Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Naval Air Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: VTOL verse CATOBAR
stingray1003    6/15/2007 8:06:44 AM
Taking a look at the spanish BPE. Would it be able to launch and recover aircraft in a higher seastate than a Nimitz or CVF? The Nimitz and the CVF are much larger of course. But they have very exposed deck edge lifts. Also I belive BAR requires a very level deck. The BPE has lifts well protected, while no bar so would most likely be easier to land in rough seastates? CVF of course is superior being bigger with more deck area.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
DropBear       6/15/2007 8:22:45 AM
 
Steel is still steel. I would think that any deck that pitches, rolls and yaws in a given sea state would be a challenge, regardless of whether it is one type or the other. Ship, plane and ocean are all moving together. Can't imagine one would be easier or more beneficial in determining bounce n blows.
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

stingray1003       6/15/2007 8:42:33 AM

 Ive heard the poms talk it up something wicked. But is there any evidence... Is it a usable advantage?

 Atleast with a VTOL even if the deck is rolling, you can just plonk down in the middle. Where as a CATOBAR you have to line it up, make a pass, hope you catch, everything holds. The forces involved with CATOBAR are a heck of a lot greater, as they stay its more of a controlled crash than a landing.
 
Quote    Reply

Jeff_F_F       6/15/2007 9:01:30 AM
Let's not forget the other advantage of CATOBAR is that it allows the operation of aircraft that are not STOVL or VTOL. How many STOVL AWACS planes are there out there, for example? While it would be possible to create such a craft, no nation has yet done so that I know of. Maybe on a V-22 platform?
 
Quote    Reply

perfectgeneral       6/15/2007 6:57:27 PM
But there are helicoptors that provide AEW: Sea King (UK) and Merlin (Italy)

The main criticism of these is the low service ceiling limits the radar range. The horizon gets in the way. If it is good enough, then it is good enough. Those countries that have selected STOVL carriers have made an informed choice.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    Half a dozen eggs.   6/15/2007 7:57:09 PM
VTOL in sea state 6 is no joy, you can trap in seastate 6, unless you are the CdG.

Herald
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       6/15/2007 8:01:20 PM
I have heard that a conventional carrier using conventional aircraft would not have been able to operate in the South Atlantic during the Falklands war, while Hermes and Invincible with Harrier could operate in the higher sea states.  I don't know how much truth is in the rumour.
 
Quote    Reply

stingray1003       6/15/2007 8:46:08 PM
For countries like Italy and Spain, carriers would most likely operate fairly close to friendly or home shores anyway. AEW could be provided by long range aircraft.
 
 Australia is in much the same situation, it also has a OTHR that covers most of the globe as well as new wedgetails that cover the region its in. Or can fly them to anywhere it wants to operate and base them off land bases. Both are far superior to carrier based craft. Italy has a helo based asset, Spain might concider one, and the UK has several. Australia might also concider one, if it decides to put F-35b's on its BPE's.
 
 If any of these countries operate outside the region they are in, support would be provided by US forces or other superpower friendlies.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    Yimmy reply   6/15/2007 8:57:28 PM

I have heard that a conventional carrier using conventional aircraft would not have been able to operate in the South Atlantic during the Falklands war, while Hermes and Invincible with Harrier could operate in the higher sea states.  I don't know how much truth is in the rumour.
1. The USN was planning to fight the Russians  in the Norwegian Sea and further north. So the Nimitzes were intended to fight in very rough seas.
2. The South Atlantic was unusually calm during the Falklands War, not that the sea states were 2s and 3s, but those were not 7s and 8s.
3. The British operate in the North Atlantic. THAT had to count for something in Harrier pilot skill..

Herald 


 
Quote    Reply

stingray1003       6/16/2007 3:53:36 AM
Im not sure the Nimitz can fight in rough sea states. Surely that deck edge lift is very exposed.
 
 Here in the pacific its not uncommon to have swells of greater than 8 meters. With maxiums of twice that.
 
*ttp://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/ships/carriers/histories/cv59-forrestal/forrestal890329.gif
 
Look how low that lift is. Even 4 + m swells would make that extremely dangerous. Not to mention a easy way to lose $60+ million of aircraft. Sure in good weather the edge lift increases sortie rates by a huge factor.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234       6/16/2007 4:14:05 AM

Im not sure the Nimitz can fight in rough sea states. Surely that deck edge lift is very exposed.

 

 Here in the pacific its not uncommon to have swells of greater than 8 meters. With maxiums of twice that.

 

*ttp://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/ships/carriers/histories/cv59-forrestal/forrestal890329.gif

 

Look how low that lift is. Even 4 + m swells would make that extremely dangerous. Not to mention a easy way to lose $60+ million of aircraft. Sure in good weather the edge lift increases sortie rates by a huge factor.

I presume you served aboard an aircraft carrier?

USS. John F. Kennedy

Shutters and your sense of scale is way off.

Herald

 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics