Twin-booms and arrestor hooks

Started by Librarian, September 13, 2016, 07:19:04 AM

Previous topic - Next topic


I've enjoyed building a recent carrier based aircraft but now have eyes on navalising a kit of the Mansyu Ki-98. Problem...twin-booms and a rear propeller. I'd welcome any suggestions for how to give such a machine an arrestor hook...structural weaknesses etc.

Could the hook be attached to the underside of one boom without a serious asymmetric lurch?

Would it be a problem for both booms to have a hook?


I recently read about a navalized version of the Vultee XP-54 for the Navy. It was to have a weird construction under the propeller, reaching far down the tail booms, that carried the hook and protected the rear from cable lashes. Dead ugly... could not find online pics of it, but it looks as weird as you might imagine it.  :-\

Had this conceptual issue with my current YT2T-1 build - I considered a carrier-capable version with a hook, but eventually escaped this tenptation and left/leave it land-borne, like the TT-1 Pinto.

Twin boom jets like the SeaVenom had a single, forked tail hook under the short central pod, but then there's not the pusher propeller issue... Anything else (e .g. two hooks) would IMHO also make landing too dangerous - there are enormous powers at work, and any side deviation would certainly end in disaster.


Agree that twin hooks, or a single hook on one boom would be an absolute non-starter. Hook forces need to be centerline.  I vote for the wishbone style tail hook under the belly. Sea venom style.  You could also go for a wishbone style aft of the prop with each end attached to the booms, but it would likely look ungainly and be unrealistic as booms are really not robust enough to withstand the arresting forces.  Also need plenty of clearance between the rear prop and the arresting wires. The catapult hook up crews would likely hate that prop very much...
Dave "Sandiego89"
Chesapeake, Virginia, USA


One monster hook, like that on an F-4, could work if it was centre-line mounted under the fuselage pod, aft of the CG I guess.
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)



Many thanks for the advice. I love whifery but try very hard to keep to the laws of physics etc.

I was considering an idea from the Blohm and Voss stable where a central boom projects back to the horizintal tailplane with the propeller hub incorporated into the width of the boom...B&M did something similar but the prop was part of the fuselage behind the cockpit (P178/9??). Then I think "Whats the point of twin booms in the first place" :banghead: :banghead:.

Much thinks to come :o.


How about a hook attached to the nose wheel leg?
Need a very sturdy leg mind.

- Can't be bothered to do the proper research and get it right.

Another ill conceived, lazily thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of half arsed what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

zenrat industries:  We're everywhere...for your convenience..



AAARRRGGGHHH!!! The French have nicked my idea. My Mansyu was about to go to Indochina in Le Tricoleur. More thinks.... ;D


Quote from: joncarrfarrelly on September 14, 2016, 01:09:56 PM
Makes ya wonder how they planned to hook the SO.8000 Narval.


Me, too. I have read several atricles about it, and I cannot remember any arrestor solution mentioned... The two prototypes did not carry naval equipment, it was a wonder that they flew at all, though.