About the Sea Hawk, an aircraft that was never an in service land based aircraft before the basic design was taken and made into a Fleet aircraft from the outset: "The first jet aircraft from the Hawker stable and worthy successor to the various WWII fighter designs such as the Hurricane, Tempest and Fury, the Sea Hawk was very nearly stillborn but was rescued at the eleventh hour by interest from the Royal Navy."
http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co...awk/index.html
About the Sea Vixen, an aircraft that was never an in service land based aircraft before the basic design was taken and made into a Fleet aircraft from the outset: "After proving to themselves that carrier operations were feasible for jet aircraft with the de Havilland Sea Vampire, the Navy formulated a specification for a fleet defence fighter. The RAF issued a similar requirement and de Havilland decided the requirements were so similar that a single aircraft could fulfil them both."
http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co...n/history.html
About the Sea Venom: "Early problems with the FAW20 [prototype Sea Venom] lead to withdrawal of the type from front-line service. The insufficient strength of the arrester hook lead to several aircraft overshooting the landing strip and falling in the drink. At this time, no ejector seats were fitted. "
http://www.neam.co.uk/venom.html
However Jackonicko, my original statement was too sweeping and poorly phrased. There have been land based aircraft that have operated from ships and suggesting that they were not successful does not do them justice.
I should have rephrased it with a word that encapsulates the ease of operation around the deck of a marinised land aircraft over a purebread naval one.
Semantics aside, using a periscope on a Typhoon to see the deck is still not a good maritime design feature whichever way you package it.