503:
not. Thus was born the ZELMAL (ZEro-length Launch and MAt
Landing) program. A rocket would be used to launch a fighter aircraft, then use an inflatable rubber mat, an arresting cable, and a tailhook for the landing. The mat they came up with measured 80 x 400 feet, was 30 inches thick, and had a slick surface coated with a lubricant to assure a smooth landing. The first mat landing was performed on June 2, 1954, but was unsuccessful. The aircraft, S/N 51-1225, was piloted by a Martin Aircraft test pilot. The tailhook missed the arresting cables and tore through the mat surface, tearing open three air cells. Apparently the test pilot was not aware that the F-84 had a tail-hook/airplane flap interconnect system that automatically retracted the flaps when the tail hook contacted the arresting cable, or that he had a manual override switch. The momentary contact between the tail hook and the mat was enough to cause the flaps to retract and the aircraft to settle on the mat too quickly. Complicating the problem was the slow engine response to the pilot's full throttle command. The F-84 bounced off the mat, skidded across the lakebed, and was damaged beyond economical repair. The pilot received back injuries that grounded him for several months.
188:. The conceived mission profile would have been for the pilot to have launched a retaliatory nuclear strike against the attacker before attempting to return to any available friendly airbase, or having to eject from the aircraft if a safe landing site could not be reached. Despite the extremely high thrust generated by the rocket motor, the F-100 reportedly subjected its pilot to a maximum of 4g of acceleration forces during the takeoff phase of flight, reaching a speed of roughly 300 mph prior to the rocket motor's depletion. Once all fuel had been exhausted, the rocket motor was intended to slip backwards from its attachment points and drop away from the aircraft. However, testing revealed that this would sometimes fail to detach or cause minor damage to the aircraft's underside when doing so. Despite such difficulties being encountered, the F-100's ZELL system was considered to be feasible, but the idea of its deployment had become less attractive as time went on.
276:
38:
131:. Although launching aircraft using rocket boosters proved to be relatively trouble-free, a runway was still required for these aircraft to be able to land or else be forced to crash. The mobile launching platforms also proved to be expensive to operate and somewhat bulky, typically making them difficult to transport. The security of the mobile launchers themselves would have been a major responsibility in and of itself, especially in the case of such launchers being equipped with
255:
241:
139:
76:. As envisioned, the operational use of ZELL would have employed mobile launch platforms to disperse and hide aircraft, reducing their vulnerability in comparison to being centralised around established airbases with well-known locations. While flight testing had proved such systems to be feasible for combat aircraft, no ZELL-configured aircraft were ever used operationally. The emergence of ever-capable
177:(52,000 lbf) thrust output, which burned out seconds after ignition and dropped away from the manned fighter a second or two later. Tests of the larger F-100 Super Sabre and SM-30 (MiG-19) (with the SM-30 using the Soviet-design PRD-22R booster unit) used similar short-burn solid fueled boost motors, albeit of a much more powerful 600 kN (135,000 lbf) thrust-class output levels.
502:
By the early 1950s, short ramps were used routinely to launch early cruise missiles. Engineers figured that perhaps this concept would work just as well for manned aircraft. But eliminating the runway for launch only solved half of the problem... one still would be needed for landing. But perhaps
195:
having rendered the adoption of such aircraft to be less critical in the eyes of strategic planners. Furthermore, the desire to field combat aircraft that lacked any dependence upon relatively vulnerable landing strips had motivated the development of several aircraft capable of either vertical
111:, thus the ability to remove this dependence upon lengthy runways and airbases was highly attractive. During the 1950s, various powers began experimenting with a diverse range of methods to launch armed fighter jets, typically using some arrangement of
126:
to facilitate air operations. In the event of a sudden attack, air forces equipped with such systems could field effective air defenses and launch their own airstrikes even with their own airbases having been destroyed by an early
266:
The aircraft would then drop onto the rubber mat. A number of unmanned tests were performed before two piloted ZELMAL tests in 1954. In both cases the pilots suffered spinal injuries. The program was not continued after that.
68:
to rapidly gain speed and altitude. Such rocket boosters were limited to a short-burn duration, being typically solid-fuel and suitable for only a single use, being intended to drop away once expended.
