Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

How about one of these for your 'fictional' mystery aircraft?

The only other thing would be some USN derivative of the F-22A; there is just no way the USAF's Raptor could 'safely' recover onto a carrier. Simply look at the differences between the F-35A and F-35C to notice how much needed to be strengthened, and/or enlarged for proper carrier operations.

Launch an F-22A from a carrier; maybe, clear the deck and go for it... but land in a manner consistent with the aircraft surviving, highly improbable.

Keep 'em flyin' Thumb

TEG

F-16.net Sponsor

TEG -- I wonder if it wouldn't be easier to have retractable wing extensions that slide out of the wings than have full on swing-wings. Swinging wings look like they would play havoc with stealth in any position.

While we are dreaming, how about simply letting Northrop/Boeing build a F-23 variant with a bigger wing? Like how the F-35C wing is bigger than the wing on the F-35A model?

That_Engine_Guy wrote:

count_to_10 wrote:

Wouldn't the hook get ripped right off trying to stop the F-22 in just the length of the carrier deck?

Yep, and the gear would be crushed.

Navy arrestors on carriers are a WHOLE lot more abrupt/short than the emergency cables on USAF runways.

Next bright idea?

TEG

Wait for the Air Boss to tell the F-22 pilot to eject out next to the ship.

As for how abrubt/short the landing is on a runway, That depends on the type of arrested landing. The short field arresting cable is rigged for stopping in 400ft, just like a carrier. This also is for when an aircraft can't stop towards the end of a runway. A long field arrested landing is about 900ft stopping distance.

I saw an emergency at NAS Oceana where a F/A-18F stopped in 400ft on a short field arrested landing. A F-111 can stop in that distance, and maybe a F-15 can as well. I'm not sure if a F-22 can land in 400ft without damaging the airframe permanently.

Quite possibly, USAF/ANG runway arresting gear is different than for a Naval Air Station but I thought they were similar with regard to short field and long field equipment.

Somewhere I have copies of the relevant NATOPS manuals, but I didn't check them tonight.

count_to_10 wrote:

Quote:

And if they still can't pull that off, maybe they could pull a hail-mary Cobra just as they cross the back of the ship, and then level out just before they hit the deck.
Like this,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=en ... g&NR=1
Only with wheels-on-deck afterwards.
...or maybe I need to play less HAWX and more X-plane.

I'm pretty sure it would crush it's landing gear trying to land like that.
I've seen a video of someone land a 747 on an aircraft carrier in X-plane. It had to be stripped down to minimal weight and just enough fuel to land, and actually came in from bellow the carrier deck: the guy pulled it up into a stall just high enough to clear the deck and slammed on the breaks. No grantee that the simulation didn't overestimate the strength of the landing gear.
Can't find it now, but this is what you are imagining, right? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAtw2FDS ... re=related

That's pretty much the idea. The gear strength in X-Plane from my experience seems slightly more than it would be in reality. And that Raptor in the video has some modeling issues- the rudder airbrakes don't deploy like that iirc.

This video shows exactly what I had in my head.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CvA-wjBgbM
The question is whether this is realistic or not. Perhaps if one knew the tolerances of the 22's gear then it could be done on paper.

popcorn wrote:

firstimpulse wrote:

pants3204 wrote:

Sure it may be able to land on a carrier with the emergency tail hook. Egress from the ship though I am not sure.

TVC and 70k lbs of thrust should be able to take care of that. Cool

I take it you're assuming a takeoff without using the catapult?

Correct. That'd be a great scene too- the Navy guys in awe as a Raptor shoots down the deck, falls off the edge, then reappears as it rises vertically above the carrier in full AB. The landing gear would retract while the plane was still practically hovering, and then it would start accelerating upwards...

Well, PLEASEPLEASEPLEASE finish and publish it!!!! I always need more airpower fiction to read.

I think that an F-22N would wind up being a lot heavier to accommodate Naval-spec landing gear and arrestor hook. It would probably perform fine as long as the weight could be balanced out easily, considering the thrust provided by the F119s. A swing-wing sounds like a terrible idea for a naval fighter; either the fictional F-22N would have a SH-esque wing, or it would employ some time of airflow control system to improve low-speed handling.

(On another note, I have a book rapidly approaching completion and publishing Wink

)

firstimpulse wrote:

And if they still can't pull that off, maybe they could pull a hail-mary Cobra just as they cross the back of the ship, and then level out just before they hit the deck.

Once you leveled off, the plane would have a shallow angle of attack and stall, so you effectively be dropping it from a crane onto it's landing gear.

You might be able to get a F-22 on and off a carrier under really good conditions if you absolutely had to, but operating from a carrier for any period of time is not realistic.

If you wanted to have the F-22's land/takeoff from the carrier in your book, they would probably have to be at a very low fuel state, and with all stores jettisoned. Maybe they would come to the carrier, which would have the deck as clear as possible, and burn fuel doing touch and goes to determine the feasibility of landing (more likely, they would have gone somewhere on land, or ditched).

In your book, is there anyway to get a tanker to the F-22's, or were they all destroyed/grounded early on?

southernphantom wrote:

..... A swing-wing sounds like a terrible idea for a naval fighter;.....

I believe they tried that. Seemed to work out OK.

johnwill wrote:

southernphantom wrote:

..... A swing-wing sounds like a terrible idea for a naval fighter;.....

I believe they tried that. Seemed to work out OK.

Johnwill sir,

If anyone ever tries to talk you out of retirement and into developing a swing-wing F-16XL, please allow me to be the first to plead you to enjoy every youthful day of the rest of your blessed and well-served long retirement... Salute

thanks for your service, johnwill.

geogen wrote:

johnwill wrote:

southernphantom wrote:

..... A swing-wing sounds like a terrible idea for a naval fighter;.....

I believe they tried that. Seemed to work out OK.

Johnwill sir,

If anyone ever tries to talk you out of retirement and into developing a swing-wing F-16XL, please allow me to be the first to plead you to enjoy every youthful day of the rest of your blessed and well-served long retirement... Salute

thanks for your service, johnwill.

@Geogen Thats a little rude isn't it?

3 Carrier aircraft flew with swing-wing;
The F-14 was the main fleet defense fighter for 30 years, and was quite safe behind the boat. Swing-wing was is an effective compromise between high-speed flight, and landing performance.

The RA-5C was one of the highest approach speeds of a carrier aircraft, and was quite difficult to land. Operational it was quite effective in the reconnaissance role.

F-111B was considered too heavy for the smaller carriers in service in the 60s but performed better with engine upgrades in later variants, and on bigger carriers. This aircraft didn't become operation, except with the USAF & RAAF.

The Vigilante was a great looking plane but she wasn't a swing wing.

geogen wrote:

johnwill wrote:

southernphantom wrote:

..... A swing-wing sounds like a terrible idea for a naval fighter;.....

I believe they tried that. Seemed to work out OK.

Johnwill sir,

If anyone ever tries to talk you out of retirement and into developing a swing-wing F-16XL, please allow me to be the first to plead you to enjoy every youthful day of the rest of your blessed and well-served long retirement... :salute:

thanks for your service, johnwill.

Put you mind at ease, geogen, no one in his right mind would ever try to talk me out of retirement. Thanks for the good wishes.

Yeah, I meant a terrible thing for a stealth fighter, not naval Embarassed

No problem! Cheers

Forum: General F-22A Raptor forum

F-22 Fictional Carrier Ops