Navy's J-35 not suitable for carrier ops?

Yeah, carrier pressurized tires will certainly increase the risk of hydroplaning....what was that equation again for min hydroplaning speed, something like 9xsqrt(tire PSI)? I'm sure the Hornet isn't peculiar in the history of Naval Air for needed to take a field trap on occasion.

As for the gear itself, when I took a field trap recently, the ARFF guys were able to do a normal pullback with me at idle to allow me to bring the hook up, much like CV ops. On E28/Bak12 we are supposed to apply braking below 20 kts to prevent 2 blocking on play-out of the wire.....though in the event of a 2 block, it says to add power to prevent walkback. Good review of NATOPS right there :)
 
MikeD said:
DLF used to keep them all the way up, as ATC used to as a normal thing; primarily to negate having the time it takes to raise itself once activated. Guess they finally changed that.

When I was at DLF 15 years ago, a T-37 was one of the last jets coming back at dusk one night. Some new approach lighting had been repaired, and tower asked the T-37 crew if they could do an opposite direction approach/low approach to check them out and judge how they looked. Unbeknownst to anyone, the RW 13C BAK-15 was in battery, as per the normal ops, and the T-37 made it's approach to 31C. On the low approach, the mainmounts of the T-37 snagged the top of the 23' tall BAK-15 net and slammed the jet into the ground right on the 31 numbers, where it burned up.
Click to expand...


Holy cow, feel sorry for those guys, but I'm glad I wasn't on either end of the radio that day....
 
Yeah, 3 years of my life in New Mexico flying the Nighthawk prior to retiring them. A-10 and the 117 were night and day, no pun intended, in terms of mission, how they fly, complexity, etc. Neat jet, and interesting to be part of such a small cadre known as the Bandits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top