Carrier based aircrafts question.....

[NY3D]

I have a question regarding "Carrier based aircrafts". I notice that these aircrafts take quite a beating when it comes to landing these birds,some touch downs are pretty smooth but on the most part it looks more like a "controlled crash".Are these aircrafts built with this in mind,do they make modifications to the aircraft to make it last longer??? Im pretty sure they do,but to what extent ???

[EscCtrl]

Oh its definitley taken into account as for what modifications go on im not too sure but look at the landing gear on them. they often have huge landing gear that are very flexible.

 

Also remember on a lot of these ships they have massive workforce who maintain the birds round the clock making sure they are always flight worthy.

 

I'm sure there are other things built into the aircraft to help out.

 

 

On the other hand it is possible to throw aircraft around a lot more then most people think. There are videos on the internet showing huge passenger aircraft being slammed down on a run way and withstanding it, just dont do it too often :P

[britgliderpilot]

It's not so much a modification as something that's designed into the airframe to begin with . . . .

 

You don't design your aircraft and then think "Oh crap - I've got to beef it up to land on a carrier" . . . . you design it to take those stresses in the first place.

 

 

Beefed up gear to handle a no-flare landing is one part, stressing an airframe that can be decelerated by the hook and accelerated by the nosegear is another ("normal" aircraft not having to withstand that loading passed through those points), then stuff like corrosion-proofing and so forth . . . shrug.

 

It's a slightly more complex process, but the basic result is the same - you end up with an aircraft designed for what you want it to do!

[Guest IguanaKing]

Yup. Take a good look at an F-18 some time, IRL. The landing gear is the thing that really jumps out as being different from other aircraft. I've watched Marine Corps Bug drivers land here, and, even though they have a 10,000' runway...they still slam that thing down. It holds true to the USMC and USN aviator saying that "Flaring to land is like squatting to pee." :D

[SuperKungFu]

Speaking about carrier landings, you would be surprised at the planes that lands on a carrier. Ranging from F-111-C-130.

 

Here are the links:

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0050.shtml

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0097.shtml

[britgliderpilot]

Hooked U2 and F-111B? :D

 

 

You, sir, are my personal hero for finding those pics . . . . I knew both variants existed but had never found a single pic of either. Respect!

 

 

To be fair, none of them entered widespread service use - the U2 was a relatively experimental aircraft flown by rather good pilots anyway, F-111B was only a prototype, and the C-130 SuperCOD . . . . . mmn.

 

Good show on all of them, though :)

[Kenan]

"LOOK MA NO HOOK" << ROFL :D

[suntrace1]

I doubt that U2 was landing on a carrier, only launched.

[britgliderpilot]

I doubt that U2 was landing on a carrier, only launched.

 

Nope, s'true - from multiple sources.

 

Not least of which, the excellent "Skunk Works", written by Ben Rich (who RAN the Skunk Works) and Leo Janos.

 

 

The U2's an exception, though . . . . with carrier forward speed, windspeed, and the stupidly low stall speed, you could probably make an approach with little more than 20 or 30 knots closure on the carrier. Makes the hook stressings that much easier to deal with!

[SuperKungFu]

I doubt that U2 was landing on a carrier, only launched.

 

nope that U2 also got the hook :pilotfly:

 

For more info go to the link i provided http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0050.shtml

[Brit_Radar_Dude]

Yep - what SuperKungFu said, in fact if you follow his link and check out the C-130 section there are tiny movies of the herc takeoff and landing......

[Crusty]

Nice pic there, looks like it caught the wire before the wheels touched..hehe...I know it ...it was prolly a bounce after innitial touchdown, there is a good account of the carrier experiments in the book "50 years of the U2", a book I highly reccomend for anyone into the u2 or general air intelligence through the cold war to the present

[VMFA117_Poko]

U2 Masterpiece landing!!! It's hard to land even on long lenght runway. USAF/NASA U2s landings are assisted by car driving flyers giving directives to the pilot on a final approach. For what? U2 has huge wingspan - it's easy to land on the wing.

[S77th-konkussion]

I don't know how they keep that thing [u-2] balanced on bicycle gear in the best of conditions... It's like landing on a tightrope.

[Force_Feedback]

I don't know how they keep that thing [u-2] balanced on bicycle gear in the best of conditions... It's like landing on a tightrope.

 

That's because everytime you see one flying, Jack Bauer is not around...

[Pilotasso]

LOL

[RvETito]

That's because everytime you see one flying, Jack Bauer is not around...

 

Hehe:D Good one!

[S77th-konkussion]

That's because everytime you see one flying, Jack Bauer is not around...

 

 

 

:P he'd be able to stop, have the azz- end lift up, and bounce on the front gear a couple times like the freestyle bicycle riders, too.

[britgliderpilot]

I don't know how they keep that thing [u-2] balanced on bicycle gear in the best of conditions... It's like landing on a tightrope.

 

U2 wingspan - 80 feet.

 

 

Project Eta wingspan - 101 feet.

 

 

 

Difficulty is relative ;)

 

Real answer - wheels on legs partway along the span keep them level on the takeoff roll, then drop away as they become airborne.

 

For landing . . . . you've just got to be careful. You've got roll control right down to the stall, and you can keep the tips up virtually until you stop.

CIA and USAF pilots had and have the advantage of a stationary level runway, which isn't a big deal. Landing on a carrier in a U2, though, could indeed be scary . . . grin.

Apparently the first time they did it the tip hit the deck, ouch.

 

Biggest span aircraft I've flown is the DG505 at 65 feet - it's not THAT difficult to land, it's just lazy conventional pilots being xenophobic ;)

 

 

Biggest problem with landing the U2 is supposed to be judging your height above the ground - that's (and catching the wings rather than dropping them) is why they use chase cars.

[RvETito]

That glider has damn big aspect ratio! I wonder how it is able to land at all???

[S77th-konkussion]

I bet if you tied a rope to it's nose and waited for a good, stiff breeze- she'd fly like a kite.