Carrier ops

You wouldn't be a good surfer. :)

You wouldn't be a good surfer. :)

Pfffft!

At 156kg I'd make an excellent surfboard/floatation-device/splashmaker!

Yes. We know. The point is it shouldn't, because if the damage is modeled correctly the hook on the F-16 would sheer off and the landing gear would collapse among other things.

 

As for the F-5E you could philosophically argue that even though operationally the hook was only used for runway emergency arrests, the F-5 did start its life intended as a Navy fighter and would go on the serve as the platform for the F-18. Its also half the weight of a F-16. All the same, unless some F-5 SME wants to correct me, it too should have the tail-hook modeled to shear off landing on a carrier.

 

For kicks, here's an interesting thread about F-5s on a Carrier.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=167762

We all know it's not realistic irl but whether it can be done in the confines of the game is another matter dependant on damage model of the tailhook and landing gear as you said.

It seems the landing gear isnt modelled as you describe. With a functioning tail hook it would be easier to successfully to land like an f5 as someone already had landed a f16 on a carrier and halted ( due to excessive winds) without the tailhook

You can land any aircraft on a heli-pad on a building with enough wind, that wouldnt count and shouldnt be relevent.

You can land any aircraft on a heli-pad on a building with enough wind, that wouldnt count and shouldnt be relevent.

thats not the point

the reason why F5E can land on a carrier isnt because people cheat by setting up a scenario with excessive amounts of wind but because the tail-hook is deployable, but damage model doesn't represent damage that would be induced in the gear.

Same could be replicated in an F16C assuming it had a working tailhook, as with the F5E assuming it didn't have a more intricate damage model.

That looks like a harrier landing .....