Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Let's not forget the nuclear-powered aircraft studies during the 1950's, as well.
Consider building a reactor well enough shielded not to fry the crew and still light enough to get off the ground...
Ever read about the US Navy's soft carrier deck experiments designed to cushion the landings of planes without landing gears? Yep, the thinking was if planes didn't need landing gear they could be built much lighter and carry more fuel and ordnance. So, a resilient deck was experimented with and they actually tested it by pan-caking (gear up) some Grumman Cougars on it. It didn't work either.
The British also tried this using a Vampire flown by Eric 'Winkle' Brown. A great way to scrap aircraft.
I also think one of the maddest schemes ever was the USN VTOL fighter project that resulted in the XFV-1 and XFY-1. Take off and flight were one thing, but landing vertically backwards!?!?
I wasn't aware the USN had also tried gearless deck landings, I thought the RN took all the blame for that one. So who was daftest, the service that thought of it first or
I also think one of the maddest schemes ever was the USN VTOL fighter project that resulted in the XFV-1 and XFY-1. Take off and flight were one thing, but landing vertically backwards!?!?
Just thinking aloud here, but I'm surprised something like this wasn't tried early in WWII when fighter escorts didn't have the range to escort bombers all the way to their targets in Germany. Perhaps some bombers could have been dedicated as glider tugs (similar to how Stirlings operated later) and each towed a couple of gliding Spitfires over with them, so they could start their engines when near the target, provide some fighter cover and cruise back on their own.