- Posts: 5026
- Thank you received: 440
- Forum
- Open Forum
- Miscellaneous Research Topics
- General Airfield or 20th Century Military Architecture Discussion Topics
- Number of runways
Number of runways
- carnaby
-
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
Less
More
28 Dec 2017 09:20 #21
by carnaby
Time to put this one to bed. Naval aircraft had folding wings. This meant that they had a narrower undercarriage than conventional aircraft which made them inherently unstable in cross-wind conditions. Hence the carriers aligned themselves accordingly, and thus ground stations needed more runways.
Source: something I read in TNA a while ago,
Plan A is always more effective when the problem you are working on understands that Plan B will involve the use of dynamite
Replied by carnaby on topic Number of runways
Naval airfields seem to have often had multiple (short) runways ....(EG Yeovilton, Gosport,Predannack)
Could it be because naval aviators would generally be used to landing directly into wind (carrier ops?)...I don't know but seems feasable.
Time to put this one to bed. Naval aircraft had folding wings. This meant that they had a narrower undercarriage than conventional aircraft which made them inherently unstable in cross-wind conditions. Hence the carriers aligned themselves accordingly, and thus ground stations needed more runways.
Source: something I read in TNA a while ago,
Plan A is always more effective when the problem you are working on understands that Plan B will involve the use of dynamite
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- canberra
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 5639
- Thank you received: 122
28 Dec 2017 10:41 #22
by canberra
Replied by canberra on topic Number of runways
An interesting point about naval aircraft having a narrower undercarriage. From what Ive read of the Seafire, it wasnt liked on carriers because of its narrow undercarriage.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Peter Kirk
-
- Offline
- Moderator
-
Less
More
- Posts: 12446
- Thank you received: 1029
28 Dec 2017 10:48 #23
by Peter Kirk
No Amount Of Evidence Will Ever Persuade An Idiot (probably not Mark Twain)
Replied by Peter Kirk on topic Number of runways
Regarding Predannack, I think it had four runways in 1942 (aerial photo, date uncertain) with the west end of the E-W runway extending slightly beyond the perimeter track and the NE end of the NE-SW runway also extended. All four runways look bedded in with no construction scars so they must have been built close together or at the same time. Note that this was before the later major additions.
Could the extra runways here and at Portreath be for similar reasons to the RN airfields, namely the prevailing winds, which are stronger on the exposed west coasts?
I can't recall if Culdrose was originally intended to be a RN airfield but it seems to be an exception if it was.
Could the extra runways here and at Portreath be for similar reasons to the RN airfields, namely the prevailing winds, which are stronger on the exposed west coasts?
I can't recall if Culdrose was originally intended to be a RN airfield but it seems to be an exception if it was.
No Amount Of Evidence Will Ever Persuade An Idiot (probably not Mark Twain)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- canberra
- Offline
- Platinum Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 5639
- Thank you received: 122
28 Dec 2017 10:52 #24
by canberra
Replied by canberra on topic Number of runways
AFAIK Culdrose was always intended to be Navy.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- ColinBa
- Offline
- Senior Member
-
Less
More
- Posts: 377
- Thank you received: 13
28 Dec 2017 14:02 #25
by ColinBa
Replied by ColinBa on topic Number of runways
Am I right in thinking that most RAF airfields up to the BoB period were grass?
If you look at old film of this period most fighters seem to be taking off from grass fields into the wind
The need for hard runways was to stop bombers and particularly heavy bombers bogging down in wet weather.
I have read that parts of the runways on some naval stations had decks painted on them. There is some description of Michael Hordern training as a Flight Director cycling around and directing aircraft onto the painted deck.
I don't think there were hard and fast rules and a number of grass airfields had runways tailored for subsequent users.
If you look at old film of this period most fighters seem to be taking off from grass fields into the wind
The need for hard runways was to stop bombers and particularly heavy bombers bogging down in wet weather.
I have read that parts of the runways on some naval stations had decks painted on them. There is some description of Michael Hordern training as a Flight Director cycling around and directing aircraft onto the painted deck.
I don't think there were hard and fast rules and a number of grass airfields had runways tailored for subsequent users.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Peter Kirk
-
- Offline
- Moderator
-
Less
More
- Posts: 12446
- Thank you received: 1029
28 Dec 2017 14:33 #26
by Peter Kirk
No Amount Of Evidence Will Ever Persuade An Idiot (probably not Mark Twain)
Replied by Peter Kirk on topic Number of runways
I believe a few fighter airfield had concrete runways in the summer of 1940, although not always complete. Biggin Hill and North Weald spring to mind.
No Amount Of Evidence Will Ever Persuade An Idiot (probably not Mark Twain)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Forum
- Open Forum
- Miscellaneous Research Topics
- General Airfield or 20th Century Military Architecture Discussion Topics
- Number of runways
Time to create page: 0.039 seconds
