With its arrestor hook, I wonder if any RAF pilot considered if he could land his Lightning onto HMS Ark Royal or Eagle.
I wonder if the RCAF's CF-18s keep naval spec hooks for their land based arrested landings. Did USAF F-4 Phantoms have naval spec hooks?On the majority of aircraft fitted with arrestor hooks that were not naval aircraft designed for landing on carriers, this couldn't be done for the simple fact that the hook was not strong enough to restrain the aircraft within the space a carrier aircraft lands at. The arrestor hooks on non-carrier based aircraft were designed to restrain the aircraft on airfield emergency arrestor systems that don't provide anywhere near the strain capability of carrier arrestor systems, bearing in mind that they're located on long concrete runways that provide plenty of rolling distance once the aircraft's movement has been arrested.
A wee pictorial representation of what we're dealing with. This is the arrestor hook on the Lightning, the boom is less than half an inch thick. In the picture with the hook, the drag chute stowage door can be seen.
View attachment 684909DSC_0471
View attachment 684910DSC_0456
This is an A-4's arrestor hook. Even though the A-4 is smaller and lighter than the Lightning, it's boom is beefier.
View attachment 684911DSC_2273
For comparison, this is an F-4's arrestor hook. A mite more substantial given the Phantom was a bigger beast, but the point is obvious.
View attachment 684912DSC_8504
Not much - and more than likely there would be changes to the structure to support a such a modification. You're dealing with such powerful aircraft that the weight saving wouldn't make a difference in the end.I wonder what the weight or cost savings the RCAF accomplished by using a different hook.
So does the F-117A - not very many photos of it - it was contained within the fuselage.I didn't know the Eagle had a hook.
Also the Lightning had tyres that were good for only 12 landings, not very economical on-board a carrier where they probably wouldn't last even that long !
Thanks Grant, i knew they were some ridiculous pressure but couldnt remember off hand and didnt want to make it up !Mains' pressure 360 psi, apparently... woulda been a few nasty bangs on a carrier. The Lightning was a maintenance hog, according to an ex-RAF engineer I got talking to once. He was amazed that they managed to keep them serviceable!