[
Harry,
I’ve not heard of any specific angled-deck issue regarding the conversion?. Any vessel utilising arrested-recovery techniques requires an angled-deck for reasons of safety and optimum deck-flexibility. It simply makes no sense to try and use an axial (single) deck for an arrested-recovery technique carrier these days….unless of course you build it bloody huge!!!.
The problem with Gorshkov is that the takeoff run for the Mig-29’s is so far back it encroaches on the angled landing deck – at least according to published artwork. This means that to land-on an aircraft that launching spot must be clear. Conversley it means that to launch a number of aircraft in rapid succession will take time as the following fighters will have to wait, prior to being spotted, for the launching fighter to be up and emergency free. This also means that the first aircraft launched may have to be buddy-tanked to top-off fuel wasted whilst waiting for the launch evolution to complete etc!.
STOVL on the other hand can see a fighter spotted for launch, a fighter land vertically in front of it then taxi away, then complete the launch immediately when it has a clear run. Very much easier and safer!.
jonesy
you hit the nail on the head of why i don’t like the lanch encroacheing on the the angled deck. because of the lack of a runway if their is the invitable emegency and their are planes in the air and they can’t land.
thats why i do not like the angled deck on Gorshkov seems to be too risky and removes the angled decks saftey and speed if the end is blocked .
i didn’t know that the migs were configered for buddy tanking i would have thought they could carry that much fuel kusenofes su33 seems to have told us that they couldn’t carry a full tank of fule and a meaningful load.
would they indiens have enough migs to act as tankers if they wanted to strike? is 20+ – enough.
also what was the smallest carrier that an f18 had operated off
Sign In
