Page:  / 2
Next Page  
Author
Message
NineLivez
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE
Offline
Posts: 7049
Feedback: 100% (7)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/8/2009 3:24:44 PM EST
Originally Posted By Shott8283:
Originally Posted By NineLivez:
Originally Posted By hardhit77:
I think this might be a front runner in that competition. C-130 landing on the USS. Forrestal.



http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e9e_1249675844
(made it hot)



Thats the boat my dad was on


i hope it was before the fire and not during


He was on board in the late 50's or very early 60's I don't think the fire was untill around the time I was born in 68.
Never apologize for being patriotic.

FUCK OBAMA, ALL THOSE WHO VOTED FOR HIM, AND HIS ARFCOM APOLOGISTS
slanted
Offline
Posts: 600
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/8/2009 4:05:00 PM EST

Originally Posted By Frank_The_Tank:
Originally Posted By slanted:
My dad flew these... AF-2S Guardians

"the largest single-engine, piston-engined aircraft ever used by the US Navy"




But it is no C-130.


btw, they flew as a pair.. the hunter with all the electronics and radar and the killer with stuff that goes boom.


Not as cool as the nuclear depth charge, but that is a story for another thread.






Thanks, that is a rare and obscure Naval aircraft I did't know about. Have anymore info about it or your fathers tales please share...


I don't think AFs were considered a very good aircraft. It had a relatively short service life and was replaced by the S-2. I think he really enjoyed flying the S-2 and that is the aircraft he made the majority of his 900+ carrier landings in, many at night.

The one AF story he tells is set in the early 1950's (April 1952?) at the now infamous GITMO Naval base. His squadron was flying out of GITMO and would meet up with a carrier to practice landings. In one day they wrecked 3 AFs! Fortunately he was not involved in any of the incidents.

The first incident involved a hunter aircraft that took off normally from Windward field, but when the gear was raised, only one side went up. The pilot decided to circle around and bring the plane back in. Only when he lowered the gear, one side when down and the other went up. He circled trying to raise and lower the gear, but each time one wheel would go up and the other would go down!

The pilot decided to try a landing at the Leeward field since it had a crosswind at the time and might allow him to crash at a slower speed. He was able to land on one wheel and the radar dome that sits under the hunter. The damage was minor and the crew was able to lock down the other wheel so the plane could be ferried back to the Windward field for repairs. It turns out the mechanics put in the wrong hydraulic valve.

After that fun, another pilot attempted to take off and was buffeted by a headwind. He tried to abort but was going too fast and ended up skidding over a cliff at the end of the runway and into the ocean. By the time crews made it to the water the pilot was climbing ashore, wet but in one piece.

The final wreck happened on the carrier late in the day. The same hunter from the morning's incident with a different pilot was attempting carrier landings. He landed extremely hard and broke the aircraft in two.






ykluas
Offline
Posts: 230
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/8/2009 4:08:34 PM EST
Originally Posted By hardhit77:
I think this might be a front runner in that competition. C-130 landing on the USS. Forrestal.




(made it hot)



Yep. I thought that would be it. I love the C-130. That beast rocks big time.
ykluas
Offline
Posts: 231
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/8/2009 4:11:15 PM EST
Originally Posted By KJCA3:
so why would a c-130 be able to take off without the catapult and a smaller, lighter fighter not be able to?


Loading, wing loading
DSRV
Member
Offline
Posts: 421
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/8/2009 4:13:51 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By DSRV:
As I remember, the F-111 was being considered for deployment on carriers. i think it went through some testing before the concept was abandoned.


The F111 was the original 'Joint Strike Fighter'...

All services were going to fly them...

In the end, it got scaled down to 'just the Air Force', and the weapons system that was going to be on the USN F111s eventually went on the Tomcat...


That's what I thought, but wasn't sure. The F-111 was one helluva plane.

"It's important to learn the rules, so you know how to break them properly" - The Dalai Lama -
GiggleSmith
الجارحه
Online
Posts: 16468
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/8/2009 4:24:01 PM EST
Briefly, the F111's were deployed on an aircraft carrier.

The USS Coral Sea to be exact:





"He should have killed me. I would have killed me."
FMD
Striving not to be "That Guy"
Offline
Posts: 8105
Feedback: 100% (43)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/8/2009 4:43:41 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/8/2009 4:47:56 PM EST by FMD]
Originally Posted By LARRYG:
Originally Posted By AKSig:
Originally Posted By LARRYG:
Originally Posted By Noname:
The prize has to go to the 130 pilot followed up by the 111B.

Don't forget about the North American A-5/RA-5 Vigilante. Those critters were huge for a carrier based aircraft...!


Were the F111, the A-5, and the S-2 Viking bigger than the A-3?


I think the A-3 was slightly bigger than the A-5.


The A-3 was bigger than all of them. That thing was huge. The Air Force borrowed the design for their B-66.


