Both are combat aircraft. Is there any difference between ships and land aircraft?
As the backbone of the modern navy, aircraft carriers cannot exercise combat effectiveness without the protection of other warships. Fly a carrier-based plane to get help. If an aircraft carrier is compared to a person, then carrier-based aircraft are its weapons. For aircraft carriers, carrier-based aircraft have a combat radius of up to 1,000 kilometers, allowing aircraft carriers to carry out attacks beyond visual range.
Ship-borne aircraft are divided according to their function into fighters, attack aircraft, anti-submarine aircraft, early warning aircraft, tanker aircraft, reconnaissance aircraft and electronic countermeasures aircraft. But the ones that appear most frequently are fighter planes. After all, fighter jets are aircraft tasked with strike missions. The number ofcombat aircraft is also the most important.
The first carrier-based aircraft were not as professional, but were used directly on board the ship by land-based aircraft. This is also somewhat similar to the original aircraft carrier. Initially, both looked like other part-time weapons, but with the independent development of ships like aircraft carriers, people's needs for carrier-based aircraft are getting higher and higher. Generally speaking, there are three differences between carrier-based aircraft and land-based aircraft.
First: carrier-based aircraft are more adaptable to the ocean
The ocean environment is no better than that on land. Strong winds of around level 6 are the norm. hits, the aircraft carrier will shake. In this case, for carrier-based aircraft to take off and land smoothly on the aircraft carrier, in addition to certain skills required for pilots, the aircraft mustalso be specially manufactured. For example, reinforced landing gear and wheels, as well as additional hooks used with arresting cables, etc.
Second: Carrier-based aircraft must be able to fold their wings.
Land-based fighters do not need to fold their wings. The reason is very simple. rigidity of the aircraft wings. This will have detrimental effects on long-term use, but carrier-based aircraft must be able to fold their wings.
The reason is that carrier-based aircraft must be parked on the narrow deck of the aircraft carrier. If the wings cannot be folded, the seemingly large aircraft carrier will not be able to accommodate many combat aircraft. In addition, the deck of an aircraft carrier also has a runway for combat aircraft to take off and land, so it is very important for carrier-based aircraft to fold their wings.
Third: on-board aircrafts adapt to the humid ocean environment.
Compared to the ever-changing land environment, the ocean environment is obviously more monotonous because there is more water. relatively humid, and there will also be salt spray (sea water contains a lot of salt). Moisture and salt are the main culprits in corroding the aircraft fuselage. Therefore, when land-based combat aircraft arrive at sea, it will not take long for them to rust.
Compared to ground-based combat aircraft, which are not resistant to corrosion, special substances are added to the fuselage paint of carrier-based aircraft. These substances can not only prevent rust on the road but also on the road. Wed. This is also the biggest difference between carrier-based aircraft and land-based fighters, although the paintwork is similar.
The three differences above do not represent all differences betweenre carrier-based aircraft and land-based fighters. Carrier aircraft are lighter and have smaller loads. However, with the development of aviation technology, carrier-based aircraft will eventually embark on the path of heavier loads and larger loads. After all, this is determined by the strike mission of the aircraft carrier, and the carrier-based aircraft must carry.ascending location.
The argument that land-based combat aircraft are more powerful than carrier-based combat aircraft is as unreliable as the comparison between Guan Gong and Qin Qiong. For this type of weapon, which has its own uses, it is irresponsible to talk about good and evil unilaterally, and it is impossible to distinguish the so-called good from evil.