Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

First landing on HMS Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

    Spray a little water there and I'm sure it's a great surface for pond hockey. And you can stop yourself using the wires.

    All kidding aside, why would Canuck forces be practicing traps? Is there an aircraft carrier in Canada's future that we don't know about?
    I seem to remember that pilots from other NATO nations were sometimes embedded within the USN. Perhaps they are practicing for a secondment on a US carrier?
    "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Surrey View Post

      I seem to remember that pilots from other NATO nations were sometimes embedded within the USN. Perhaps they are practicing for a secondment on a US carrier?
      Back in the day, when the Argentines sported A-4s and Super Etendards, they might work out a handful of traps and cat shots with a passing USN CV -- but I've not heard of any Canucks doing that. Back then Los Criollos had themselves a CV -- a leftover RN CVL, actually. Maybe RN fliers did the same thing when the Ark Royal was still with the fleet.
      I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

      Comment


      • #63
        Could be as simple as this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUGtajanQIM - road bases. Qualities required for carrier landings tend to be rather useful for road bases too.
        It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Surrey View Post

          I seem to remember that pilots from other NATO nations were sometimes embedded within the USN. Perhaps they are practicing for a secondment on a US carrier?
          I've heard about the occasional cross-decking with other NATO pilots onto USN CVNs. Since Canada does run Super Hornets, they'd be really easy to integrate either the pilots, the planes, or both.
          Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post

            I've heard about the occasional cross-decking with other NATO pilots onto USN CVNs. Since Canada does run Super Hornets, they'd be really easy to integrate either the pilots, the planes, or both.
            I think they just have Hornets, not Super Hornets........yet.
            Last edited by Salinator; 18 Oct 19, 16:48.
            Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

            Prayers.

            BoRG

            http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Salinator View Post

              I don't think they just have Hornets, not Super Hornets........yet.
              Yeah they’ve been buying a few of the Australian F/A-18s for spares.
              "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
              Ernest Hemingway.

              In english "silence" means yelling louder than everyone else.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Salinator View Post

                I don't think they just have Hornets, not Super Hornets........yet.
                Silly me, I thought they had adults in charge. Somehow I forgot that Trudeau is still running the show at least through next week.
                Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Surrey View Post

                  Presumably a B could still take off and land from a cat equipped carrier? When the harrier was being tested it landed in the old Ark Royal which had catapults. So surging would still be possible.
                  I think taking off again would be the problem or at least taking off with a useful payload, without the ski-jump/ramp.

                  Also wouldn't the vectored thrust be a danger to the Carriers cats and traps?

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Gooner View Post

                    I think taking off again would be the problem or at least taking off with a useful payload, without the ski-jump/ramp.

                    Also wouldn't the vectored thrust be a danger to the Carriers cats and traps?
                    US Marine Harriers use a rolling takeoff technique, with a ski jump. I asked before, didn't the Invincible class have some kind of wells on her deck to keep Harriers from sucking in their own hot exhaust, as well as preventing them from scorching the flight deck surface?
                    I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

                      US Marine Harriers use a rolling takeoff technique, with a ski jump. I asked before, didn't the Invincible class have some kind of wells on her deck to keep Harriers from sucking in their own hot exhaust, as well as preventing them from scorching the flight deck surface?
                      I remember hearing about a strengthened deck but can’t find a reference.

                      The US marines don’t use ski jumps with their bs.
                      "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Surrey View Post

                        I remember hearing about a strengthened deck but can’t find a reference.

                        The US marines don’t use ski jumps with their bs.
                        My apologies. I meant to type "without a ski jump," but as usual, my brain and my fingers were not in sync. USN amphibs ships do not feature ski ramps.



                        I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Gooner View Post

                          For the UK having the 'B' version means we can surge F35 numbers from the RAF onto the Carriers if that became necessary (between them the QEs have a potential capacity of 100+) whilst had we catapult carriers we would be limited to just the FAA F-35s.
                          Will you ever have "100+" in service at any time? I doubt it. There have even been proposals to cap the B's at 48 and make the rest of the purchase A's.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by johns624 View Post
                            Will you ever have "100+" in service at any time? I doubt it.
                            Operational 'fleet' of 63 F-35s planned, apparently.

                            There have even been proposals to cap the B's at 48 and make the rest of the purchase A's.
                            The proposal coming from the RAF no doubt!

                            The Government statement from 2017 says:

                            “As part of the Strategic Defence and Security Review in 2015, we reaffirmed our commitment to procure 138 F-35 Lightning II aircraft.

                            The first tranche of 48 aircraft will be of the F-35B variant, which will be jointly operated by the Royal Air Force and Royal Navy, and capable of operating from both land and the Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers. The decision on the variant of subsequent tranches of Lightning will be taken at the appropriate time.”

                            I would expect the RAF to get some F-35As but the bulk of the 138 ordered to still be the 'B' version.

                            The MOD were pretty clever in making sure it was RAF squadrons getting the F-35B first

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

                              My apologies. I meant to type "without a ski jump," but as usual, my brain and my fingers were not in sync. USN amphibs ships do not feature ski ramps.

                              Ah, good point. Why doesn't the USN amphibs use ski ramps?

                              I'd have though the ramp reduces take-off distance and was a bit safer?

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Not Invented Here, comes to mind. The USN also has a lot of money invested in Catapults for regular aircraft. The American solution was the Arapaho Crane, which saw service with the RN in the Falklands. It was a bit complicated compared to a ski lift.

                                Pruitt
                                Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

                                Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

                                by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X