Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: igor!yoda!wab@uunet.UU.NET (Bill Baker)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Carrier Aircraft
Message-ID: <1991Mar13.003648.7991@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 13 Mar 91 00:36:48 GMT
References: <1991Mar8.021800.7056@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (william.b.thacker)
Organization: Joan Vollmer Womens Academy
Lines: 39
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: igor!yoda!wab@uunet.UU.NET (Bill Baker)

In article <1991Mar8.021800.7056@cbnews.att.com> jeff@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (JEFF NANIS ) writes:
>
>
>From: jeff@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (JEFF NANIS )
>
>	There have been a number of threads concerning the ease with which
>land-based aircraft can operate off of carriers. The following is a letter from
>the back of AW&ST (March 4, 1991) which gives the best explanation I have seen:
>
>	"Converting an advanced tactical fighter candidate into a carrier-based A-12 replacement is more complex than suggested...
>	New, heavier landing gear will be required. Carrier aircraft have
>landing sink speeds of 26 ft/sec, while those of comparable land-based aircraft
>are 8-12 ft/sec. Catapulting and arrested landing systems must be provided.
>This equipment is not just bolted on; carry-through structure must accommodate
>vertical landing loads, and fore and aft launch and recovery loads up to 6 g.

     Isn't one of the advanced fighter candidates incorporating thrust
vectoring?  It seems like I read this in an article.  Wouldn't that
permit much lower sink rates for carrier landings?  The main problem
of converting land-based aircraft, historically, has been the airframe
and landing gear relative weakness.  I've always assumed that the
reason the F-4 converted so easily to carrier flight was that it was
built like a tank anyway.
     I would think that, regardless of whether they procure a version
of the ATF, the Navy would insist on thrust vectoring on the next
generation of carrier aircraft.  The weight savings from airframe
downgrading could translate into much more range, more room for
weapons and avionics, etc.  The Navy (well, the Marines) have
experience with thrust-vectored fighters with the Harrier.  The
technology is proven and mature.  Beyond fighters, I would think that
other carrier-based aircraft could benefit.  When the time comes to
replace the E-2, why not design a new radar platform with real STOL
characteristics?  The old Boeing YC-14 was a pretty good-sized plane
with incredible STOL capabilities.  Besides, I always wanted to see if
it could take off from a carrier.