They will just open the bomb bay and load it. The USN loads most weapons by hand. I'm not sure about the RN.
Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
They will just open the bomb bay and load it. The USN loads most weapons by hand. I'm not sure about the RN.
And in essence, these two statements make the point.
CATOBAR with four cats will get more aircraft airborne with full loads in far more conditions than STOBAR.
Of course if you have a strong enough engine and the proper thrust to weight ratio, you can get airborne, but the conditions have to be right, and your aircraft and pilot have to be able to handle the loads placed on them. So, while there is no doubt in my mind that STOBAR can get a well laden aircraft into the air under certain conditions, it is not able to do so in nearly as many conditions as a CATOBAR can...which projects a significant dis-advantage on a STOBAR carrier if they ever have to meet at sea.
As to the Russians, the idea that they have not been able to "afford," fully laden aircraft is just not so. We see them do so in other exercises for their air force, and so if they wanted they could for the navy too. I believe that the biggest issue with the Russians has been their doctrine. The operate the Kuznetsov (to date) more as a floating air defense base to protect their submarines and their other surface vessels with the large anti-surface missiles strike forces.
Perhaps with the Mig-29K air wing coming we will see that change and see the Russians actually start preparing their aircraft carrier air wing for strike at sea missions.
Just the same, I believe there are significant limitations to STOBAR, but not that those limitations are absolute when it comes to laden aircraft. With the right engines and in the right wind conditions, they certainly should be able to get aircraft with decent loads into the air. Their problem when compared to CATOBAR is that they cannot do it nearly as regularly or often, which means they suffer from a significant handicap in that regard.
Last edited:
I forgot something..The USN flew S-3 Vikings from carriers from 1975 to 2009.. that's 34 years... and the S-3s had a bomb bay. I was assigned to VS-33(S-3A squadron) from November 1980 until November 1982.
Yes they did. Two bays forward of the sonar buoys dispensers.
In addition, another even larger aircraft also had a bomb bay on the carriers. From 1961-1963 the A-5A and A-5B Vigilantes served and they had a large bomb bay too. They were mach 2, supersonic, nuclear armed strike bombers to be launched from carriers. Here are some operating off of the USS Enterprise (CVN-65) in 1962.
Here's a picture of the bomb bay. It was located between the two engines and the single nuclear bomb was ejected out the back of the bombay and the aircraft aircraft, propelled with a 50 fps speed out the back, and so the bomb took a ballistic track.
Once the SSBN subs began deploying on their nuclear deterrence partrols after 1963 all Vigilantes were either converted to, or built as the RA-5C Recon version. In that role the bomb bay was filled with extra fuel tanks and no longer used for any weapons.
The RA-5C was retired in early 1980 after being completely replaced by recon versions of fighters like the F-8 Crusader and then the F-14 tomcat, and now the Hornets.
While aboard America in 1981 the only thing we loaded in the bomb bay were mines and torpedos. We used a hoist.
We loaded thousands upon thousands of sonobouys. <<<THOUSANDS>>>
I miss my old seafaring days but I don't miss what these photos depict..
We loaded thousands upon thousands of sonobouys. <<<THOUSANDS>>>
I miss my old seafaring days but I don't miss what these photos depict..
Slightly off topic here. Can F-35B take off vertically and make the transition from vertical flight to horizontal flight in the air? I have seen videos of Harrier doing that, but I have yet to see any video on F-35B performing such flight transition.
Of course it can. The USMC would not replace the Harrier with this aircraft if it could not. If it can come in for a landing then go vertical.. it can certainly do the same during a take off.
Honestly , I could not find a video on this subject.
I trawled around the internet but no one seems to be able to give a straight answer on this. What I found was that vertical-to-horizontal take off is not a JSF program requirement, so no surprise if it can't do that. Then again I guess such capability has very little practical use beyond showing off during air show, but the sight of a a fixed wing aircraft taking off vertically, hover around and then fly off into the sky has got to be one of the most dramatic experience, like watching a SCI FI movie.
Stack, we have an F-35 thread;
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/wor...rogress-photos-videos-53-5796.html#post240670
Check it out!
http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/wor...rogress-photos-videos-53-5796.html#post240670
Check it out!
Well, for the sake of getting this on the Aircraft Carriers II thread because it is quite an important thing for all STOVL carriers, and to answer your question, here goes.
Watch this video a USMC active F-35Bs exercising at the MCAS in Yuma, AZ this year.
At 43 seconds you see an F-35B hovering. At 49 they zoom out to show another F-35B landing while it hovers. At 56 seconds they zoom out again and then that hovering F-35B flies away horizontally. So yes, they can do it.
[video=youtube;b_gvYGwsfPE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_gvYGwsfPE[/video]
The aircraft is billed and designed to be a STOVL (Short take-off, vertical landing) which is primarily what the harriers do. Vertical take-off and then transition to horizontal flight from that hover takes too much fuel...but that does not mean it cannot do it.
Here's another video showing USMC test aircraft operating off of the USS Wasp during aircraft qualifications for the F-35B aboard ship. Here you will see horizontal flight transitioning to vertical (which obviously means that if they can do that, the can also do the other), and also short take off rolls from the Wasp.
[video=youtube;Ki86x1WKPmE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki86x1WKPmE[/video]
Now, they will not normally go vertical take-off to horizontal flight because, as stated pure vertical take-off and then transitioning to horizontal flight eats up too much fuel...but there will be times they have to do it, either because of recovery to someplace near the front where they do not have the room to roll (either landing or take-off) because of battle damage or some other reason.
Hope this helps
Last edited:
- Status