The 'catapult extensions' you refer to were in fact bridle arrester booms. Each catapult was originally equipped with a Mk-1 (All American) bridle arrester(energy absorber). The machinery for Cats 1,2 and 3 was located within the booms while Cat 4 machinery was below the flight deck approx. 30 ft fwd of the cat track. (Cat 4 did not use the angle deck boom.) This system allowed the launch bridle or pendant to be 'arrested' after launch for reuse. The drawback was that the system did not return the bridle to battery (beginning launch position) and personnel had to get up on the flight deck and remove the bridle and stow it in the catwalk. This also meant that prior to launch the cat crew had to ready a stack of bridles equal or greater than the number and type of aircraft expected to launch during any particular cycle.
Catapults 1 and 2 are NOT parallel. If you extend the C/L of both cats forward of the ship, the lines would cross. For this reason, the cats were 'interlocked', preventing simultaneous launch and two aircraft trying to occupy the same piece of sky at the same time.
During the San Francisco yard period of 61/62,the Mk-1 bridle arresters were removed from Cats 1, 2 and 3 and replaced with Mk 2-Mod 1 & 2 (Van Zelm, the 'Zook' or 'Zooker'). Cat 4 retained the MK-1. Why ??? The parallel cables on the cat tracks were replaced with bronze bridle arrester tracks that ran from forward of the JBD's to the end of the bridle arrester booms. This system really helped speed the launch cycle as the bridle was not only 'arrested' but retracted for reuse immediately. If launching the same type aircraft you reused the bridle over and over. The bridle was back in battery position before the cat shuttle.
Having the same bridle arrester system on three cats and a totally different system on Cat 4 was not a problem during routine ops but when the ship conducted 24/7 exercises that required that a designated catapult be the 'duty' cat and the cat crews would rotate to the 'duty cat', problems arose. Cat 4 crew was unfamiliar with all this new fangled stuff on Cats 1,2 and 3 and likewise crews from 1,2 and 3 who manned Cat 4 were puzzled with cables, pigtails and bungee assists etc. Cat 4 eventually received a Mk- 2 system and all cats were outfitted with the Nose Gear Launch system as the A-7 was introduced and all follow-on aircraft were NGL style. It was a transition period that took many years to go from bridle/pendant launch to a full NGL Air Wing. Some ships removed the booms from Cat 2 and 3 but retained the boom on Cat 1 since the Training Command still had some bridle type aircraft (T-2, A-4 and ?). It was possible, but not likely, that a carrier could be assigned to CarQuals for the Training Command if the training carrier was not available. Eventually all carriers removed the bridle arrester booms as part of the topside weight reduction program. I believe the Hawk's booms were removed during SLEP but I'm not positive.
It was always possible to launch an aircraft without a bridle arrester. Of course it was expensive as the bridle ended up in the ocean. NOTE: During the 62/63 WestPac, the Hawk had a competition with the Ranger(the Reluctant Warrior.) We had almost identical air wing make-up and the day's flight ops sked was the same. approx 12 cycles. In Cats, Ranger had an advantage; their cats (C-7) cycled faster than ours (C-13) on the retract cycle. At the end of the first launch cycle we looked to port and the Ranger was still launching. WE BEAT EM! But wait, every time they launched from the bow cats we saw a splash. Probably also from the waist cats but we couldn't see that area. The splashes was the bridles hitting the water. They threw away 125 bridles that day to save precious seconds but the Hawk still beat them every launch and every recovery except one. Naturally we sent over an OPS Manual for C=7 Cats and a cartoon of a plane on a Ranger cat with cobwebs growing around the nose and main gear.
Sorry for the length of my response. Now...what was the question again?

Thanks for the info. I realized after I posted that No. 1 and 2 cats were NOT parallel. The fill in info from you was very interesting and informative. As a plank owner I remember standing on the island and watching the cat crew firing dead loads out into the river. Thanks again for the info.

