and the aircraft manufacturer for such runways would be called Boing.
Important to note this is the Royal Air Force. Unlike the US, the Royal Air Force covers both land and naval based aircraft.
It’s a surprisingly good idea for carrier aircraft. The landing gear on carrier planes has to be extra durable because carrier landings are rough. Getting rid of landing gear would save a lot of weight and a big source maintenance.
Worked pretty well. The only reason it wasn’t pursued was because carrier aircraft do land on regular runways, and nobody wants to convert every single runway to a bouncy version.
How would the planes taxi after landing
The only reason? So they had a solution for that massive amount of friction too?
Soapy water! And a filled kiddie pool at the end of the runway to stop.
Just don’t have any emergency landings, during a war.
Is that the true issue with Boeing? Their planes need a bouncing runway when landing?
No, they let suits and business majors take over for actual engineers who know what they’re doing.
To frame it another way; they were enshittified by the infinite-profit-growth fallacy and corruption of capitalism.
Basically
No. The issue with boeing is that they’re poorly constructed due to corrupt ownership/management.
So, they’re not supposed to go Boing Boing Boing when landing….
Seems logical
Gear 5 pilots get full freedom smh
deleted by creator