Talk:Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System

message: I am planning on adding quite a bit more to this article, including more information about the components of the system, the pros and cons of the EMALS compared to the steam catapult, and a little bit about the history of the system.  Any suggestions for more content that would be relevant to this article? –bl7904
:That all sounds good.  Just do what you can to cite your sources, so that the information you add doesn't get challenged as original research.  I look forward to your work.--Father Goose (talk) 06:41, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Goose, thanks for the feedback.  And I know all of my footnotes reference the same source at the moment; I do have other sources but haven't included them yet in the article.  Bl7904 (talk) 21:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I removed the sentence.  You could have as well (be bold!), but thanks for the explanation here as well.--Father Goose (talk) 00:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: Could someone please help me with my second reference?  The url is displaying as text instead of a link, and I can't figure out what's wrong with it.  Thanks. Bl7904 (talk) 03:33, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You apparently needed an http: in front of it.--Father Goose (talk) 07:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Help on references

message: There very much needs to be a section on criticisms of EMALS and the problems the Navy is having with the system. There have been multiple test failures, most notably the Jan 2010 accident that damaged the system and set testing back for months. Rep. Gene Taylor has noted in hearings that the Navy basically has no Plan B if this system isn't ready on time, and that the CBO says that EMALS is alone responsible for over $1.3 billion in the Ford's cost overruns. This article is lacking without these kinds of details. DesScorp (talk) 18:06, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism

message: I've heard, steam catapults may have problems, caused by low temperatures in nothern seas - frozen water can block and damage catapult's tubes and track. That is why Russian carrier has no catapults (Russian's said it). Is it true? Ходок (talk) 07:50, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Advantages

message: I ran across this article by accident and a section that seems useful would be discussion of the launch systems' electromagnetic pulse signature and its affect on launch personal, avionics plus weapons electronics. A quick search finds Carrier Launch System Passes Initial Tests which says "So far, tests show no signs that the powerful electrical surges cause electromagnetic interference with aircraft, ammunition or ejection seats." --Marc Kupper|talk 19:41, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electromagnetic pulse? 

message: Is there still a large shake and boom below deck foward ship with the electromag launch sys?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul kindle (talk • contribs) 02:59, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  cat- boom 

message: I believe there's a small error in the section where the article states that the catapult successfully launched an F35C.  I believe it should be F35B.  There's a picture in the article about the F35 where what appears to be an F35B is launched.  Both versions are intended for carrier-use, but the C-version is supposed to be launched from a conventional carrier while the B is supposed to be launched from LHDs.
07:33, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The article linked to clearly calls the aircraft the F-35C. Only the C model is capable of using catapults and arresting gear, even EMALS. Also, the aircraft in both the photos and the video is clearly marked with "CF" on the tail; the B models carry a "BF" prefix, and the USAF A models are marked with "AF". -BilCat (talk) 12:53, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: F-35B or C

message: Reference [2] was:
http://www.edn.com/contents/images/207108.pdf
Is now found at:
http://www.edn.com/Pdf/ViewPdf?contentItemId=4341471
(Apologies -- have never made a Wikipedia entry, and don't want to mess up the page)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Banchang (talk • contribs) 00:46, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have fixed it SwiftingSpeed (talk) 08:32, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken link to EDN article 

message: Just came across a news article, putting it here for reference. It also suggests that the arrestor system is not ready for use, yet.  June 19, 2015. and same at  "Icebergs ahead for expensive US, UK aircraft carrier projects" - 220 of Borg 06:52, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ship ready, launcher not? 

