492:
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.
177:. 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.
265:
120:. 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
27:
244:
230:
128:
65:. 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
166:(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.
491:
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
184:
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
100:, 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
115:
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
255:
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.
57:
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.
61:
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
646:
217:
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.
264:
96:. 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
930:
639:
951:
632:
180:
Eventually, all projects involving ZELL aircraft were abandoned, largely due to logistical concerns, as well as the increasing efficiency of
213:
The ZELMAL program investigated the possibility of a zero-length landing. The program was conducted 1953 and 1954. It involved a
Republic
900:
576:
561:
546:
531:
476:
384:
278:
202:
104:. In some concepts, such a fighter could be launched from a trailer from virtually any location, including those that could be
154:
in 1955. The
Soviets' main interest in ZELL was for point defense-format protection of airfields and critical targets using
169:
Testing proved that the F-100 was capable of a ZELL launch even while carrying both an external fuel tank and a single
591:
504:
283:
417:
822:
273:
111:
The primary advantage of a zero-length launch system is the elimination of the historic dependence on vulnerable
505:"Collection search - Rocket Geometry Zero Length Launch CF-105 Arrow [architectural: technical drawing]"
294:
288:
194:
136:
677:
672:
150:
all conducted experiments in zero-length launching. The first manned aircraft to be ZELL-launched was an
92:
became popular amongst military planners and strategists during the early years of what is now known the
753:
611:
554:
X-Plane
Crashes: Exploring Experimental, Rocket Plane, and Spycraft Incidents, Accidents and Crash Sites
20:
920:
159:
905:
745:
735:
656:
26:
730:
880:
875:
870:
865:
715:
707:
572:
557:
542:
527:
482:
472:
682:
147:
143:
46:
720:
121:
50:
890:
616:
Recent photos (out of use, but well preserved) of the hard-site test buildings for Mace
181:
170:
117:
70:
945:
925:
860:
687:
306:
82:
127:
910:
895:
692:
603:
101:
54:
43:
885:
229:
624:
193:) flight profiles; such fighters included production aircraft such as British
915:
619:
569:
The U.S. Nuclear
Arsenal: A History of Weapons and Delivery Systems Since 1945
247:
174:
163:
105:
97:
486:
524:
Lost fighters: a history of U.S. jet fighter programs that didn't make it
466:
317:
112:
93:
62:
852:
758:
664:
595:
66:
803:
788:
198:
155:
73:
mission, while questions over practicality had also played a role.
812:
798:
768:
263:
151:
126:
25:
471:. William G. Holder. Atglen, PA: Schiffer Pub. pp. 147–149.
842:
837:
832:
827:
817:
808:
793:
783:
778:
773:
763:
725:
418:
Greg Goebel's Air
Vectors' "The Zero-Length Launch Fighter" page
322:
312:
190:
186:
69:
had greatly reduced the strategic necessity of aircraft for the
628:
85:, but due to them losing the war, development was cut short.
228:
88:
According to aviation author Tony Moore, the concept of the
158:. The American tests with the F-84s started with using the
81:
During the second world war, Germany experimented with the
30:
A USAF F-100D Super Sabre using a zero-length-launch system
385:"Fighter Plane Launched Like Missile From Truck Platform."
201:, as well as experimental prototypes such as the American
268:
A Lockheed F-104G during tests at
Edwards Air Force Base
108:
or otherwise concealed up until the moment of launch.
612:"Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. Launch Complex 21"
851:
744:
706:
663:
222:
309:—World War II vertical launch rocket interceptor
468:Straight up : a history of vertical flight
620:Video of MiG-19 performing a ZELL-style launch
640:
371:
369:
367:
365:
363:
8:
42:(ZLL, ZLTO, ZEL, ZELL) was a method whereby
606:. 38th Tactical Missile Wing, tribute site.
594:. Greg Goebel's AIR VECTORS. Archived from
19:"ZELL" redirects here. For other uses, see
647:
633:
625:
353:
351:
349:
347:
345:
343:
539:Aviation Management: Global Perspectives
260:Manned aircraft involved in ZELL testing
53:could be near-vertically launched using
567:Polmar, Norman and Robert Stan Norris.
