
spazsinbad wrote:Methinks you misunderestimate the airframe strengthening and modifications required for an F-35B to be EMALSed or STEAMflung. And it is not necessary. You have forgotten that when the F-35B returns for a VL that is another KPP which requires full internal weapon load plus adequate fuel for a missed approach (in bad weather).
In my hypothetical musing, I was specifically ruling out STEAMflung. I was thinking that since EMAL is supposed to impose significantly less stress on the airframe, that the necessary modifications might be tolerable / minimal.
I saw two possible advantages:
- Increased payload
- Less deck space required for launch
I understand that it [EDIT: "it" meaning EMALS] is not necessary to meet established KPPs / requirements. Regarding the KPP of VL with max internal load only... well, if you EMALs with a full combat load then have to immediately return, it would be understood you have to dump stuff into the water prior to VL. Oh well.
I was more curious if the deck space regained by EMALS launch would support increased # aircraft aboard ship or increased launch tempo. That is, if EMALs only requires 300' rather than 600' for STO, could that extra 300' support additional aircraft, other operations, or increased launch tempo.
When USS America was being designed, was EMALS even a glimmer in the eyes of ship designers?
[ Edited: 20161120 @ 16:03 MST]