Heavy Seas on Final Approach CV-38 Full Deck CV-38 USS Shangri-La

In the 1950s, all take offs made on a carrier were conducted with the canopy open. This would facilitate rescue in the event of a cold catapult launch or a missed landing.
High seas make landing a difficult and challenging task. As seen, aircraft are waved off from landing due to pitch and yaw of the ship in heavy seas.
On all approaches to the carrier, jets are required to go into full afterburner incase a landing is missed they are able to touch and go.

[@kevinriordan1632]

I have sea time on Nimitz class carrier and working flight deck in early 90s. I can't imagine an A3-D operating off of such a small deck. Blows me away.

[@jamesbugbee6812]

After all those beautiful little Tigers, it almost seems those flatfaced Spads had 2 increase throttle 2 catch up w/ the ship. Then the Whale arrives! 💜.

[@thomasharmon6444]

Thanks to Pacific Aviation Museum for preserving this. What a gem. And thanks to all who commented who have served us in time of need or in peace time.

[@p51dlm22]

When Douglas ruled the flight deck! Skyraiders, Skyhawks, and Skywarriors!

[@johnpalmer5131]

As are retired carrier pilot I would like to clarify a couple items. When landing on a carrier you only go to full power (ie not afterburner) so you can take off if fail to catch arresting wire (referred to as a bolter) - think of it like a “touch & go” landing ashore. Flight crews often practice this maneuver by doing carrier landings with the aircraft hook up - guaranteeing a bolter. In normal arrested landing (referred to as a trap), pilot takes power off when he/she feels the aircraft hook engages arresting wire pulling the aircraft to full stop.

[@raynic1173]

So what's the procedure, you go full power just before touch down? Please explain this is fascinating!

[@Blovi-qd4lh]

@@raynic1173 at touchdown, full power.

[@mossyhornhunter7022]

My Father served on this ship during Vietnam, thanks for posting the video and thanks to all the veterans out there.

[@bobv5806]

My dad did a Med cruise on the Shangri-La in 1969. My family went aboard many times for dinner when he had the duty. Very fond memories! Its amazing to see an A-3 come aboard.

[@stevestone5524]

Wow! That A3D looks like a monster on that deck!

[@KB4QAA]

Very heavy seas and a heaving deck. Overall great job of landing. F11F Tigers shown in nice livery. Thanks.

[@allgood6760]

.. Thanks 👍

[@dragonmeddler2152]

Anyone notice the A-3's nose wheel was positioned exactly in the middle of the landing deck's centerline when she achieved the full stop? At about 2:59.

[@moremoneyfordreadnoughts1100]

Tigers, Demons, Spads, Whales, Skyhawks.

[@johnbenet5394]

I was on the shang in V2 catapults. I hated every minute of it. When I got out I never looked back

[@mikekennedy4572]

I was amazed to see jets landing on the wooden flight deck of this ship. You can see the seam lines in some of the shots. I am guessing that the heavier modern aircraft took their toll on the wear and tear of the deck.

[@bugattieb110ss]

Did I also spot some F3 Demons on that deck...?

[@codys8754]

That A-3 barley fits on that deck! No room for error!

[@wheel6243]

I gotta think landing that A-3 on such a relatively small deck would be terrifying every time.

[@josephstevens9888]

The F-11-F Grumman Tiger was a cool looking fighter... too bad it never lived up to its billing as a fleet defense fighter, which was soon assumed by the F-8 Crusader. Grumman, however, corrected itself and went on to build the magnificent F-14 Tomcat.

[@carlmills100]

I was on Board her last cruise-Nam--1970--M division-e-vaps-front and aft--

[@dkoz8321]

Crusader is 1/4 length of the ship and 1/2 length of landing area. Skywarrior is just plain 1/2 size of the ship.

[@alainpeulet1679]

I'm astonished to see the deck still in wood ...! Maybe it's just before the next refurbishing ! Somebody can help , as i'm a model maker ( french) and build a 1/72 FJ3 Fury ( navalized F86 Sabre , what is the color of this deck ? Blue grey ? Thank's !

[@herbieshang38]

I was on the shangrila mid 60

[@thesawch63]

cool

[@jkaposi]

Would like to get a copy of this film without the huge logo.

[@theman6557]

my grandpa Fraser served on it during wwii

[@robertcombs55]

I was surprised at how small the F11F was.

[@CGCampbellJr]

and conversely, how big the skyraider(?) is

[@sequoyah59]

Grumman's F-11 Tiger looked like a hot rod.

[@KB4QAA]

Yes, it's a good looking plane. Unfortunately is was underpowered and was barely able to go supersonic. It just didn't match its contemporaries like the F-8. It had a short operational life of about 5 years.

[@aj-2savage896]

@@KB4QAA Its life was longer with the Blue Angels, who found it to be a near-perfect choice for a display team. Grumman proposed a "Super Tiger" which was not taken up.

[@briancooper2112]

Nice video 📹 👍

[@thomasmiller6151]

I was on the Shang 66-68.

[@davidcarter2379]

Me too. COD Crew and AIMD , sheet metal shop.

[@jimzarcone8923]

@@davidcarter2379 Was on carrier 66-69. Supply

[@331SVTCobra]

Was the carrier straight-deck at the time?

[@jasonhirtle9323]

CV-38 toy.

[@williamlarson3623]

As a Navy vet, c 1964 - 68, in and out of the Gulf, and as I've posted elsewhere, look how much waste in military buildup we endured back then, just to see how noble a nation we could be in mid-60s, thereby trying to destroy yet another third world country we don't approve of. Yes, noble a nation we are, it's why I pay taxes. But as for all of this I really don't know. And now apparently neither does my country. But if you think I don't know whereof I speak, was witness to many of those lost souls out there in the Tonkin Gulf back then, they without a voice to say otherwise today, and if they could -- 'did I die in vain, or not?' while we today say what?

[@KB4QAA]

WL: The US never attempted to destroy any third world country. BTW, neither the US nor South Vietnam ever invaded North Vietnam!

[@raynic1173]

@@KB4QAA No but one of the largest bombardments in the history of man kind doesn't count?

[@raynic1173]

What I find totally f--ed up is that the Vietnam was totally avoidable. we get involved to "prevent the spread of communism". Meanwhile Ho Chi Min spent decades trying to get the US as an Allie for a unified Vietnam and we ignored him, sad.

[@KB4QAA]

@@raynic1173 No, the bombardment doesn't. The US never stated the intention to destroy NVN. It halted bombings for numerous times and continually attempted negotiations with NVN. While, on the contrary, NVN stated intention was to eliminate the SVN government.

[@KB4QAA]

@@raynic1173 Yes, in the same way Nazi Germany tried to get the US and Britain to accept Nazi control of Europe.