339:
209:ZELMAL (ZEro-length Launch MAt Landing)
219:
16:Method of launching military aircraft
7:
541:. Global India Publications, 2009.
162:solid-fuel boost motor of some 240
901:Shipborne rolling vertical landing
604:"Martin Matador and Mace missiles"
14:
279:North American F-100D Super Sabre
592:"The Zero-Length Launch Fighter"
242:
571:. Naval Institute Press, 2009.
203:McDonnell Douglas F-15 STOL/MTD
408:Norman and Norris 2009, p. 32.
1:
952:Types of take-off and landing
189:) or short takeoff/landing (
40:zero-length take-off system
968:
284:Lockheed F-104 Starfighter
248:ZELMAL rare color footage)
18:
931:Floating landing platform
823:Launch and recovery cycle
556:. Specialty Press, 2008.
274:Republic F-84G Thunderjet
241:
227:
90:zero-length launch system
36:zero-length launch system
295:Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow
131:F-84 during ZELL testing
124:-armed strike fighters.
465:Markman, Steve (2000).
289:Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19
195:Hawker Siddeley Harrier
137:United States Air Force
926:Water landing/ditching
678:Non-rocket spacelaunch
673:Balanced field takeoff
455:Moore 2008, pp. 74-75.
446:Moore 2008, pp. 73-74.
437:Moore 2008, pp. 72-73.
269:
233:
132:
31:
754:Brodie landing system
428:Khurana 2009, p. 126.
390:, March 1955, p. 108.
375:Khurana 2009, p. 147.
267:
232:
130:
29:
921:Touch-and-go landing
399:Holder 2007, p. 138.
160:Martin MGM-1 Matador
906:Short-field landing
746:Takeoff and landing
657:takeoff and landing
522:Holder, William G.
698:Zero-length launch
357:Moore 2008, p. 72.
270:
234:
133:
32:
939:
938:
881:Emergency landing
876:Deadstick landing
871:Crosswind landing
866:Corkscrew landing
708:Assisted take-off
598:on 22 April 2012.
388:Popular Mechanics
253:
252:
185:takeoff/landing (
146:, and the Soviet
959:
683:Rejected takeoff
649:
642:
635:
626:
615:
607:
599:
509:
508:
501:
495:
494:
462:
456:
453:
447:
444:
438:
435:
429:
426:
420:
415:
409:
406:
400:
397:
391:
382:
376:
373:
358:
355:
246:
245:
220:
216:
967:
966:
962:
961:
960:
958:
957:
956:
942:
941:
940:
935:
847:
740:
721:Ground carriage
702:
659:
653:
610:
602:
590:
587:
582:
518:
513:
512:
503:
502:
498:
479:
464:
463:
459:
454:
450:
445:
441:
436:
432:
427:
423:
416:
412:
407:
403:
398:
394:
383:
379:
374:
361:
356:
341:
336:
331:
303:
262:
243:
237:
223:External videos
214:
211:
197:and the Soviet
182:guided missiles
173:mounted on its
79:
51:attack aircraft
24:
17:
12:
11:
5:
965:
963:
955:
954:
944:
943:
937:
936:
934:
933:
928:
923:
918:
913:
908:
903:
898:
893:
891:Forced landing
888:
883:
878:
873:
868:
863:
857:
855:
849:
848:
846:
845:
840:
835:
830:
825:
820:
815:
806:
801:
796:
791:
786:
781:
776:
771:
766:
761:
756:
750:
748:
742:
741:
739:
738:
733:
728:
723:
718:
712:
710:
704:
703:
701:
700:
695:
690:
685:
680:
675:
669:
667:
661:
660:
654:
652:
651:
644:
637:
629:
623:
622:
617:
614:. 2 June 2008.
608:
600:
586:
585:External links
583:
581:
580:
565:
550:
537:Khurana, K.C.
