Posted on 02/10/2011 6:31:07 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
The development of carrier aviation during the 20th century led to a dramatic paradigm shift in military capability. For the first time, navies had the ability to exert their influence far over the horizon – supporting land campaigns and allowing hostile fleets to be engaged from beyond the range of a battleship’s guns. From Pearl Harbor to more recent conflicts in the Falklands and the Middle East, the carrier and its aircraft provide commanders with an unrivaled ability to project military and political influence; several acres of sovereign territory which can be moved close to potential trouble spots at short notice.
Historically, carrier aircraft have been highly specialized and designed specifically for the role. In the majority of cases, there is little or no commonality between the aircraft operated by a nation’s air force, and the different aircraft performing the same role in the Navy. Design decisions taken in order to optimise an aircraft for carrier operations can lead to trade-offs elsewhere – such as additional weight and low-speed handling characteristics that compromise performance in other areas of the envelope.
A classic example today is the F-18 in all its versions, heavy, slow and not capable of facing the most advanced threats emerging around the world.
(Excerpt) Read more at defencetalk.com ...
Why invest in a carrier version of the Eurofighter when there is no carrier to fly it off of?
It’s being touted as an option for carriers being built for the Indian Navy. And to tempt the Royal Navy if the JSF faces more delays.
Not yet.
A model of the navalized typhoon on display on a landing approach to a Gorshkov class carrier, displayed at the BAE Systems pavilion at Aero-India 2011. 
Navalized Typhon - note the conformal tanks, part of the Tranche 3 program. However, no air force has used this option yet.
ping
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
OK drivers! I have been reading a lot of stories bitching about the Hornet... heavy, slow, short legs, etc., etc... What's the real scoop?
I read the whole article, and it seems to make light of the problem of the landing gear. It speaks of the strength of the airframe to handle the stress of the arresting gear, but it makes no reference to the need for a really strong landing gear..It's basically a crash landing on a moving carrier deck. Look at the gear/struts of any carrier plane, they are MASSIVE compared with a land based plane..don't think they can make that work.
I've often wondered why the US never went with canards on fighters...?
It’s mainly adapted for the carrier role. So it’s slower and on average heavier compared to a land-based aircraft. That being said, it’s electronics are probably the best for a multi-role jet and can take out most targets at long range.
They would need to strengthen the undercarriage for that. Which would add weight. The Russians have ‘converted’ land-based aircraft such as the SU-27 and Mig-29 for the naval role, so its not impossible.
Canards are typically used to offset the disadvantages of the delta design so guess the US doesn’t need them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.