Aircraft Carriers

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 02:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
The wasp and Tarawa should really have ski ramps - then the harriers would be able to carry a bigger load.

Stealth - do you think the Indian Navy will buy the ex-Royal Navy Sea Harrier FRS-2`s when they are retired?


The The Indian Navy will end its relationship with the Harrier after its currnet harrier force is replaced by MiG 29Ks and naval LCAs..
Straight from the mouth of Chief of Naval staff Arun Prakash.. a pilot himself..




posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 05:07 AM
link   
The Harrier used by the US Marines has only a limited hover time when taking off or landing. It is not unlimited. They cannot hover till they run out of fuel. They will burn out or damage the engine.
Heavily loaded Harriers use a combination rolling take off and verticle thrust to get off. Also..pure verticle take off uses alot of fuel. Hence the jump ramp principle. The jump ramp is a simple cost effective way to take off. A very smart and practical idea on someones part.
Remember what I said in an earlier post. Aircraft often take off light on fuel and heavy on ordinance ...and soon tank up in flight once airborne.
Orangetom



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 06:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3

Originally posted by Harlequin
The wasp and Tarawa should really have ski ramps - then the harriers would be able to carry a bigger load.

Stealth - do you think the Indian Navy will buy the ex-Royal Navy Sea Harrier FRS-2`s when they are retired?


The The Indian Navy will end its relationship with the Harrier after its currnet harrier force is replaced by MiG 29Ks and naval LCAs..
Straight from the mouth of Chief of Naval staff Arun Prakash.. a pilot himself..


It would appear that most people are replaceing the harrier then - the RN are getting rid as well - waiting for for F-35;

Are the Indian Harriers the same as the FRS-2`s of the RN?

And the harrier takes off using STOVL , hence the ski ramp - to get them in the air in 100m !



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 02:01 PM
link   

The CCS also authorised limited upgradation of 14 vertical landing and take-off Sea Harrier fighter jets of Navy at a cost of Rs 476.69 crore, the Defence Minister said.

He said the upgradation will involve replacement of radars, fitting these with latest air-to-air missiles from Israeli firm Raphael, combat manoeuvring flight recorder, and digital cockpit voice recorder.

The upgradation will be carried out by HAL in Bangalore.







Mukherjee said a go-ahead has been given to purchase of one complete C-303 submarine-fired torpedo decoy system along with transfer-of-technology from Italian company WASS.



more indian navy purchases : www.outlookindia.com...



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 05:54 PM
link   
I have often seen this hovering time limit of the Harriers posted as if it were a fault, it is not. Why on earth would anyone WANT to hover for more than 90secs?

The point really is that the Harrier can land vertically and thus return to its base even if it has been bombed and it is the only operational warplane in the world that can do that and has been for the last 36 years, that fact alone shows remarkable lack of foresight or planning on the part of the worlds air forces as far as I can see and even now, with the F-35B coming along, it is still the same forces of the RAF and USMC that have always used the Harrier that will benefit once again. How trusting of the worlds air forces to presume their precious airfields will never be bombed



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
I have often seen this hovering time limit of the Harriers posted as if it were a fault, it is not. Why on earth would anyone WANT to hover for more than 90secs?

The point really is that the Harrier can land vertically and thus return to its base even if it has been bombed and it is the only operational warplane in the world that can do that and has been for the last 36 years, that fact alone shows remarkable lack of foresight or planning on the part of the worlds air forces as far as I can see and even now, with the F-35B coming along, it is still the same forces of the RAF and USMC that have always used the Harrier that will benefit once again. How trusting of the worlds air forces to presume their precious airfields will never be bombed


A Harrier can hover for far longer than 90 seconds. 90 seconds is the maximum time a Harrier can hover if it is like 110 degrees outside. In normal weather (not hot, not cold), Harriers have been able to hover for upwards of 5 minutes or more.

If the cooling system must be used at its maximum capacity (i.e. you hover the thing in 110 degree heat or something), the water coolant will only last for 90 seconds at that rate.



