ITT we post totally bad ass carrier capable plane.Bonus points for Korean War era planes like pice related
>>65610892Also, spell check appreciation.Fuck.
voodoo space magic bullshit that was squandered F-105 style and now fucking nobody remembers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS3MXx1ZEOo
>>65611649It was the most advanced combat aircraft (even more than the contemporary B-58) on Earth at the time of its late 1950s introduction.the later RA-5C was a dedicated long range reconnaissance platform, extensively modified from the original strike bomber
>>65611654Neat.
>>65611671This guy gets it
>Carrier capable plane appreatuon threadok
>>65612195
>>65612197
Brit Cold War aviation is definitely something to behold, now if it's in awe or horror is up to you.
I have a soft spot for the Scimitar. Also I guess RN planes were supposed to launch with the noses pointing up. Is that why their F-4s had different front gears?
Even Australia once had an aircraft carrier with Skyhawks on it
>>65612310Yes, IIRC they had shorter catapults so raising the nose increased AoA after launch.
>>65612195>>65612197>No nose gear truck and launch bar assembly, in addition to brittle bones syndrome>Zoomies have to specifically request the cuck crane to get off the boatSad
>>65612213Wow, that's new to me.
>>65613448U-2 was always a CIA project, first use of U-2As aboard USS Kitty Hawk (CVA-63) for touch and goes (Project Seeker) was in 1963, followed by actual landings in February and March 1964 on USS Ranger (CVA-61) using U-2As modified with arrester hooks, new spoilers, and different main landing gear. These carrier-modified planes were designated U-2G.In May 1964, the two U-2Gs were used on an operation (Fish Hawk) from Ranger to monitor French nuclear tests at Mururoa Atoll. Other trials continued and there was even a plan cooked up to fly from a carrier operating in the Black Sea. A U-2H (modified from one -G) that also had inflight refueling capability was used mostly at Edwards AFB for equipment trials and flight tests.The later U-2R carrier evals (picrel ^upthread) were conducted on USS America during 1969; it was found that on takeoff the airplane—due to its good thrust to weight, high l/d ratios—did not require catapult assist. The outer 70" of wings are foldable and there was no problem fitting it below deck or on the ship's elevators.
>>65613962>1964>U-2Gs were used on an operation (Fish Hawk) from Rangerhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-CUV3o4PLA
>>65612195That's the best part about carrier capable planes. If you can land it on a boat, you can land it just about anywhere. >>65612310>>65612319>>65612468>>65613758Based.
>>65612866I'm pretty sure an F-16 could fly itself off.They showed even C-130s can do it.
>>65613962Damn, I'm a massive planefag and spookfag and I didn't know any of that.>it was found that on takeoff the airplane—due to its good thrust to weight, high l/d ratios—did not require catapult assist.That actually kind of makes sense if you consider that it was based on the lolnowings F-104. I mean, if you 5x the wing area and optimize it for high altitude, low air density flight, of course it's going to have insane lift. Not that I'm smart enough to figure that out, but I am smart enough to understand the general concept once it's pointed out.The F-105 is another of my favorite early Cold War Planes.
>>65613991Absolutely wild. It's pretty cool that you can see the pilot's skill progression until it becomes easy for him. It also looks like they are landing without the wing supports.That rate of climb off the deck is crazy!Thanks for sharing. This is the first new stuff I've seek on /k/ in a long time.Any other cold war plane gems welcome. https://youtu.be/_XQzNBOhMcI
>>65614160what in the fucking AI sloppo shoop is that
>>65614138>landing without the wing supportsU-2's auxiliary underwing "pogo" stabilizing caster wheels are only for taxiing and takeoff, they're jettisoned.If you look closely at the ^ 1964 film footage, the U-2G carrier-capable version has a small special retractable nose 'landing gear' (twin wheels smaller than but similar to those on the wing pogos) beneath cockpit to protect the aircraft nose after a trap on the flight deck. Also note the new wing spoilers.On takeoff and taxiing of the pre-R models, it was typical for a ground crewman/contractor to run with and hold at least one of the aircraft's wing tips steady even though the pogos were deployed, until it reaches (pretty rapidly) lift off velocity.U-2 lower wingtip skids are titanium; when the plane comes to rest then the pogos are reinstalled by ground crew. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_KFqiDmESIPlane's design is essentially a large jet powered glider with bicycle main landing gear.
>>65614160Anon what the fuck is that photo.Get the fuck out of here.
>>65614184It's also a bit nuts to think how much trouble they do to to land one on regular runway. What with the chase vehicle spotting for them. To just slap that bitch down on a carrier is all the more impressive https://youtu.be/E9S4qEKdmMU
>>65610892>Carrier capable>Korean WarAs far as i know no one every has done it but there is no reason it couldn't and it would be pretty funny. It probably wouldn't be impossible for it to sneak up under a moonlit sky with calm seas and pop up then park on the deck.
>>65616250Po 2 could land on a postage stamp. Hell, the carrier might have to land WITH the wind so the plane could keep up with it.https://youtu.be/jcemHIqmkYI
>>65616301With a headwind it can pull off a vertical landing, a modern carrier goes fast enough that it could use a rope and fly it like a kite at top speed.
>>65616301>the carrier might have to land WITH the wind so the plane could keep up with it.Did some math and checking, yes this is possible but it would have to be pretty windy. With headwinds a little under 60 mph a Midway Class at top speed can outrun a Po-2.
