick to sign on, and both nations believed the Egyptians would be unable to safely operate the Canal without the Suez Company's skilled pilots and technical know-how. Unfortunately, the most important member of the western powers, the United States, was not onboard with the plan to invade, and Eisenhower sent Secretary of State John Foster Dulles to try and head off military action. But Eden was determined, stung by charges of "appeasement" from MPs who well remembered the failure of British diplomacy in the years before Hitler invaded Poland.⁸ Read more...

The Suez Canal, opened in 1869, soon became one of the key chokepoints of world maritime trade, and proved so vital to the British Empire that the entire region was soon known as "East of Suez". In 1882, the British took informal control over Egypt, assuming formal control in 1914 on the outbreak of war with the Ottoman Empire. After defeating several attempts on the Canal by the Central Powers, the British pushed across the Sinai Peninsula and into the Ottoman province of Palestine. But the war had unleashed nationalism across the region, not least in Egypt, and in 1922, Britain declared Egypt independent, although with reservations regarding defense and Suez because no Egyptian government would agree to such provisions, a state of affairs that left the Egyptian nationalists far from satisfied.

Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden and an obscure politician named Winston Churchill

Through the 20s and 30s, Egyptian politics was a strange balance of power, as the King, the elected government and the British all worked to achieve their goals. Things finally began to change in 1936 when the ambitious young Foreign Secretary, Anthony Eden, managed to use Italian intervention in Ethiopia to convince the Egyptians to sign a treaty which would withdraw British troops to the Canal Zone except in time of war. The arrangement would last for 20 years, and then renewal would be discussed. Eden and the British thought this had solved the problem in the long term, while the Egyptian nationalists believed they had only 20 years of British rule left to deal with. But the treaty required Egypt to give full assistance to Britain in the event of war, a clause that became vital four years later when Italy declared war on Britain and invaded Egypt from Libya. This immediately closed the central Mediterranean to British shipping, forcing supplies for both India and Egypt to go around Africa. Despite this, the Canal remained vital to the British war effort, allowing the Royal Navy to operate in the eastern Mediterranean, where it was able to deliver victories like Taranto and Matapan. The Italians invaded Egypt shortly after entering the war, and for two years, the battle raged in the western desert, with the advantage changing hands several times. Suez itself was subject to air raids and mining efforts, but these were not enough to cut the vital lifeline. Rommel was able to get no closer than 70 miles to Alexandria, whose fall might well have made Suez untenable, and the British were ultimately victorious, first driving the Axis out of Africa and then driving Italy out of the war. Read more...