PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Future Carrier (Including Costs)
View Single Post
Old 3rd Apr 2018, 10:08
  #4945 (permalink)  
Davef68
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,709
Received 38 Likes on 23 Posts
Originally Posted by Not_a_boffin
SHAR struggled to recover with a full AD load in tropical conditions, so you can imagine what trying to bring back air to mud ordnance would be like.
One reason that hastened it's departure. As Engines says:

So why has the UK gone down this route? Because there was a late change to requirements (from the UK) to be able to carry out a VL to the ship with the same bring-back, but at more demanding weather conditions. The F-35 requirement document called out the US Mil Spec 'Tropical Day'. In 2003, the UK came up and requested that studies be carried out into how to recover to the ship on what came to be called the 'UK Hot Day', which was significantly hotter and with lower pressures - this 'UK Hot Day' reflected conditions in the summer in the Northern Gulf.

Two options were looked at. First was a 'thrust push' - basically screw 10% more thrust out of the propulsion system. The second, more feasible, was SRVL.

The UK's large decks offer the chance to exploit SRVL to do exactly what the pilots are saying - to be able to come back to the deck with more fuel and weapons, reducing the need to dump fuel and allow recoveries with external stores as well.
That 2003 request was born out of practical experience
Davef68 is offline