OK, now I'm really shocked. I've just started the 10th scenario in EC2003 GIUK in my newly bought HCE and what do I find on my aircraft carrier? F-15s! and F-22s!

Please, tell me, what's going on here?

 

(And I'm pretty sure I've seen this thing in HC 2002 already.)

 

And please allow me some well-justified irony: Should I expect B-2s launched from enemy aircraft carriers?

Read the description for the unit/carrier Mitchel where you find those planes:

 

Mobile offshore basing. Faced with the loss of its forward basing in Europe and a perceived need to deploy USAF assets in theater the U.S. Navy developed on a fast track the CV Mitchel. Built to commercial standard these large barge like ships have the ability to embark a reinforced USAF fighter wing. Only capable of 10 knots these aircraft carriers are designed to park in an isolated area and act like a stationary airfield. As originally designed the CV Mitchel was to have point defense only, but the reality of anchoring a Tico and pair of Destroyers to the Mitchel caused the Navy department to find additional funding for a 61 cell VLS Block and the associated Spy-1A radar system. The CV Mitchel also provides one other function for the forward deployed force: its cargo storage capacity and commercial container handling capability allow the Mitchel to act as a cargo distribution point and maintenance tender. These ships are vulnerable to submarine attack so all efforts should be made to establish an ASW barrier.

 

It's a hypothetical platform. I don't believe that it is either a bug or an accident.

Herman is correct. Its a hypothetical platform built around the Mobile Offshore Base concept that was being discussed a few years back. Try and keep up.

Here ya'll had me worried

In theory, you could possibly launch a LB A/C from a carrier, just not land it (and the stress of the Catapult shot probably wouldn't do it much good either).

 

In WWII, this was done by several nations, that is launch LB A/C from a carrier, then have the A/C fly to a friendly airstrip to land (IE Doolittle's Raid). The Japanese army actually operated a pair of small CVEs for this purpose, but they were never put into use in this capacity. Once of them did end up carrying auto-gyro's in an ASW capacity however (Japan was the first to use a rotor wing A/C in this capacity).

IIRC, the original intent was for Doolittle's B-25s to return to the Hornet, as well, though I don't remember whether they were to ditch there or actually land aboard. Given that they were taking off fully loaded at only 90 knots or so, they might well have been able to successfully land even without arresting gear.

I didn't realize some missions are created on hypotethical platforms. I thought it's all real-world.

IIRC, the original intent was for Doolittle's B-25s to return to the Hornet, as well, though I don't remember whether they were to ditch there or actually land aboard.

 

I was always under the impression that the raid force had a one way ticket from Hornet to "allied" air bases on the Chinese mainland.

 

Guess I'll have to read some more.

I was always under the impression that the raid force had a one way ticket from Hornet to "allied" air bases on the Chinese mainland.

 

Guess I'll have to read some more.

 

 

The American force stumbled over a lone Japanese fishing boat, and they weren't sure whether it had been able to transmit a sighting report before being destroyed. Because of this, Doolittle had to launch from several hundred miles further out than planned, and lacked the fuel to return to the Hornet. His force therefore proceeded to the bases in China, which were originally supposed to be used only as emergency divert sites for damaged aircraft.

The American force stumbled over a lone Japanese fishing boat, and they weren't sure whether it had been able to transmit a sighting report before being destroyed. Because of this, Doolittle had to launch from several hundred miles further out than planned, and lacked the fuel to return to the Hornet. His force therefore proceeded to the bases in China, which were originally supposed to be used only as emergency divert sites for damaged aircraft.

Noted, thanks.

I can't get to my reference books, but I never recall reading about the B-25s returning to HORNET. It certainly wasn't mentioned in the film "Thirty Seconds over Tokyo".

The plan, as I remember, was to continue on to landing strips in China to be used in future operations from (there with the CAG or USAAF?). The earlier than planned launch meant they didn't have the fuel to reach those bases anymore, resulting in the aurcraft losses.

Check Wikipedia for an overview.

According to this writeup: http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/...c-42/dooltl.htm

The intent was allways to continue to China after the raid.

 

Buddha

According to this writeup: http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/...c-42/dooltl.htm

The intent was allways to continue to China after the raid.

 

Buddha

 

Thanks Budda, that was my original recollection, but in my youth I was more of an ETO kinda guy vice PTO.

According to this writeup: http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/...c-42/dooltl.htm

The intent was allways to continue to China after the raid.

 

Buddha

 

That's what I thought.

 

The real problem with being spotted by the fishing trawler was that they were forced to launch about 200 miles further out from Tokyo then planned, which left the B-25s with barely enough fuel to make it to the Chinese coast, much less the inland airbases. A lot of the raiders were forced to ditch into the sea, and some were captured by Japanese forces.

The fact of the matter is... The F-15 was DESIGNED for carrier operation... IE it was stressed for it. McDonnall Douglas was BANKING on it atracting orders from the Navy. There were more Navy proposals for the F-15 than there ever was for any other aircraft in history.

 

One proposal had a large conformal pod below the fuselage to allow two Phoenix missiles to be carried (max 4 with 4 Winders on the OUTER wing pylon)

 

As part of my large collection of F-14 junk I have a lot of the proposals for the F-15"N" ALL of them call out the fact that the Airframe is ALREADY stressed for carrier operation and the only things that would need changing would be a Folding wing, Different landing-gear and Naval Grade Arrestor hook.

 

Craig P

 

PS I would sooner trust my life to a rickety old pre-WWII Po-2 with the origional fabric than to a F-22 after a Carrier launch! Anyone wonder why NATF failed? Could it be you can't make a 2nd gen 100% Stealthy aircraft survive multiple carrier cycles?! HMMM?