Timeline for Is is possible to land a midsize commercial plane on an Ford Class aircraft carrier?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
24 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 15, 2020 at 14:25 | answer | added | Cosmobeauregard | timeline score: -3 | |
| Feb 14, 2019 at 13:51 | comment | added | CrossRoads | Flight deck sizes: Name: Gerald R. Ford–class aircraft carrier Aviation facilities: 1,092 ft × 256 ft (333 m × 78 m) flight deck en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gerald_R._Ford The same as a Nimitz class: "The flight deck measures 333m x 77m and is equipped with four lifts." naval-technology.com/projects/nimitz | |
| Feb 13, 2019 at 15:24 | answer | added | Hobbes | timeline score: 2 | |
| Mar 14, 2016 at 5:12 | comment | added | TomMcW |
@mins Approaching a moving strip shouldn't be something easy for a commercial pilot. There are a whole lot of commercial pilots out there that have a great deal of experience landing on carriers, albeit not in 737's. I think about 40% of commercial pilots are former (or current) military.
|
|
| Mar 14, 2016 at 5:04 | comment | added | TomMcW | Sounds from the answers that the plane would fit on the deck and it sounds at least plausible. That's a lot more than most Hollywood screenplays require. | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 21:36 | comment | added | Jan Hudec | The landing could be made arrested. In addition to the arrestor wires used for normal operation, the aircraft carrier has an arresting net that can be raised across the landing strip and captures the structure of the aircraft. It might damage the aircraft, but for emergency landing it would get used. | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 19:34 | answer | added | Him | timeline score: 3 | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 19:28 | comment | added | Michael | Maybe you can think out of the box. I have landed the Space Shuttle on an aircraft carrier in XPlane 9, basically by rigging the shuttle to have working rockets and landing vertically. | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 18:04 | comment | added | Kevin Krumwiede | I would assume that a Ford-class carrier has crash nets, but don't know whether they'd be effective at stopping a 737. | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 16:11 | comment | added | Patricia Shanahan | Consider man-eating sharks that have learned to capsize boats as a reason for landing on the carrier. | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 15:53 | comment | added | Michael | I hope I’m not mistaken, but the mass of the aircraft shouldn’t matter if the wings and flaps are scaled appropriately. It certainly doesn’t matter for simple braking distance. | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 14:57 | history | edited | SMS von der Tann | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Mar 13, 2016 at 11:50 | comment | added | mins | Adding to the difficulty: The carrier must be oriented correctly into the wind, and sailing at full speed to make the landing deck more stable by countering the effect of the waves and allowing a higher approach speed. Approaching a moving strip shouldn't be something easy for a commercial pilot. Remember the direction of the landing is not exactly the direction the carrier is sailing, because the strip is angled. See What makes it so hard to land on an aircraft carrier?. | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 10:02 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackAviation/status/708956347543502848 | ||
| Mar 13, 2016 at 7:29 | comment | added | UnrecognizedFallingObject | BTW -- there are regional-sized civil planes that can do the "short strip" thing just about as well as the Herc can -- the DHC-7 being the leader in that department. (It has a wingspan almost as wide as the 737 though!) | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 5:59 | vote | accept | TheWire | ||
| Mar 13, 2016 at 4:33 | comment | added | Ralph J♦ | @RonBeyer. Not with full flaps it doesn't! | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 4:31 | answer | added | Ralph J♦ | timeline score: 32 | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 4:10 | comment | added | Ron Beyer | Tough landing gear, brakes, beta props, low stall speed... they also went into beta before touching down on the aircraft carrier to slow down even more, something modern airliners can't do is give reverse thrust while in the air. I believe most aircraft use squat switches to lock that out. C-130 stalls at 100kts, 737 around 150. | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 4:07 | comment | added | TheWire | @RonBeyer What attributes of the c-130 allow it to land on short landing strips? | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 4:02 | comment | added | Ron Beyer | As a comparison, a c-130 taking off at 80,000 lbs needs 1400 ft to take off, only 500ft more than the ground roll of a Cessna 172. The problem is that the airliner would hit the deck so hard is gear would break off and end up in the drink anyway. Safer to just ditch near the carrier and hope for a quick rescue. | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 3:55 | comment | added | Ron Beyer | The c-130 was designed to operate from short unimproved strips, there is no way a 737 could land in 1000ft. | |
| Mar 13, 2016 at 3:39 | review | First posts | |||
| Mar 13, 2016 at 4:04 | |||||
| Mar 13, 2016 at 3:36 | history | asked | TheWire | CC BY-SA 3.0 |