The A3 had a larger wingspan and was about 2k lbs heavier (empty) than the A5. The A5 was longer by a couple inches, but had a higher max takeoff weight by 9k lbs. It's about a horse apiece, but I'd bet it was a bit easier landing the A3 than the A5 on a moving postage stamp.

ETA:


The answer is: "Glock G19 with XS BigDots and a CompTac CTAC".

DavidK: You've never met FMD? He's 6'6, 240, and trains Navy Seals for a living.
DSRV
Member
Offline
Posts: 422
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/8/2009 4:52:13 PM EST

Originally Posted By GiggleSmith:
Briefly, the F111's were deployed on an aircraft carrier.

The USS Coral Sea to be exact:



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/F-111B_CVA-43_approach_July1968.jpg



Awesome.

I remember the raid on Libya was conducted by F-111s flying from England. And that our friends in Spain, and of course, France, refused us overflight permission.

We lost a plane and crew that day.

The whole country, and many of our true allies mourned their loss. But we were still very proud and honored their sacrifice.
"It's important to learn the rules, so you know how to break them properly" - The Dalai Lama -
AA717driver
Offline
Posts: 127
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/8/2009 4:53:33 PM EST
Originally Posted By GiggleSmith:
Briefly, the F111's were deployed on an aircraft carrier.

The USS Coral Sea to be exact:




Maybe for carrier suitability trials but not actually "deployed". They were never introduced into fleet service. Probably splitting hairs but...

TC

PalmettoSharpshooter
Member
Offline
Posts: 780
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/8/2009 5:03:21 PM EST
A-3 SkyWarrior
NRA Patron Member
PaDanby
Member
Offline
Posts: 26622
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 12:41:59 AM EST
Originally Posted By bcw107:
I think a U-2 landed on one.


They launched U-2s, I doubt they ever landed any.

If I was to bet, I would say that the P2V had the widest wingspan ever to land and take off. The C-130 is probably within a few feet more or less.

The A-3 is probably the largest to do so on a REGULAR basis.
Dunragit
Offline
Posts: 1506
Feedback: 100% (1)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 12:59:12 AM EST
Originally Posted By DSRV:

Originally Posted By GiggleSmith:
Briefly, the F111's were deployed on an aircraft carrier.

The USS Coral Sea to be exact:



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/F-111B_CVA-43_approach_July1968.jpg



Awesome.

I remember the raid on Libya was conducted by F-111s flying from England. And that our friends in Spain, and of course, France, refused us overflight permission.

We lost a plane and crew that day.

The whole country, and many of our true allies mourned their loss. But we were still very proud and honored their sacrifice.


my wife and I were both stationed there, she was there for that mission and I PCS'd there just after.
F-111F models from RAF Lakenheath. The navy got rid of them because when they landed they damaged the decks.
RickNC
Offline
Posts: 1600
Feedback: 100% (3)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 1:38:29 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/9/2009 1:38:54 AM EST by RickNC]
C17

Fatbert
Offline
Posts: 1419
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 4:58:37 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/9/2009 4:58:56 AM EST by Fatbert]
Originally Posted By PaDanby:
Originally Posted By bcw107:
I think a U-2 landed on one.


They launched U-2s, I doubt they ever landed any.

If I was to bet, I would say that the P2V had the widest wingspan ever to land and take off. The C-130 is probably within a few feet more or less.

The A-3 is probably the largest to do so on a REGULAR basis.


The U-2 did carrier take-offs and landings and was used operationally to spy on French nuclear tests.

U-2 Carrier Operations
CarbineDad
Offline
Posts: 4555
Feedback: 100% (2)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 5:07:26 AM EST
Originally Posted By Fatbert:
Originally Posted By PaDanby:
Originally Posted By bcw107:
I think a U-2 landed on one.


They launched U-2s, I doubt they ever landed any.

If I was to bet, I would say that the P2V had the widest wingspan ever to land and take off. The C-130 is probably within a few feet more or less.

The A-3 is probably the largest to do so on a REGULAR basis.


The U-2 did carrier take-offs and landings and was used operationally to spy on French nuclear tests.

U-2 Carrier Operations


Once, long ago (like 25 years ago) when I called BS on U2 operations, the next day I was handed a Conny cruise book. I bought him the beers after work without grumbling.

A boeing 707 test pilot also barrel rolled a 707 successfully

KA3B
TOXIC PHDAN
Offline
Posts: 38266
Feedback: 100% (28)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 5:33:55 AM EST
Originally Posted By CarbineDad:
A boeing 707 test pilot also barrel rolled a 707 successfully


Tex Hill rolled the Boeing 367-80 (the Dash 80), not a 707.
TACELRON THIRTY FOUR VAQ-34
Электронные войны Aгрессоры
KA3B
TOXIC PHDAN
Offline
Posts: 38267
Feedback: 100% (28)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 5:45:22 AM EST
Originally Posted By FMD:
The A5.....but had a higher max takeoff weight by 9k lbs.



