That could be because there isn't a Naval variant of the Typhoon?
However if you go into your keyboard assignments you can set a tailhook button

Ozzy

PS. It'll only work on models with a tailhook that isn't connected to the flaps

I don't think so, non of the countries developing it have carriers (Britain does not own any "real" carriers) so there wouldn't be a need for a carrier variant, however, I'm guessing that like most warplanes out there, it too has a tail-hook, for emergency breaking (I know all IAF aircraft have one)

Iafpilot

10 years is a long time mate,
they would have to be pretty stupid to go for a full-size carrier, and here's why:

the F-35 is a support aircraft, a "diet-F22" if you will, it's there to help the F-22, work together with it, its carrier version is fantastic, but you don't build up naval airpower out of one aircraft variant.

Judging by the developement on the Israeli and American front, in ten years tactical UAV's are gonna slowly step in for human pilots and do the "dirty work". in which case a plane like the X-45 doesn't really need a big carrier, just one of those heli carriers the British navy owns at the moment.

the F-35 is set to replace the Harriers in naval action, it has V/STOL capabilities, like the harrier, and does not require a catapult, or a big deck.

now why would the British navy spend billions on a new carrier when its heli-carriers are perfectly capable of taking on these (or other similar) aircraft?

kinda reminds me of their decision to take the gun off the Eurofighter, that's what the US did with the original Phantoms, turns out that once you're out of missiles you can't shoot anything down with a "clean" nose

Iafpilot

I try to make a funny and
spark a heated debate on
international arms

I LOVE THIS PLACE

It is an honor to be a
member of this forum!

thank you
Bhofmx

Like woody said the JSF will have a V/TOL varient, but it will be hevier slower , have a larger RCS and a lower payload capability. Its also being designed to replace not just the F-16, but the F-18 and Harrier and possibly A-10, I'll have tto look that up. As to building a naval air power on one type it used to be imposible but that was because of the way aircraft were designed, high wing aircraft made good bombers but were cumbersome while low wing aircraft were agile but had low payloads, now with the arrival of fly-by-wire technology computers can corect for aerodynamic inbalances allowing one type to conduct several mission variants often in one flight, thus allowing aircraft to self escort. There are a few examples of this already in service ie: F-16 (replaced A-7D attack aircraft and F-106 interceptors), Rafale (replaced Etandard strike aircraft, F-8 interceptors ine the Aeronavale and Mirrages in the Armee del Aire), also the Eurofighter is set to replace Tornado F.3 Interceptors, Jaguar Gr.3 attack/recon aircraft and possibly Tornado Gr.1A recon and Gr.4 bombers in the RAF, Tornadoes of the Luftwaffe, Luftmarine/Marineflieger, Tornadoes and F-104s f the Italiam airforce and F-18s of the Fuerza aeria)

Sorry about the 12 line sentance 

Quote:


mah zeh!!
sorry dude, but that's a bunch of bullocks..
F-32 was not better at all, you work for boeing or something??

The F-35 can and will be a fighter bomber just like every plane it is replacing

Something I've never understood about the British military is how they sselect aircraft, to replace the Lightning and Phantom the F-14/15 and 16 were considered. The MOD wanted twin engine reliability for operations over the north sea so the F-16 was out, fair enough. They wanted a 2 seater for reasons unknown to me so thats the F-15 out. Then someone said that the F-14 was a naval aircraft and so was unsuitable for the RAF, but errrrrrrr the Phantom was a naval aircraft as well . So we end up with the Tornado F.3, a bomber pretending to be a fighter.