535:
519:
517:
514:
511:
510:
496:
477:
457:
448:
439:
430:
421:
410:
401:
392:
377:
359:
338:
337:
335:
332:
330:
327:
326:
325:
320:
315:
310:
302:
299:
298:
297:
292:
286:
281:
276:
261:
258:
251:
250:
239:
238:
235:
225:
224:
210:
207:
171:nuclear weapon
118:nuclear attack
78:
75:
71:nuclear strike
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
964:
953:
950:
949:
947:
932:
929:
927:
924:
922:
919:
917:
914:
912:
909:
907:
904:
902:
899:
897:
894:
892:
889:
887:
886:Flexible deck
884:
882:
879:
877:
874:
872:
869:
867:
864:
862:
861:Belly landing
859:
858:
856:
854:
850:
844:
841:
839:
836:
834:
831:
829:
826:
824:
821:
819:
816:
814:
810:
807:
805:
802:
800:
797:
795:
792:
790:
787:
785:
782:
780:
777:
775:
772:
770:
767:
765:
762:
760:
757:
755:
752:
751:
749:
747:
743:
737:
734:
732:
729:
727:
724:
722:
719:
717:
714:
713:
711:
709:
705:
699:
696:
694:
691:
689:
688:Rocket launch
686:
684:
681:
679:
676:
674:
671:
670:
668:
666:
662:
658:
650:
645:
643:
638:
636:
631:
630:
627:
621:
618:
613:
609:
605:
601:
597:
593:
589:
588:
584:
578:
577:1-5575-0681-7
574:
570:
566:
563:
562:1-5800-7222-4
559:
555:
552:Moore, Tony.
551:
548:
547:9-3802-2839-2
544:
540:
536:
533:
532:0-7680-1712-2
529:
526:. SAE, 2007.
525:
521:
520:
515:
506:
500:
497:
493:
488:
484:
480:
478:0-7643-1204-9
474:
470:
469:
461:
458:
452:
449:
443:
440:
434:
431:
425:
422:
419:
414:
411:
405:
402:
396:
393:
389:
386:
381:
378:
372:
370:
368:
366:
364:
360:
354:
352:
350:
348:
346:
344:
340:
333:
328:
324:
321:
319:
316:
314:
311:
308:
307:Bachem Ba 349
305:
304:
300:
296:
293:
290:
287:
285:
282:
280:
277:
275:
272:
271:
266:
259:
257:
249:
240:
231:
226:
221:
218:
208:
206:
204:
200:
196:
192:
188:
183:
178:
176:
172:
167:
165:
161:
157:
153:
149:
145:
142:
138:
129:
125:
123:
119:
114:
109:
107:
103:
102:rocket motors
99:
95:
91:
86:
84:
83:Bachem Ba 349
76:
74:
72:
68:
64:
59:
56:
55:rocket motors
52:
48:
45:
41:
37:
28:
22:
911:Soft landing
896:Hard landing
697:
693:Space launch
596:the original
568:
553:
538:
523:
516:Bibliography
499:
490:
467:
460:
451:
442:
433:
424:
413:
404:
395:
387:
380:
254:
212:
179:
168:
141:Bundeswehr's
140:
134:
110:
89:
87:
80:
60:
39:
35:
33:
731:Rocket sled
175:hard points
106:camouflaged
98:superpowers
916:Splashdown
329:References
236:A-10 STORY
164:kilonewton
655:Types of
334:Citations
144:Luftwaffe
113:airfields
946:Category
736:Ski-jump
716:Catapult
487:46790785
318:CAM ship
301:See also
94:Cold War
67:missiles
63:Cold War
47:fighters
853:Landing
759:CATOBAR
665:Takeoff
156:MiG-19s
122:nuclear
77:History
804:V/STOL
789:STOBAR
575:
560:
545:
530:
485:
475:
199:Yak-38
139:, the
813:VTOHL
799:STOVL
769:eVTOL
291:SM-30
152:F-84G
843:HTVL
838:HTHL
833:VTHL
828:VTVL
818:VTOL
809:VTHL
794:STOL
784:RTOL
779:QTOL
774:PTOL
764:CTOL
726:JATO
573:ISBN
558:ISBN
543:ISBN
528:ISBN
483:OCLC
473:ISBN
323:VTOL
313:JATO
215:F-84
191:STOL
187:VTOL
135:The
49:and
34:The
21:Zell
148:VVS
44:jet
38:or
948::
489:.
481:.
362:^
342:^
205:.
811:/
648:e
641:t
634:v
579:.
564:.
549:.
534:.
507:.
23:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