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Waynos,
I dont mean to imply that the limit on hovering ..about 10 minutes ..is a handicap..and you are correct about that ...why would anyone want to hover so long.??
As I recall it is a heat problem ..leading to engine failure in the long run when the distilled water injection runs out ..about 10 minutes.
The harrier is ideal for the US Marines who have a very devout and religious tradition of close air or artillery support for thier troops on the ground and rightly so. This airplane is ideal for this role where it can be based very close to the action on unprepared fields or roadways.
I am not however sure how one lands a Harrier out at sea if the verticle take off and landing features will not work and the aircraft cannot hover??? To my limited knowlege the assault type aircraft carriers to which the Harriers are assigned to dont have arresting gear! Do you know how this is done.??? I suppose they would have to be inflight refueled ..until they can get to a conventional arresting hook carrier or until they can return to a land base. Orangetom



posted on Apr, 10 2005 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Oh..Waynos,
My apologies. I forgot to add ..that I included the point about limited hovering ability because some of the postings gave the impression that the Harrier could in fact hover to the limits of its fuel. It was not a point that it was a vulnurability. Orangetom



posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 11:14 AM
link   
I take your poitn and my post was not specifically aimed at you but I have seen that mentioned quite a lot.

When you ask about how the Harrier would recover to a ship at sea could you clarify the question as I don't understand quite what you mean.

The RN ships do not have arrestor gear and the standard procedure is to take off via the ski jump and land vertically on the deck, The Harrier has been operated by the RN in this way for 25 years now and I am unaware of any incident where an aircraft was unable to land vertically. I think the cooling/engine failure issue would only come into force if the pilot hovered until all the coolant had evaporated, and in that case he would get the early bath he deserved for being a dimwit


Sorry if I've missed your point, as I said, please clarify.



posted on Apr, 11 2005 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Waynos,
Thank you for your reply.
I am not aware of any such incident either where a harrier cannot recover at sea. To my knowlege the Amphibious type carriers used by the US Navy also do not have arresting gear. My inquiry was such that in the case of a h overing casualty where the hover gear could not for some reason be brought to bear to the hovering position how would one recover a plane back to the ship?? I feel sure that there is a drill for this .especially in the event of a combat casualty to the plane or pilot. I just have not heard what the drill is!
I have worked the arresting gear and the launch catapults on the large nuclear aircraft carriers here in the local shipyards and they are complex systems requiring lots of space on the ships. The Amphibious carriers do not appear to have this space available below decks for all the support systems required.
Thanks. Orangetom



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 03:51 PM
link   
I believe I have read (can't be more specific than that I'm afraid) that the RN policy in that particular situation is to just eject, a bit wasteful but better than losing the pilot. Of course that would only apply if out at sea with no prospect of making it to the nearest airfield.



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 07:55 PM
link   
yes..I agree.thanks Waynos.



posted on Apr, 14 2005 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin


It would appear that most people are replaceing the harrier then - the RN are getting rid as well - waiting for for F-35;

Are the Indian Harriers the same as the FRS-2`s of the RN?

And the harrier takes off using STOVL , hence the ski ramp - to get them in the air in 100m !


The IN Harriers are inferior to the RN FRS-2 harriers..

And about the hovering..ARe you SURE harriers a hover for more than a couples of minutes..I was quite sure they wouldn't/couldn't..Something to do with the water coolant circulation not being able to deal with the underbelly thrust..
Or was it "the harrier MUST land in under 2 mts..."
Im not quite sure.. Does the Harrier hover a various altitudes?



posted on Sep, 12 2005 @ 12:32 AM
link   
Looks like this thread died sometime ago. Maybe we can keep the discussion going on this?

Out,
Russian



posted on Sep, 12 2005 @ 01:30 AM
link   
European carriers are all small because they pretty much all fly the same jet.
The ski-ramp is only good for a jet with vectored thrust, so if you don't fly Harrier, there's no point in a ski-jump. F14 is too big and heavy for a ski-jump, it needs a catapault and full re-heat to get off the deck.

How about somebody putting up some pics and stats of HMS Ocean?

Or a few of the "third world" carriers out there?



posted on Sep, 12 2005 @ 02:21 AM
link   
yes yes.. why not.. There are many subjects that can be covered..

The chinese varyag..final consensus on whether its a casino or a carrier!!


The Indian Gorshkov and its recently intiated indigenous ADS carrier venture..

Also we could look up the Peruvian and Thai carriers as well.



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Here is an interesting idea that could have shrunk carriers even smaller that the ski jump types.

An even cleverer idea was the "Skyhook". This concept was to use a crane that could be mounted on a small ship, such as a helicopter frigate, to lift Harriers off the deck and allow them to fly off, and then recover them later. On recovery, they could be returned to their deck hangar, or refueled while they dangled on the crane, and released to continue operations. The crane would be "smart", with stabilization capabilities and a panel indicator mounted to give the Harrier pilot location information. With such a system, even a helicopter frigate could operate four Harriers as a kind of "mini-carrier". Link






new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join