72:
The majority of ZELL experiments, which including the conversion of several front-line combat aircraft for trialling the system, occurred during the 1950s amid the formative years of the
228:
aircraft and an inflatable rubber mat. The aircraft would perform a zero-length landing by catching an arrester cable with a tailhook, similar to an aircraft carrier landing.
107:. Conventional aircraft, reliant on large and well-established airbases, were thought to be too easily knocked out in the opening hours of a major conflict between the
657:
191:
Eventually, all projects involving ZELL aircraft were abandoned, largely due to logistical concerns, as well as the increasing efficiency of
224:
The ZELMAL program investigated the possibility of a zero-length landing. The program was conducted 1953 and 1954. It involved a
Republic
941:
650:
275:
395:
962:
643:
115:. In some concepts, such a fighter could be launched from a trailer from virtually any location, including those that could be
165:
in 1955. The
Soviets' main interest in ZELL was for point defense-format protection of airfields and critical targets using
911:
180:
Testing proved that the F-100 was capable of a ZELL launch even while carrying both an external fuel tank and a single
17:
602:
587:
572:
557:
542:
487:
289:
515:
428:
213:
122:
The primary advantage of a zero-length launch system is the elimination of the historic dependence on vulnerable
516:"Collection search - Rocket Geometry Zero Length Launch CF-105 Arrow [architectural: technical drawing]"
161:
all conducted experiments in zero-length launching. The first manned aircraft to be ZELL-launched was an
103:
became popular amongst military planners and strategists during the early years of what is now known the
622:
565:
X-Plane
Crashes: Exploring Experimental, Rocket Plane, and Spycraft Incidents, Accidents and Crash Sites
294:
833:
284:
305:
299:
205:
147:
688:
683:
764:
31:
931:
170:
8:
916:
756:
746:
667:
896:
741:
627:
Recent photos (out of use, but well preserved) of the hard-site test buildings for Mace
891:
886:
881:
876:
726:
718:
583:
568:
553:
538:
493:
483:
693:
614:
158:
154:
57:
731:
132:
61:
37:
901:
635:
204:) flight profiles; such fighters included production aircraft such as British
192:
181:
128:
81:
630:
580:
The U.S. Nuclear
Arsenal: A History of Weapons and Delivery Systems Since 1945
258:
956:
936:
871:
698:
317:
93:
497:
921:
906:
703:
112:
65:
54:
535:
Lost fighters: a history of U.S. jet fighter programs that didn't make it
477:
926:
606:
185:
174:
138:
116:
108:
240:
328:
123:
104:
84:
mission, while questions over practicality had also played a role.
73:
863:
769:
675:
482:. William G. Holder. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Pub. pp. 147–149.
77:
429:
Greg Goebel's Air
Vectors' "The Zero-Length Launch Fighter" page
80:
had greatly reduced the strategic necessity of aircraft for the
814:
799:
209:
166:
823:
809:
779:
162:
96:, but due to them losing the war, development was cut short.
99:
According to aviation author Tony Moore, the concept of the
853:
848:
843:
838:
828:
819:
804:
794:
789:
784:
774:
736:
333:
323:
270:
201:
197:
169:. The American tests with the F-84s started with using the
92:
During the second world war, Germany experimented with the
41:
A USAF F-100D Super Sabre using a zero-length-launch system
396:"Fighter Plane Launched Like Missile From Truck Platform."
219:
212:, as well as experimental prototypes such as the American
279:
A Lockheed F-104G during tests at
Edwards Air Force Base
119:
or otherwise concealed up until the moment of launch.
623:"Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. Launch Complex 21"
954:
665:
320:—World War II vertical launch rocket interceptor
479:Straight up : a history of vertical flight
631:Video of MiG-19 performing a ZELL-style launch
651:
382:
380:
378:
376:
374:
53:(ZLL, ZLTO, ZEL, ZELL) was a method whereby
617:. 38th Tactical Missile Wing, tribute site.
605:. Greg Goebel's AIR VECTORS. Archived from
30:"ZELL" redirects here. For other uses, see
658:
644:
433:
371:
364:
362:
360:
358:
356:
354:
460:
404:
550:Aviation Management: Global Perspectives
451:
442:
274:
271:Manned aircraft involved in ZELL testing
137:
64:could be near-vertically launched using
36:
578:Polmar, Norman and Robert Stan Norris.