The A-3 was rated at a max take-off weight of 82,000 pounds while the A-5 was rated at a max take-off weight of a little less than 80,000 pounds.




TACELRON THIRTY FOUR VAQ-34
Электронные войны Aгрессоры
Argon3
Old Geezer
Offline
Posts: 2371
Feedback: 100% (2)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 6:03:55 AM EST
Originally Posted By KJCA3:
so why would a c-130 be able to take off without the catapult and a smaller, lighter fighter not be able to?



Air Speed
Fighter needs more to stay airborne
WWII they could get the speed just by rolling and ship speed

Look at the flight deck of a CV, you so a white strip down the "Center"
That's just in case we ever needed something bigger than what a C-2 could carry

Another problem they had that made them go to C-2 is Size
Flight deck needed to be clearer than what a deck normally was/is
Peace through Superior Firepower
Beta Phi Lamda Fraternity (BFL)
NRA Life Member
CHL Holder
CERT

Fortune Favores the Prepared
scottfire1957
Member
Offline
Posts: 3979
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 6:16:47 AM EST
From the pothandle of Texas
Valkyrie
Member
Offline
Posts: 9536
Feedback: 100% (9)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 6:22:38 AM EST
Originally Posted By RedSS454:
Very cool, always loved teh C-130's. So this may be a stupid question, but...

The video mentioned something about the Herc's would go to full reverse throttle, and would be in reverse by the time they hit the deck. Does this mean the engines would reverse the rotation of the prop? So spin counter-clockwise during flight, cut throttle, come to a stop, and then spin backwards?



No, the pitch on the prop blade is fully reversable, the engines are constant speed and power is derived by how much pitch is on the blades, how much bite they take from the air... Normally there are mechanisms that keeps the props from going into the ground range while in flight but they made some modifications to all of that to allow the pilot to bring the props into reverse before they hit the deck.

The USN tested this up to a GW of 125k lbs, take off and landing, IIRC. The C-130 is a very capable aircraft, so much so that it has remained in continual production for over five decades with little change in her airframe. It can take off and land in amazingly short distances, take one hell of a beating, land on anythig from a dirt road to a corn field, her engines can fully ingest a seagul and still function( I know this personally). I've spent quite a bit of the last 6 years in one, I should know I would not fly in anything else. In my eyes, it is the greatest aircraft ever fielded. She's not fast, shes's not even pretty but if you need 30k lbs of 50 cal amo delivered to a bunch of Marines in the middle of the desert on short notice and an unimproved airfield under fire, the Herc can do it better than anything we have in the inventory. They fly thru hurricanes, they mount artillery on them, I've seen them spraying insecticide over a flooded New Orleans to quell the mmosquito hatches, it is one of the most versatile combat aircraft in the world. Did I mention they can take off and land from a carrier?

Sincerely,

A proud Herc crewman
Manic_Moran
Member
Offline
Posts: 5978
Feedback: 0% (0)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 9:42:58 AM EST
Usually I see reference to the C-130 landing on the carrier being described as "The largest aircraft to land and take off from a carrier without the use of a catapult or arresting gear"

Which thus implies that bigger aircraft have landed on a carrier.

Any ideas?

NTM
LARRYG
USN 1969-1973
Offline
Posts: 36047
Feedback: 100% (24)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 9:52:29 AM EST
Originally Posted By Manic_Moran:
Usually I see reference to the C-130 landing on the carrier being described as "The largest aircraft to land and take off from a carrier without the use of a catapult or arresting gear"

Which thus implies that bigger aircraft have landed on a carrier.

Any ideas?

NTM


I doubt it. I doubt the arrresting gear could handle even the 130.
If it's a Colt, it's a copy of an original ArmaLite.

I am not LARRYG36.

Racing is life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting.

If your AR10 is marked Geneseo, IL, it's still an AR10 no matter what some people say.
KA3B
TOXIC PHDAN
Offline
Posts: 38275
Feedback: 100% (28)
Link To This Post
Posted: 8/9/2009 10:43:24 AM EST
Originally Posted By Manic_Moran:
Usually I see reference to the C-130 landing on the carrier being described as "The largest aircraft to land and take off from a carrier without the use of a catapult or arresting gear"
Which thus implies that bigger aircraft have landed on a carrier.
Any ideas?
NTM


Fail.

The C-130 is the largest aircraft to land and take-off from a carrier without the use of a catapult or arresting gear
The A-3 Skywarrior is the largest aircraft to land and take-off from a carrier with the use of a catapult and arresting gear.
TACELRON THIRTY FOUR VAQ-34
Электронные войны Aгрессоры
Page:  / 2
Next Page