Landing speeds for naval aircraft?

"Frank Minich" wrote in message
...
The RA-5C max trap was 50,000 pounds, at 139KIAS on-speed.
Maybe the numb-nutz has gone kinder/gentler since then.

Frank

I thought is was a bit faster, mid-140's. Thanks for the info.

R / John

John Carrier wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

John Weiss wrote:
wrote...

As John has pointed out, swing wing was for high speed dash + slow
speed manuvering with a A/C big enough to carry the Phoenix, able to
come aboard small decks like the Forrestal class.

I don't think anyone considers Forrestal -- the first of the "super
carriers" -- a "small deck"! OTOH, I watched a pair of turkeys land on
Midway... Now THAT was a "clobbered deck"!

If ya flew Turkeys onboard FID, like I did, it was a small deck.
Particularly after landing abord IKE, America and Nimitz...

Yep, I was there in VF-151 when those 2 landed during the North Pacific
'Fun-Ex'....Midway-maru had more acreage that FID, BTW-BUT Midway
always felt like it was 'small'...

Small was Oriskany, Hancock, and Lex and their sisters. Night traps on two
of them.

R / John

yep, F-8s, at night on 27 chucks....better yee than me...Altho I really
miss not flying single seat Fighters. never knew how much fun it was
until I got into the A-4 and F-16...

"John Carrier" wrote...

Small was Oriskany, Hancock, and Lex and their sisters. Night traps on
two of them.

Indeed! The A-6 took up a LOT of space on Lady Lex!

SNIP

Small was Oriskany, Hancock, and Lex and their sisters. Night traps on
two
of them.

R / John

yep, F-8s, at night on 27 chucks....better yee than me...

It ah ... built character.

Altho I really
miss not flying single seat Fighters. never knew how much fun it was
until I got into the A-4 and F-16...

The F-8 really made you feel like god in the cockpit. But for the sweetness
of the flying experience, an A-4F was my favorite ride. And it could
confound many a "better" airplane in a fight.

R / John

John Weiss wrote:
"John Carrier" wrote...

Small was Oriskany, Hancock, and Lex and their sisters. Night traps on
two of them.

Indeed! The A-6 took up a LOT of space on Lady Lex!

Gotta ask if anybody that reads this NG CQ'ed onboard Lex..I did, in
1973...still had a mirror...

Or anybody serve onboard Lex, when she was still a CVA??

wrote in message
ups.com...

John Weiss wrote:
"John Carrier" wrote...

Small was Oriskany, Hancock, and Lex and their sisters. Night traps on
two of them.

Indeed! The A-6 took up a LOT of space on Lady Lex!

Gotta ask if anybody that reads this NG CQ'ed onboard Lex..I did, in
1973...still had a mirror...

Or anybody serve onboard Lex, when she was still a CVA??

Once in T-2's, once in TA-4's, once in F-8's ... including the obligatory
six night passes for the qual.

R / John

On 2 Dec 2006 06:37:12 -0800, wrote:


John Weiss wrote:
"John Carrier" wrote...

Small was Oriskany, Hancock, and Lex and their sisters. Night traps on
two of them.

Indeed! The A-6 took up a LOT of space on Lady Lex!

Gotta ask if anybody that reads this NG CQ'ed onboard Lex..I did, in
1973...still had a mirror...

Ayup. T-28C from VT-5 in March, '69. TS-2A from VT-28 in June, '69.

Or anybody serve onboard Lex, when she was still a CVA??

Not quite THAT old! ;-)

Bill Kambic
Haras Lucero, Kingston, TN
Mangalarga Marchador: Uma Raça, Uma Paixão

On 12/2/06 8:37 AM, in article
, "
wrote:


John Weiss wrote:
"John Carrier" wrote...

Small was Oriskany, Hancock, and Lex and their sisters. Night traps on
two of them.

Indeed! The A-6 took up a LOT of space on Lady Lex!

Gotta ask if anybody that reads this NG CQ'ed onboard Lex..I did, in
1973...still had a mirror...

Or anybody serve onboard Lex, when she was still a CVA??

Did night CQ off San Diego in S2F early 60s


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

wrote...

Gotta ask if anybody that reads this NG CQ'ed onboard Lex..I did, in
1973...still had a mirror...

In '75 in the T-2 and A-4, and in '81 in the A-6.

fudog50 wrote in
:

Since the original question was about landing speeds, I assume you
mean traps?

Here is a topic for discussion.....

The E/F "Rhino" comes in fast and heavy. The gear on Nimitz class is
taking a heavy toll and is wearing out faster than the design was
intended.

The "Growler" will come in heavier and faster.

Can the current configuration of the arresting gear handle it and not
have catastrophic fatigue failure without major modification?

I would simply draw your attention to several designs that could
have been or were operated off Enterprise class & later carriers.
A3, F4, A5 & F111. All heavier (30-40+ tons) than the Rhino or Growler.

I think the rough aim point for approach speeds is something like
` 140Kts +/-.

IBM