I love sim hijinks. It's possible to reliably land a 737 on the carrier in X-plane: just take off with 30min of fuel, drag it in with full flaps and high power, and set the parking brake before you touch down.
I love sim hijinks. It's possible to reliably land a 737 on the carrier in X-plane: just take off with 30min of fuel, drag it in with full flaps and high power, and set the parking brake before you touch down.
I wouldn't be surprised if it's possible in real life. The Navy tested a C-130 on the USS Forrestal and accomplished 21 landings. I'm sure a C-130 has better short-field performance than a 737, but they were also testing it with substantial cargo on board. Official figures for required runway distance for a 737 are far in excess of a carrier's deck length, of course, but those figures include weird things like "safety" that are not strictly required, and tend not to fully account for the 40+kt headwind you can get from a carrier steaming into the wind.
> The Navy tested a C-130 on the USS Forrestal and accomplished 21 landings.
my son plays DCS and that game just got a C-130 module and he showed me youtube vids of people landing on carriers. I had to think hard if that was an actual thing or not. Seems like a C-130 can land/take-off pretty much anywhere so why not a carrier?
Also, of course, the 73 would have to have a hook, which shortens the landing quite some (as well as the lifespan of the fuselage, I assume), as long as you catch the wire, that is. Wingspan-wise, this could also work. @RedBull, how bout it?!
Not necessarily. The C-130 didn't use one. That doesn't mean the 737 could get away with it, but with the carrier going max speed, a decent wind, the plane at min weight and speed, and touching down as early as possible, I wouldn't be surprised if the landing roll was shorter than the length of the deck.