David, a few words about catapult deadload test shots. Usually the task is tedious, boring and proceeds at glacial speed unlike launching activities at sea with aircraft. Occasionally however the unusual happens and the pucker factor appears out of nowhere. The initial deadload shots from New York Shipbuilding (Camden Div) were a big hit with the folks in Phila. The bow was pointed towards the city across the Delaware River. Prior to launch we were required to activate a very loud siren that apparently could be heard across the river in Phila. Many office workers would come to their open windows and watch the deadload come flying off the flight deck and hit the water with a very large and very, very high plume of water. Cheap entertainment. We made the newscasts and the papers.
Later when the ship was brought to the Phila. Naval Shipyard on the opposite side of the river we continued the deadload test program but now we were south of the Walt Whitman Bridge and the bow was pointed towards New Jersey. When we fired our last shot and all the official and necessary data was in hand for certification, the test engineer announced he wanted one more shot from Cat 1, just to see what the Cat could do. We positioned the lightest deadload (probably less than 10,000 lbs) and used a very high steam pressure. (At the time the cats max launch pressure was 1000 psi). Normally we launch deadloads at a slight bow down condition to facilitate the deadload angling over and hitting the water front first where it is most structurally sound. For this shot, the ship was bow up. I don't recall the end speed but suffice to say, that orange tank was haulin! The deadload hit the water flat and skipped and skipped and skipped like a flat stone until it came to a stop in the New Jersey mud on the other side of the river. I was only an E-3 at the time and wasn't required to do any 'splaining' but rumor was that it was a catapult malfunction that caused the deadload to turn into a rocket.
Another deadload incident occurred towards the end of the yard period in San Francisco in the spring of 62. We were firing Cat 4 all morning and broke for lunch. All morning there was a barge in the water off the port angle deck with a large crane that was installing whip antennae along the catwalk. Also off the port side, the USS Oriskany was coming pierside perpindicular to the Hawk. Her bow was aimed at our island and her position was very close to us. Just prior to lunch the largest deadload in the inventory (I believe 120,000 lbs) was loaded on the flight deck by the shipyard riggers in preparation for the first shot after lunch. The deadload was positioned athwartship abreast the island and the wheels were chocked only on the stbd side since the ship had a stbd list (operative word here is HAD). Unbenownst to anyone topside, the Engineering folks were playing with ballast and put the ship in a portside list. Just as we were manning up on the cat, the deadload started rolling across the flight deck towards the port catwalk (and the Oriskany). The cat deckedge operator (David Rich) looked up and couldn't believe his eyes nor could he get out of the way. He was held captive by the neck strap of the sound powered phones. Fortunately the phones he was using had an extra long cord that allowed him to run aft in the catwalk and just get clear of the deadload as it crashed through the catwalk, shearing off a one hour old antenna, liferafts and just missing the Fresnel Lens platform. Fortunately the barge that had been there all morning had moved because that is exactly where the deadload entered the water. No harm, no foul...no one was hurt. The flight deck rigger boss was red faced. Dave Rich was red necked. The sound powered phone cable almost decapitated him when he ran out of cable when running away from the deadload. Note: Never again did we fasten the strap to the breastplate. The Oriskany bow was packed with crew gawking at the Hawk- newest and biggest in PacFlt. I guess at first they thought we had an athwartship catapult but man is it slow! When they realized we just had a major screw-up, of course they thought it was hilarious. We of course were embarassed. Perspective is everything ! The ABs of the Oriskany didn't let us forget that incident for a long, long time.

Richard, As long as we are talking Cats maybe you can put to rest some of the other stories that I heard. Oh by the way, I do remember hearing about the 'skipper' that wound up in the mud banks on the Jersey side. Wish I had seen that one.
One story had to do with tearing up the water break on one of the cats. The story I heard was that the shipyard installed a valve handle that was labeled backward. So when the cat was fired it fired into a 'dry' water brake. Any truth to that one?

