PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Future Carrier (Including Costs)
View Single Post
Old 12th Aug 2017, 05:25
  #4340 (permalink)  
SpazSinbad
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 53 Likes on 46 Posts
A more recent GEORGE quote specifically about STOVL (but for ADF) Ops & this LONG article is available online (PHEW) so just a small part is excerpted below. Meanwhile a long article from an RN Wig of Big Admiral Sir John Woodward GBE KCB 'bout difference between FAA & crab ops: http://www.publications.parliament.u...61/761vw39.htm

Making the STOVL F-35B Work for the ADF Steve George, Feb 2015 Defence Technology Review
"Integrating Aircraft and Ships It’s best to start by understanding that putting military aircraft on ships has never been easy. Warships, even the massive US Navy (USN) nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, are not and never will be just ‘floating airfields’ – the raw constraints of physical space have driven naval aviators to develop new ways of launching, recovering, arming, maintaining and repairing aircraft since the earliest days.

But they have consistently succeeded. Effective, safe and sustainable embarked air power has been demonstrated from a wide variety of ship/aircraft combinations over the past 100 years. Maritime fixed-wing aviation is an achievable art – and STOVL makes it even more achievable.

Successful maritime aviation depends on a little known discipline called ‘ship/aircraft integration’. This is a systems engineering challenge, requiring thorough understanding and control of the various interfaces between the ship and the aircraft...." Defence Technology Review : DTR FEB 2015, Page 1
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
CarrierNOTfloatingAirfield.jpg (1.04 MB, 32 views)

Last edited by SpazSinbad; 12th Aug 2017 at 05:35. Reason: JPG & URL
SpazSinbad is offline