475:
351:
220:ZELMAL (ZEro-length Launch MAt Landing)
14:
955:
639:
27:Method of launching military aircraft
552:. Global India Publications, 2009.
173:solid-fuel boost motor of some 240
24:
912:Shipborne rolling vertical landing
615:"Martin Matador and Mace missiles"
239:
25:
974:
595:
290:North American F-100D Super Sabre
603:"The Zero-Length Launch Fighter"
253:
582:. Naval Institute Press, 2009.
526:
508:
469:
214:McDonnell Douglas F-15 STOL/MTD
422:
419:Norman and Norris 2009, p. 32.
413:
389:
13:
1:
963:Types of take-off and landing
339:
344:
200:) or short takeoff/landing (
7:
311:
51:zero-length take-off system
10:
979:
295:Lockheed F-104 Starfighter
259:ZELMAL rare color footage)
87:
29:
942:Floating landing platform
862:
834:Launch and recovery cycle
755:
717:
674:
567:. Specialty Press, 2008.
285:Republic F-84G Thunderjet
252:
238:
233:
101:zero-length launch system
47:zero-length launch system
306:Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow
142:F-84 during ZELL testing
135:-armed strike fighters.
476:Markman, Steve (2000).
300:Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19
206:Hawker Siddeley Harrier
148:United States Air Force
937:Water landing/ditching
689:Non-rocket spacelaunch
684:Balanced field takeoff
466:Moore 2008, pp. 74-75.
457:Moore 2008, pp. 73-74.
448:Moore 2008, pp. 72-73.
280:
244:
143:
42:
765:Brodie landing system
439:Khurana 2009, p. 126.
401:, March 1955, p. 108.
386:Khurana 2009, p. 147.
278:
243:
141:
40:
932:Touch-and-go landing
410:Holder 2007, p. 138.
171:Martin MGM-1 Matador
917:Short-field landing
757:Takeoff and landing
668:takeoff and landing
533:Holder, William G.
709:Zero-length launch
368:Moore 2008, p. 72.
281:
245:
144:
43:
18:Zero length launch
950:
949:
892:Emergency landing
887:Deadstick landing
882:Crosswind landing
877:Corkscrew landing
719:Assisted take-off
609:on 22 April 2012.
399:Popular Mechanics
264:
263:
196:takeoff/landing (
157:, and the Soviet
16:(Redirected from
970:
694:Rejected takeoff
660:
653:
646:
637:
636:
626:
618:
610:
520:
519:
512:
506:
505:
473:
467:
464:
458:
455:
449:
446:
440:
437:
431:
426:
420:
417:
411:
408:
402:
393:
387:
384:
369:
366:
257:
256:
231:
230:
227:
21:
978:
977:
973:
972:
971:
969:
968:
967:
953:
952:
951:
946:
858:
751:
732:Ground carriage
713:
670:
664:
621:
613:
601:
598:
593:
529:
524:
523:
514:
513:
509:
490:
474:
470:
465:
461:
456:
452:
447:
443:
438:
434:
427:
423:
418:
414:
409:
405:
394:
390:
385:
372:
367:
352:
347:
342:
314:
273:
254:
248:
234:External videos
225:
222:
208:and the Soviet
193:guided missiles
184:mounted on its
90:
62:attack aircraft
35:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
976:
966:
965:
948:
947:
945:
944:
939:
934:
929:
924:
919:
914:
909:
904:
902:Forced landing
899:
894:
889:
884:
879:
874:
868:
866:
860:
859:
857:
856:
851:
846:
841:
836:
831:
826:
817:
812:
807:
802:
797:
792:
787:
782:
777:
772:
767:
761:
759:
753:
752:
750:
749:
744:
739:
734:
729:
723:
721:
715:
714:
712:
711:
706:
701:
696:
691:
686:
680:
678:
672:
671:
663:
662:
655:
648:
640:
634:
633:
628:
625:. 2 June 2008.
619:
611:
597:
596:External links
594:
592:
591:
576:
561:
548:Khurana, K.C.
