Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: gordon@meaddata.com (Gordon Edwards)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: SUPERTOMCAT/ATF
Message-ID: <1991Feb8.021343.21013@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 8 Feb 91 02:13:43 GMT
References: <1991Feb4.071106.22819@cbnews.att.com> <1991Feb7.021044.4709@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Lines: 25
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: gordon@meaddata.com (Gordon Edwards)


In article <1991Feb7.021044.4709@cbnews.att.com>, orpheus@reed.UUCP (P.
Hawthorne) writes:
|>   Now that the Navy is not going to get the A-12, I wonder if either of the
|> contractors is working on a variant for carrier duty. 
|> 
[refering to the YF-22/YF-23. -gordon]

Yes, the Navy is interested in a Naval variant of the ATF.  This is odd since
historically Air Force developments do not lend themselves to carrier
operations.  The F-14 was developed after the Navy rejected a plan to modify
the F-111 for carrier duty.  The main problem is that carrier operations are
much more demanding on the aircraft than land operations.  Any modified ATF
would be considerably heavier (possibly double).  My guess is that Grumman
anticipates these problems, and is therefore offering the Tomcat-21
proposal.

It is interesting to note that the F-4 was a Navy development that proved
quite popular with the Air Force.

-- Gordon     (gordon@meaddata.com)