Naval Pictures Forecastle: Laying siege to the poop deck!

[ColBosch]

Certainly C-130s can, though the pictures below I think was just demonstrative purposes they could do it.
USS Forrestal in October 1963.

Yep. They did a total of 21 tests, gave the pilot a Distinguished Flying Cross, and never tried it again.

[Feenix74]

Yep. They did a total of 21 tests, gave the pilot a Distinguished Flying Cross, new underpants and never tried it again.

Fixed for you  O0

[Feenix74]

If we are going to talk big aircraft near/on aircraft carriers then:

[Wrangler]

F-111?  Nice...

Looks like USS Zumwalt's sister ship is undergoing trials now, USS Michael Monsoor DDG 1001.

[Feenix74]

F-111?  Nice...

Sea Trials of the prototype F-111B trials aboard USS Coral Sea.

Would you like to know more? https://youtu.be/UxDV9y5Is64

[ColBosch]

Fixed for you  O0

From what I've read, the pilot was cool as a cucumber. It was everyone else that wore brown trousers for the duration of the tests.

Man, I love the Herky Bird. But that's a topic for another thread. :D

[glitterboy2098]

if my research was right, the C-130 tests actually proved fairly viable, in terms of takeoffs and landings. the reason it was never picked up was that the sheer size of the plane and the deck area that would have to be cleared to let it land and take off was just so large that it was a major disruption to operations, and would limit the number of planes that could be carried in the air wing (since they wouldn't be able to park as many on deck, in order to be able to clear them out of the way.)

so instead they developed a smaller Carrier delivery craft, the C-1 Trader, that could operate off carriers using the same catapult and arrester wire set ups as the fighters, and which would be more easily slotted into normal deck operations.

[ANS Kamas P81]

I recall reading that at one point, just to see if it would work, the pilot threw the plane into full reverse on the props while he was still about 10 feet above the deck.  The total landing run from wheels-down to stop at that point was something idiotic like 30 feet, without a tailhook.

If we are going to talk big aircraft near/on aircraft carriers then:


I always dug that short Vought nose on the early -111, before it got the extension.  It seriously gives the cockpit a look like the F-8.

[ColBosch]

if my research was right, the C-130 tests actually proved fairly viable, in terms of takeoffs and landings. the reason it was never picked up was that the sheer size of the plane and the deck area that would have to be cleared to let it land and take off was just so large that it was a major disruption to operations, and would limit the number of planes that could be carried in the air wing (since they wouldn't be able to park as many on deck, in order to be able to clear them out of the way.)

so instead they developed a smaller Carrier delivery craft, the C-1 Trader, that could operate off carriers using the same catapult and arrester wire set ups as the fighters, and which would be more easily slotted into normal deck operations.

Yup. I found a video! https://youtu.be/ar-poc38C84

[Wrangler]

I recall reading that at one point, just to see if it would work, the pilot threw the plane into full reverse on the props while he was still about 10 feet above the deck.  The total landing run from wheels-down to stop at that point was something idiotic like 30 feet, without a tailhook.

I wonder how the A-5 Vigilante was handled.  I almost mistook the F-111 for it.  She was just recon jet by the time F-111 came around.

[JadeHellbringer]

Not sure if the F-111B had the problem, but the shot of it with the engines lit reminds me of the early trials of the Tomcat, when they found that the current blast deflectors on board the carriers were just fine for the Intruder, the Corsair, even the Phantom, but... not so much for the Turkey. (This was one of several reasons the Midway and Coral Sea never operated Tomcats, actually)

In this particular instance, the Tomcat lit both engines, knocked down the deflector, and melted the nose of the RA-5 on the other side. I'm trying to find the photo of the RA-5 afterwards, it's in a book I used to own- everything forward of the cockpit is just sort of drooping Concorde-style. Oops.

[I am Belch II]

With the nose gear being longer on the A-5 i'm sure that the plane scrapped a couple of times on the carrier. The A-5 was a physically a big plane, but not in the weight department. The Midways did operate them for a little bit. The F-14 and the S-3 I guess was to much for them. 