546:
530:
528:
525:
522:
521:
507:
488:
468:
459:
450:
441:
432:
421:
412:
403:
388:
370:
349:
348:
346:
343:
341:
338:
337:
336:
331:
326:
321:
313:
310:
309:
308:
303:
297:
292:
287:
272:
269:
262:
261:
250:
249:
246:
236:
235:
221:
218:
182:nuclear weapon
129:nuclear attack
89:
86:
82:nuclear strike
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
975:
964:
961:
960:
958:
943:
940:
938:
935:
933:
930:
928:
925:
923:
920:
918:
915:
913:
910:
908:
905:
903:
900:
898:
897:Flexible deck
895:
893:
890:
888:
885:
883:
880:
878:
875:
873:
872:Belly landing
870:
869:
867:
865:
861:
855:
852:
850:
847:
845:
842:
840:
837:
835:
832:
830:
827:
825:
821:
818:
816:
813:
811:
808:
806:
803:
801:
798:
796:
793:
791:
788:
786:
783:
781:
778:
776:
773:
771:
768:
766:
763:
762:
760:
758:
754:
748:
745:
743:
740:
738:
735:
733:
730:
728:
725:
724:
722:
720:
716:
710:
707:
705:
702:
700:
699:Rocket launch
697:
695:
692:
690:
687:
685:
682:
681:
679:
677:
673:
669:
661:
656:
654:
649:
647:
642:
641:
638:
632:
629:
624:
620:
616:
612:
608:
604:
600:
599:
589:
588:1-5575-0681-7
585:
581:
577:
574:
573:1-5800-7222-4
570:
566:
563:Moore, Tony.
562:
559:
558:9-3802-2839-2
555:
551:
547:
544:
543:0-7680-1712-2
540:
537:. SAE, 2007.
536:
532:
531:
517:
511:
504:
499:
495:
491:
489:0-7643-1204-9
485:
481:
480:
472:
463:
454:
445:
436:
430:
425:
416:
407:
400:
397:
392:
383:
381:
379:
377:
375:
365:
363:
361:
359:
357:
355:
350:
335:
332:
330:
327:
325:
322:
319:
318:Bachem Ba 349
316:
315:
307:
304:
301:
298:
296:
293:
291:
288:
286:
283:
282:
277:
268:
260:
251:
242:
237:
232:
229:
217:
215:
211:
207:
203:
199:
194:
189:
187:
183:
178:
176:
172:
168:
164:
160:
156:
153:
149:
140:
136:
134:
130:
125:
120:
118:
114:
113:rocket motors
110:
106:
102:
97:
95:
94:Bachem Ba 349
85:
83:
79:
75:
70:
67:
66:rocket motors
63:
59:
56:
52:
48:
39:
33:
19:
922:Soft landing
907:Hard landing
708:
704:Space launch
607:the original
579:
564:
549:
534:
527:Bibliography
510:
501:
478:
471:
462:
453:
444:
435:
424:
415:
406:
398:
391:
265:
223:
190:
179:
152:Bundeswehr's
151:
145:
121:
100:
98:
91:
71:
50:
46:
44:
742:Rocket sled
186:hard points
117:camouflaged
109:superpowers
927:Splashdown
340:References
247:A-10 STORY
175:kilonewton
666:Types of
345:Citations
155:Luftwaffe
124:airfields
957:Category
747:Ski-jump
727:Catapult
498:46790785
329:CAM ship
312:See also
105:Cold War
78:missiles
74:Cold War
58:fighters
864:Landing
770:CATOBAR
676:Takeoff
167:MiG-19s
133:nuclear
88:History
815:V/STOL
800:STOBAR
586:
571:
556:
541:
496:
486:
210:Yak-38
150:, the
824:VTOHL
810:STOVL
780:eVTOL
302:SM-30
163:F-84G
854:HTVL
849:HTHL
844:VTHL
839:VTVL
829:VTOL
820:VTHL
805:STOL
795:RTOL
790:QTOL
785:PTOL
775:CTOL
737:JATO
584:ISBN
569:ISBN
554:ISBN
539:ISBN
494:OCLC
484:ISBN
334:VTOL
324:JATO
226:F-84
202:STOL
198:VTOL
146:The
60:and
45:The
32:Zell
159:VVS
55:jet
49:or
959::
500:.
492:.
373:^
353:^
216:.
822:/
659:e
652:t
645:v
590:.
575:.
560:.
545:.
518:.
34:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
