Could a modified Aircraft Carrier land on Mars?

[NASAFanboy]

Let's define an "aircraft carrier". An aircraft carrier is a craft that can carry other craft that can perform atmospherical or exo-atmospherical flight. Thus, by a technicality, a interplanetary spacecraft can be an aircraft carrier if it carries it's landers and other equipment with it, since they are capable of performing atmospherical flight too (Landing/ascent).

How will we land it on Mars? Deorbit it. Never said it couldn't land in more than one piece.

[razark]

Let's define an "aircraft carrier". An aircraft carrier is a craft that can carry other craft that can perform atmospherical or exo-atmospherical flight.

I will argue that your definition is somewhat wrong.

Neither this:

,

this:

,

this:

,

nor this:

are aircraft carriers, but all of them meet your definition.

You need to account for the fact that an aircraft carrier is a vehicle specifically designed or modified for the main purpose of transporting and operating aircraft (including the launch and recovery of aircraft), and not just a vehicle that carries another vehicle to a release point.

[megatiger78]

space carriers? why not just leave them in space?

[RizzoTheRat]

landing a fighter on an object going at supersonic speed would require some pretty freakishly advanced aerospace engineering. because you are going to have to deal with all kinds of brutal wake turbulence. frankly i doubt its even possible.

They had a lot of trouble trying to launch at supersonic speeds but got that sorted out in the 60's. I agree landing would be a lot harder though.

[Kryten]

They only tried to launch that four times, and the fourth time someone died. I'd not call that 'sorted'.

[megatiger78]

here is space carrier

[KerikBalm]

Is it worrying that I looked at those photos and thought "Ooo, a Goblin" before I'd seen the link underneath

Considering I've seen one (of only 2 - 46-0524 at the SAC museum) with my own eyes, no, I do not find that worrying at all.

[Frozen_Heart]

Depends how much rocket fuel you're willing to use...

[Guest]

At least spacesuits I hope ... maybe a little bit unhealthy for humans without one

Since this "aircraft" uses ducted fans to stay aloft, I think high altitude suits would be enough.

[Godot]

Since this "aircraft" uses ducted fans to stay aloft, I think high altitude suits would be enough.

Depends on whether it is used on Earth or Duna or Mars

[megatiger78]

I still don't understand what is wrong with leaving a aircraft carrier in space

[Capt.Joseph Kerbertson]

How modified are we talking?

If an aircraft carrier were to join the ISS... pretty darned modified.

[razark]

I still don't understand what is wrong with leaving a aircraft carrier in space

Aside from the whole concept of the carrier not making much sense in space?

The original question was about landing it.

[megatiger78]

Aside from the whole concept of the carrier not making much sense in space?

The original question was about landing it.

a space fighter carrier

[razark]

a space fighter carrier

Yup. Skip the fighters, turn the thing into a giant missile carrier. Space fighters make not much sense at all.

[RizzoTheRat]

They only tried to launch that four times, and the fourth time someone died. I'd not call that 'sorted'.

Yeah ok, maybe "sorted" is too strong a word but they did manage to launch it a few times. In some respects it's surprising they did abandon the supersonic launches due to one death, there was a much greater acceptance of risk in that era. I remember seeing an interview with Burt Rutan who was saying the reason we don't make the great leaps now that we did during the cold war is because we're now much more risk averse. In the height of the X-plane programme they were losing pilots at a rate of something like one a month, which would be totally unacceptable these days.

Considering I've seen one (of only 2 - 46-0524 at the SAC museum) with my own eyes, no, I do not find that worrying at all.

Properly out geeked Looks like they've got some interesting stuff there that I've never seen.

[Kryten]

Yeah ok, maybe "sorted" is too strong a word but they did manage to launch it a few times. In some respects it's surprising they did abandon the supersonic launches due to one death, there was a much greater acceptance of risk in that era.

The fourth test was the first one without a special manouver to aid the separation, i.e. in the conditions it'd actually be used in operationally.

I remember seeing an interview with Burt Rutan who was saying the reason we don't make the great leaps now that we did during the cold war is because we're now much more risk averse. In the height of the X-plane programme they were losing pilots at a rate of something like one a month, which would be totally unacceptable these days.

It'd be totally unacceptable then, too. 1 person died in X-2, one in X-4; that's all for the first decade of the programme.

[Nibb31]

Landing is the easy part. It's getting into orbit that's gonna be hard.

Edited October 14, 2014 by Nibb31

[cantab]

Getting it into orbit is, if not easy, at least simple. You just need a ginormous rocket. Alternatively, lots of rockets and assemble pieces in orbit.

[Dodgey]

Landing is the easy part. It's getting into orbit that's gonna be hard.

Just keep throwing it at the ground, eventually you're bound to miss.