message: 1. Does EMALS rely on super-conductivity, like maglev railways do or is is it a room-temperature system? The article could clarify this detail.
2. If  understand correctly, EMALS uses juice from fission reactors to spin up 3-4 giant unipolar generators to very high RPM, which are then tapped for insanely large electric currents for ~3 seconds of launch. However, should any of those rotors fail catastrophically in the axle at max RPM, the disc will run amok and grind down the ship's foward secion in circular-saw style? What measures prevent sinking in that case?
(The motor-generators of diesel electric locomotives, while slower RPM, sometimes break free and wreck the vehicle down to chassis and then run across the field, collapsing structures they encounter, spinning around like a pop diva, before coming to rest.)
3. The article doesn't say if EMALS is planned for civilian use as well?
(The newest generation of jetliners, e.g. B787, A350 appear to have unreasonably long take-off runs, up to 3100 meters at maximum weight. This leaves pilots with a tiny margin of safety, should any mishap requiring stopping occur during the dash. Note that most airstrips are 3750 meters long or less. But very central airports, e.g. New York, London, Tokyo could possibly install an EMALS-derived system under the runway to lessen take-off run distance and save fuel while increasing safety.) 92.52.233.232 (talk) 12:51, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requests. 

message: Hi BilCat, can you explain why you think there should be no link between the two articles?Thanks, --Gnom (talk) 13:55, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I am reinserting the link. See the above question about a civilian application of this concept. --Gnom (talk) 09:45, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:   [[Ground carriage]] 

message: Someone just took the Trump Quote this out of the article. When the commander in chief of the US forces criticizes this system, it's relevant.104.163.158.183 (talk) 04:36, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I took it out per WP:NOTNEWS. Trump criticizes almost everything, and most of them are just negotiating ploys. By regurgitating everything he says, you just play right into his hand. - BilCat (talk) 04:40, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: This does not have anything to do with presidential negotiating. Wikipedia is not a site whose content varies depending on what we think the speaker meant: We are not here to interpret the value of a quote on the article subject by the 'leader of the free world.' Set up an RFC if you do not think it should be included. 104.163.158.183 (talk) 04:44, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: An RFC isn't needed,just a consensus here to readd it. Till you get it, keep it out. - BilCat (talk) 04:46, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You're the only one objecting, because you did not like my edit summary about Trump's "word salad", which is actually a term that is widely used to refer to his speech. (See "President Trump’s wilted word salad on helping urban communities" (Washington Post), "Donald Trump’s Chilling Language, and the Fearsome Power of Words" (Vanity Fair) and  "2016: the year of anger, Trump’s ‘word salad’ and anti-rhetoric" (Financial Times), for example.) A half-dozen editors before you and I were fine with the quote. More voices are needed here.104.163.158.183 (talk) 04:59, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm objecting because it's much ado about nothing, and because WP is not news. Trump isn't the first person to criticize EMALS, and no policy decision has been made either, as EMALS hasn't been canceled. - BilCat (talk) 05:12, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: He's the head of the US Military-- the organization that ordered the system that the article is about. Sure, he looks, talks and thinks like a fool, but what he says about anything while he is president is a matter of importance and part of a lasting public record that will be repeated for decades, if not centuries. It has been that way with every president: what they say matters.  You do not get to pick and choose which statement you like. He made a blistering and long comment about this system in a major magazine (Time), and that belongs in the article. I added four more good sources to the quote. 104.163.158.183 (talk) 05:20, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: We all get to pick what belongs in WP every day. It's how we apply WP:NOT. I'm not objecting to it on the basis of whether or not I like the statement. It's just way too soon, as no decision has been made. - BilCat (talk) 05:32, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

text: Trump's statement is clearly incorrect, but since he is both a significant public figure and the commander-in-chief of the US military, I can't really buy the argument that the criticism is not relevant to the article. - Brouhaha (talk) 05:47, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree that the comments should remain in the article at this time.  Incoherent blatherings in a newspaper or magazine interview may well be newsworthy and make great copy for the media.  This is not the media.  Before such pronouncements warrant inclusion in this article, at the very least there needs to be some official announcement and subsequent discussion by relevant and informed sources that we can cite so as to gain an appreciation of the real importance of the position.  Trump has form for saying all sorts of outrageous things then neither following up on them or changing them in the implementation so that they become unrecognisable.  Is this one of those cases?  Too soon to tell.  This is not a news service and there is no deadline here.  We should wait until the true situation becomes clear before bursting into print. - Nick Thorne talk 08:42, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trump Criticisms quote 

