Spitfire (OT)

[Grfin Zeppelin]

Could a Spitfire (or contemporary fighters) without modifications just take off on a modern carrier if it turns against the wind ?
Just curious since this debate came up in another forum.

[Jorge_Stanbury]

If they could easily take off from WW2 era carriers, I cannot see why they shouldn't be able to launch from a modern carrier

[Lecivius]

Against the wind, as opposed to into it? I'm not so sure.

[btd64]

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

If they could easily take off from WW2 era carriers, I cannot see why they shouldn't be able to launch from a modern carrier

Would have a longer deck as well....GP

[btd64]

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

Against the wind, as opposed to into it? I'm not so sure.

You want to turn into the wind....GP

[Lecivius]

ORIGINAL: General Patton

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

Against the wind, as opposed to into it? I'm not so sure.

You want to turn into the wind....GP

if it turns against the wind ?

True, but our favorite teddy bear asked "if it turns against the wind ? " I'm not sure what the discussion is, just trying to be factual (and it's hard)

[Grfin Zeppelin]

Ah well does turning into the wind mean the wind comes from behind the starting plane or the opposite direction ?

[btd64]

From the front to the back of the ship. The air flow provides lift under the wings....GP

[Grfin Zeppelin]

Ah I see thank you.

[jcjordan]

It might be possible for some to do it based on their stall speeds & how big a tailwind it might be. CVN capable of 30+ knots put flaps down & do a Doolittle type takeoff w/ full revs & IIRC the deck of a CVN is longer than a WW2 CV so they might have the length for the a/c to get enough speed to takeoff & not stall/crash once at the end of the deck.

[btd64]

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

Ah I see thank you.

Your welcome[:)]....GP

[Lecivius]

Looking at what limited info I can find, the Spitfire & Seafire had the same power plant, and flight charactaristics. Just modifications to the frame to take the increased strain on landing. Getting off the flight deck going into the wind would have been no problem

Of course, now that I say this someone is going to come in and step all over this with enough data to fill a dictionary [;)]

[btd64]

[:D][:D][:D]....GP

[Itdepends]

The english language is a funny thing, I read against the wind and into the wind as the same thing. I.e. If I'm walking against the wind I'm pushing into it/fighting it as opposed to walking with the wind where I would have the wind at my back.

[geofflambert]

I don't know about everyone else, and don't care. I'm against the wind. The wind blows people's houses away and worse things. I know something about those people who are into the wind and I can tell you without hesitation that they are all preverts.

[sandlance]

Stall speed of a MkV Spit is 85mph. stall speed of a MkIX spit is 95 mph. at 30kts INTO the wind the aircraft need only 65-70mph to fly from a standing start. could easily be done.

[NigelKentarus]

Didn't Bob Seger write a song about Against The Wind?

[sandlance]

I forgot about wind speed, add this to ship's speed to get wind across the deck. Subtract this from stall speed to get additional airspeed needed to take off.

[Sauvequipeut]

As a point of interest, there's at least one time when a Spitfire without modifications was landed on a carrier. It occurred during the first of the two ferry missions that HMS Eagle & USS Wasp carried out in early 1942 to supply Spitfires to Malta. A pilot who took off from the Wasp accidently jettisoned his drop tank early in the flight...so he returned to the Wasp to try and get another, despite the pilots having being told not to attempt landing back on the carriers under any circumstances.

[Sauvequipeut]

Double Post :s