[Kidd]

Not sure if the F-111B had the problem, but the shot of it with the engines lit reminds me of the early trials of the Tomcat, when they found that the current blast deflectors on board the carriers were just fine for the Intruder, the Corsair, even the Phantom, but... not so much for the Turkey. (This was one of several reasons the Midway and Coral Sea never operated Tomcats, actually)

In this particular instance, the Tomcat lit both engines, knocked down the deflector, and melted the nose of the RA-5 on the other side. I'm trying to find the photo of the RA-5 afterwards, it's in a book I used to own- everything forward of the cockpit is just sort of drooping Concorde-style. Oops.

Bearing in mind a little allowance for foreshortening effect, thats a fair visual comparison with the Hornet in the background.

[Feenix74]

If my memory serves me correctly, the Tomcat uses the same engines, the Pratt & Whitney TF30, as the F-111B, although the variant of the engine may differ. So you can probably expect similar issues would have arisen if the F-111B had made it into service.

[glitterboy2098]

Yup. I found a video! https://youtu.be/ar-poc38C84

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uM5AI3YSV3M

also, this experiment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8HMPMYL19E
which is probably even crazier.

[Daryk]

The non-skid must have been hell on the wing tips...

[truetanker]

Hate to make an image of a U2 carrying a Rad-Egg landing on one of these and miss...

TT

[Cannonshop]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gBo3iLLIts

just a bit seasonal.

[Nightlord01]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uM5AI3YSV3M

also, this experiment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8HMPMYL19E
which is probably even crazier.

LOOK MA
NO HOOK

Classic! Surprised no JATO rockets used on those launches, but I guess they just didn't need them.

[Sharpnel]

What surprised me was the C130 taking off the much shorter angled deck.

[Fat Guy]

Much shorter, but much wider.

[Wrangler]

I didn't know this ship existed, but this is a 1:1 scale replica/reconstruction of the Imperial Chinese Navy's Dingyuan armoured cruiser / Ironclad.  The original ship was launched in 1885 as the flagship of the Beiyang Fleet during the First Sino-Japanese War.  The original ship had incredible amount of bad luck and wasn't as well designed.  Ultimately the ship was sunk by scuttling, to avoid capture just before the fleet surrendered.

I was sort amazed a Imperial ship recreated by Chinese.  What i was reading this replica fixed some of the problems with the original was the layout of the flying bridge, because it basically blocked the ship's main gun turrets from firing or risk blasting the occupants.  There isn't terrible alot information on the Replica itself.

Pretty nice reconstruction!

[I am Belch II]

Great reconstruction!

[Kidd]

A leedle British humour at the commissioning of the HMS Queen Elizabeth, the Royal Navy's first aircraft carrier in I don't know how long (aircraft pending)

[Wrangler]

LOL, i hope Queen didn't mind the sense of humor injected into the cake. That's awesome. :)

[glitterboy2098]

since it is being discussed over in the AFV thread..

the AMOS mortar system, on the CB90 patrol boat. video shows why they decided not to mount the system on the boat, and work on a bigger boat for it. (might be cancelled now, since the AMOS was)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqsxrNexjkY

[kato]

Stridsbat 2010 Ny was cancelled in 2009 since its only purpose was to carry AMOS.

They might still - with different armament - have made sense as a replacement of the similar-sized Tapper class patrol vessels (23m boats, 62 tons displacement, 12 boats) which served as patrol and ASW units with crews from the Swedish Amphibious Corps. The Tapper class was subsequently supposed to retire in 2014 but they have been retained for Rule 4 reasons.

[Kidd]

Nice shot of a Zubr-class hovercraft



for scale comparison

[Wrangler]

Zubr-Class Hovercraft suntanning with bikini Clad Russians.+

[I am Belch II]

Zubr-Class Hovercraft suntanning with bikini Clad Russians.+

Go to the Beach have a great time with the family, and you get invaded. I guess only in RUSSIA!!