Project Reality Forums

Gulf of Oman
-Jabal Al-Burj
-Zatar Wetlands

Other maps that could use the Harrier:
-Al Kufrah Oilfields
-Fools Road
-Kashan Desert(yes the Army doesnt use the Harrier, but the USMC doesnt use the A-10
-Battle for Qinling

1-No, too small
2-No, too small
3-No, too small
4-No, too small
5-No, too small
6-No, army doesn't us it
7-Yes


And since when has the US marines not used the A-10? they have more of them then harriers.

'[=TC= wrote:nuetron;699589']-Kashan Desert(yes the Army doesnt use the Harrier, but the USMC doesnt use the A-10

ehhh, like we have said in the US Army update the USMC in v0.75 and before have been a "mix and match" of the USMC and US Army. The US Air force is the ones who use the A-10, just the US Air force work with the US Army, as the US Navy works with the USMC.

Interesting follow on from my "bit of cheek" in the third post.

I have a question for you carrier/Amphib Assault craft knowledge experts. It is general discussion, but I don't think it warrants a new thread so I'll ask it here if you don't mind.

What sort of distances are required on carriers for a standard catapult launch for modern jets? I guess this distance differs for different aircraft type as it would tie in to a particular type's stall speed. Do they alter the catapult launch distance (power stroke) for different types of aricraft or are all types "thrown" with the same amount of power? (i.e. lighter aircraft/less drag will simply become airborne with more airspeed). Clearly the catapult must impart enough energy to prevent the dreaded teabag/pancake/dunking.

One more question naval aviator enthusiasts everywhere, what are the types of modifications made to a particular type of aircraft to make it carrier launchable? I am guessing stronger gear (landing), catapult mechanism gear, lighter overall fuselage(?), bigger engine plant (maybe this would mean a different aricraft altogether. Can a jet's total thrust output be tuned to say have more acceleration but lower top speed (much like rally cars adjust their gear ratio) or is a given jet engine fairly linear/uniform in it's output?

Fill me in!

Billy_Crook_Foot wrote:Interesting follow on from my "bit of cheek" in the third post.

I have a question for you carrier/Amphib Assault craft knowledge experts. It is general discussion, but I don't think it warrants a new thread so I'll ask it here if you don't mind.

What sort of distances are required on carriers for a standard catapult launch for modern jets? I guess this distance differs for different aircraft type as it would tie in to a particular type's stall speed. Do they alter the catapult launch distance (power stroke) for different types of aricraft or are all types "thrown" with the same amount of power? (i.e. lighter aircraft/less drag will simply become airborne with more airspeed). Clearly the catapult must impart enough energy to prevent the dreaded teabag/pancake/dunking.

One more question naval aviator enthusiasts everywhere, what are the types of modifications made to a particular type of aircraft to make it carrier launchable? I am guessing stronger gear (landing), catapult mechanism gear, lighter overall fuselage(?), bigger engine plant (maybe this would mean a different aricraft altogether. Can a jet's total thrust output be tuned to say have more acceleration but lower top speed (much like rally cars adjust their gear ratio) or is a given jet engine fairly linear/uniform in it's output?

Fill me in!

Eddie_Baker can prolly answer more accurately, but I'll give a try. Yeah, aircraft are thrown off of the carrier with different forces, mainly depending on the aircraft, etc. just as the landing wire has a set amount of tension depending on the aircraft coming in.

As for modifications to a plane, the best place to show these would be the changes beween the F35A (Conventional, planned for USAF) and the F35C (Carrier Variant)

The changes include:
Beefed up landing gear
Larger wing surfaces
Arresting hook
Catapult launch ability

And im sure I'm missing a few

You missed folding wings, and the fact that a catapult launch isn't always how the aircraft takes off - UK and Russian carriers utilise the ski-jump bow. Where they are taking off with a steam-launch, I believe they use the tow bar attached to the nosewheel rather than any kind of seperate mechanism.

Different powerplants can be used, but I'm buggered if I can think of a modern example that I'm 100% certain on. I don't believe there's modification made to make the fueselage itself lighted, just the larger surfaces Viper mentioned.

There's usually a slightly different avionics suite as well I believe.

Interesting, thanks fellas.

So the large wing sufaces essentially mean the aircraft will have a lower stall speed and can therefore have slightly more control at low speeds - obviously this would be to help the tricky prospect of landing.

However, the large the wing area would, I suspect, create more overall drag so as a rough rule of thumb a carrier based version of an aircraft would have a slightly lower top speed and potentially a shorter operational range than a land-based version of the same type (other modifcations not-with-standing.) Of course operational range differences (maybe not true anyway) is a bit of useless comparison considering you can move a carrier around while an airfield won't be moving no matter how much you watch it.

Billy_Crook_Foot wrote:Interesting, thanks fellas.

So the large wing sufaces essentially mean the aircraft will have a lower stall speed and can therefore have slightly more control at low speeds - obviously this would be to help the tricky prospect of landing.

However, the large the wing area would, I suspect, create more overall drag so as a rough rule of thumb a carrier based version of an aircraft would have a slightly lower top speed and potentially a shorter operational range than a land-based version of the same type (other modifcations not-with-standing.) Of course operational range differences (maybe not true anyway) is a bit of useless comparison considering you can move a carrier around while an airfield won't be moving no matter how much you watch it.

*wild applause

I think hes got it!

Soooooooooooooo... will we see a reappearance of these two jets? lol

I dont think so yet, there not even issued to units yet. And theres 3 different jets in the F-35 family.