![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Bob McKellar
writes Thomas W Ping wrote: Are there aviation-related reasons why the starboard side is favored for the island, or is it a purely naval issue? If the latter, did the practice come about because the first pioneering carriers were arbitrarily drawn up that way and the configuration simply stuck as a matter of tradition, or were there more significant reasons for the convention? -- Thomas Winston Ping A somewhat silly what-if: Since the idea of using an angled deck is quite simple ( though brilliant, even if it did come from them Brits ) what would have been different if it had been used from the beginning? A very sensible what-if, but at some time someone would have suggested an observation tower of some sort, on an angled deck or straight. Re. the angled deck (invented by a brilliant and modest Brit, who had an excellent relationship with the USN dating from his wartime service in Washington) it seems that when aircraft carriers were first conceived, and aircraft speeds were very low, putting a straight runway on a ship seemed simple and obvious. Only when aircraft speeds became much higher did the problems of overrunning on landing manifest themselves. Even then, with the naval aviation world seemingly fixated on the straight deck, other schemes were considered first, including the rubber mat landing strip, and even a two-storey concept with aircraft landing on the top layer. When the angled deck was first suggested at an MoD committee in London, the response was amusement and mild derision, but to their credit the USN reacted at once to the idea and painted an angled deck on a carrier within weeks. As a beginning guess, I would say fewer crashes into islands, parked aircraft etc., Agree that one... and more losses to planes dribbling off the end of the angle unable to regain flight. Not necessarily - unable to regain flight in the old days seems to have been mostly caused by late or over-cautious application of throttle. Bob McKellar Cheers, Dave -- Dave Eadsforth |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
B-29s & P-51s Strike Japan plus "Carrier Franklin" at Zeno's Drive-In | zeno | Home Built | 1 | October 4th 04 11:19 PM |
B-29s & P-51s Strike Japan plus "Carrier Franklin" at Zeno's Drive-In | zeno | Instrument Flight Rules | 0 | October 4th 04 05:32 PM |
Can the F-14 carry six AIM-54s and land on carrier? | Matthew G. Saroff | Military Aviation | 1 | October 29th 03 08:14 PM |
C-130 Hercules on a carrier - possible ?? | Jan Gelbrich | Military Aviation | 10 | September 21st 03 04:47 PM |
launching V-1s from an aircraft carrier | Gordon | Military Aviation | 34 | July 29th 03 11:14 PM |