David, no truth at all about the shipyard mis-labeling a valve that resulted in a 'dry' waterbrake shot. During construction the vast majority of piping/valves were either not labeled or crudely labeled and then painted over since one of the last functions of construction was painting. While we were in Camden and waiting to start testing the cats, we spent a lot of time following air, hydraulic, water, steam etc. lines as I'm sure many other divisions did with their equipment. Even if a valve was mis-labeled, it is a series of pressure switches that allow the electrical sequence to continue. Closed valve...pump loss...low pressure one or more water brake cylinders equals NO GO (can't fire the cat).
The above describes just one of many, many safety features that prevent firing the cat unless all systems are GO.....UNLESS you have a Cat TWO Electrician who one day earned the famous (infamous?) nickname 'No Load Jones'. We were at sea during the first WestPac and Flight Quarters were secured. All four cats were steaming but in standby which meant that the steam receivers were charged to 550psi, steam watches set, the pistons and shuttle were stowed approx 15 ft AFT of the water brakes and the water brake pumps were OFF. Note: At the time it was thought if the pistons were stowed fully forward (the spears into the choke rings) that the ships normal vibration would prematurely wear the choke rings. Anyway, throughout the cats, "not a creature was stirring"....except No Load Jones!..."when up on the roof there arose such a clatter." CLATTER HELL...it was like a bomb going off on the port bow. I was aft on the 03 and it sounded pretty serious. At first I thought maybe one of the anchors let loose but it didn't take long to determine that "No Load" had fired the Cat into a dry water brake. Said he was doing maintenance and energized the FIRE solenoid using an external power source and bypassing all the built-in safeguards. Luckily the pistons could only travel 15 ft before bottoming out but with a 550 psi head of steam it jammed the spears into the choke rings. At the time I was Cat 3 Cat Captain so not my problem right!
Not surprisingly the cat would not RETRACT. It was jammed. It took Tilly to finally break it loose. Chief Paul Wales told me to go in there and see what damage occurred. I reminded him that the number on my green jersey had a "3" on it and not a "2." It took a nanosecond for him to convince me that I really ought to do as he said. The choke rings were made from phosphor bronze, a material that is harder than woodpecker lips and there was evidence of material that was displaced. Changing choke rings at sea is a very big job so I spent hours and hours in the water brake tank filing, grinding, massaging and willing the choke rings into some semblance of functionality. I told the Chief there was nothing more I could do but it might work. We fired a couple of 40 psi no-loads (no, not "No-Load" Jones but it was tempting) with success. The Cat Officers, Air Boss and Handler were told explicitly that Cat 2 was good to go but ONLY for low energy shots...NO Whales, NO Crusaders, NO Phantoms! It went well for several days with Cat 2 being fed only low energy stuff. Then during a routine daytime launch I looked forward from my position on deck around Cat 3 and saw an F-8 Crusader taxiing onto Cat 2 for launch. I thought ...'this is not good!' And it wasn't. Cat 2 was jammed and out of commission. Now we had to do a water brake job at sea. They wouldn't let us work on it during daytime flight quarters because they didn't want Tilly stuck on the bow...just in case. So we had to work at night using the Braille method of disassembly ,no lights ( might blind bridge personnel). We entered Sasebo with the brakes on deck but we could not remove any of the 42 bolts from the jet rings. Instead of tack welding the bolt heads per the drawing, a full circumference stainless weld was applied by ???? We were unsuccessful removing the bolts. The folks at Ship Repair Depot, Sasebo contracted with SSK Shipbuilding to bring the brakes to their shop, remove the bolts, change the choke rings and reinstall on board with our guidance. I spent several days in their shop observing them squatting on their haunches wondering what strange piece of equipment was before them. On the way back to the ship with the ready-to-install brakes, we got word that SSK was going to strike at the end of the day. Hearing this, one of our Cat Officers, Lt. Malcolm 'Red Dog' Guess decided to bribe them with lots of food and beverages from the wardroom with a promise of staying on the job until complete. They were very appreciative and ate until all the food and drinks were gone. Then they left the ship never to be seen again. We were left with dirty dishes, a red-faced 'Red Dog' and a catapult to reassemble. No doubt while we worked into the night to finish the job, "No Load" Jones was telling sea stories and sucking Sapporos in some Japanese bar.

To the Webmaster : I apologize for rambling in my responses and taking up so much space on the message board. I think we are encouraged to reminisce about our experiences aboard the 'Hawk but I hope I am not overdoing it.

Richard and David, no need to apologize for the lengthy post. These stories and memories need to be told and shared and are more than welcomed. There has got to be thousands of stories out there, so shake up those brain cells guys and keep this Message Board active. Charlie, Webmaster

I agree with you Chuck. These tales are very interesting, informative entertaining and even historical. I seem to have lived a sheltered life in V-6.
Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, one can not be everywhere.

One of the Bridle Arrestors was removed in Bremerton during the COH Overhaul in 1982. The second was kept as the A-4 Skyhawks were still used by training squadrons from Pensacola.

I was on the Kitty Hawk when she was in dry dock at the Philedephia Naval Shipyard.
That was between 86-90 SLEP (Ships Life Extention Program). She had two of the four horns and arresting gear harnesses removed at that time due to the A-7's were obsolete. However, the "just in case" scenario was applied and they kept 2 of the four on Cat 1 & 2. They later decided to remove those on or after a West PAC cruise in 1992. They were no longer needed due to the newer fighters like the super Tomcat and the F/A-18's (Super Hornets). Hope this gives you an answer to your questions. God bless and Welcome Home.

Jon Ince

Jonathan,
The original post on this subject was titled catapult extensions which some folks called horns, booms, and most recently in your post, arresting gear harnesses. They are in fact bridle arrestor booms. The Kitty Hawk and other four catapult carriers never had four, only three for Cats 1,2 & 3. The 'booms' were used to house energy absorbers early on (MK-1) and later bridle arrester track topside (Mk-2 & 4). The bridle arrester systems were not used for nose gear launch equipped aircraft which began with the A-7 up to and including the Hornet Series.
The A-7 being obsolete had nothing to do with the 'booms' being removed. They were removed for two primary reasons:
1) Bridle/pendant type aircraft were no longer in air wing inventory.
2) Topside weight removal. Beginning in the mid-80s there was a concerted effort in the carrier Navy to get rid of any and all unneccessary topside weight. Getting rid of the booms, machinery and topside track was a considerable step in the right direction.
Retaining a boom or two for a "just in case" scenario has some validity however the reason has nothing to do with Hornets. When the training carrier (the Lexington) was approaching decomissioning, it was expected that east coast CVs (primarily JFK) would rotate the duty however there was a possibility the Training Command would come to the west coast (and they did at least once). At the time the training command was still using T-29s (?) and A-4s, both bridle launch aircraft so it was prudent that several west coast carriers retain at least one boom and bridle arrester capability on Cat 1. After much start up problems, the Training Command finally transitioned to the T45 which is a nose gear launch aircraft and the need for the booms/bridle arresters disappeared.