message: Should the "Criticisms" section contain the following recent quote on the article subject by President Trump? 104.163.158.183 (talk) 20:34, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't need quite so many citations that all depend on the same source. More important, didn't Senator McCaine call the project something like "bloated, overpriced" a couple years ago? Of course, he's a bit more interested in subtleties such as the distinction between a bad proposal and a bad execution. Jim.henderson (talk) 22:41, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a lot of people would say that US presidential statements and actions are notable and important by default. Do you think the Trump presidential library will omit or include his tweets?104.163.158.183 (talk) 02:07, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, and a lot of people think the world is flat. An appeal to popularity is not very convincing. ' Nick Thorne talk 03:29, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, you are conflating two different things. Presidential statements on specific programs are by their very nature significant. You're trying to say some are and some are not. If the head of Apple suddenly came out and said that the Mac should go back to G4 processors, would you ignore that too?104.163.158.183 (talk) 05:16, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: But this was not a presidential statement, it was incoherent waffle given in a magazine interview.  Until at the very least a formal policy statement is made on the subject and that is examined and discussed by relevant experts that we can cite, there is no way any of us here can judge the importance of this quote.  To suggest anything else is straight out original research. - Nick Thorne talk 05:58, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Everything Trump says as president is a presidential statement. I can see the pragmatic side of your position: we should ignore this as it is similar to a little kid running into a room saying "Mommy, electric launchers are dumb!". That should be ignored. However this is not a little kid-- this is the most powerful person in the world. All of his statements are significant. Everything a US President says publicly gets recorded, archived, reproduced and is written about in books... even the stupid stuff.   104.163.158.183 (talk) 06:03, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, and once it's been "recorded, archived, reproduced and is written about in books" we will have something with proper context about which we can write and from which we can cite.  At the risk of repeating myself there is no rush, Wikipedia is not a news service, there is no compulsion to include everything as it happens.  We simply cannot possibly know at this point whether this statement will have any impact whatsoever on the use of EMALS in American carriers.  This is not an article about the sayings of the US President, it is about an aircraft carrier aircraft launching system and it is far from clear what effect, if any, Trump's statement will have on it. The comment does not belong here at this time (if it ever will). - Nick Thorne talk 06:49, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

text: Comment True, he's "not a subject matter expert", but he is the CEO of the military that ordered the project, and can easily order it cancelled should he desire.104.163.158.183 (talk) 03:19, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: RFC

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090210192404/http://www.ga.com/atg/EMS/m1346.php to http://www.ga.com/atg/EMS/m1346.php
*Added  tag to http://carcamal.ele.cie.uva.es/CEM/articulos/Catapult.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141028144554/http://www.janes.com/article/39799/emals-to-start-sled-trials-on-cvn-78-in-late-2015 to http://www.janes.com/article/39799/emals-to-start-sled-trials-on-cvn-78-in-late-2015
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:49, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a problem with the UK references, in that they don't mention procurement of an Electromagnetic aircraft launch system.  A quick Google search only returned a press release which is not suitable as a reference.  If no references for UK development of an EM launch system can be found perhaps the section should be deleted.
--Klaun (talk) 03:21, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  UK References 

message: The Pentagon released a scathing report about EMALS earlier this year, that for some reason hasnt been picked up on in this article. I've included that in the Criticism section and included a reference.
Cheers!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.38.137.160 (talk) 17:24, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pentagon report on EMALS 

message: thumb|right|A drawing of the linear induction motor used in the EMALS.|300px
How do we actually know the image depicts what it says? There isn't a source on what it is based on in its description, and I am not sure if it would be worth my time trying to vectorise it. The author Tosaka last uploaded in 2010, and I haven't a clue where to find their English Wikipedia account to contact them. Seloloving (talk) 09:48, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  EMALS image