It looks like you are looking for the next generation V-22 type cargo plane. Using arresting cables on a cargo plane is a probable NO GO. The wing span of a conventional powered medium lift aircraft would be a detriment on a carrier.

No, please NOT the V22. If there's one plane which will NEVER make it in real life it's that one. It's flauwed from idea (high disk loading, to complex, to fragile, not enough manouverability, low resistance to ground fire, no landing possible with engine in "plane" mode), to design ( no armaments, no pressurised and to small cargo area, wing hindering lift from prop, ) and production (fragile fuel tanks, faulty software, fragile hydraulics). It's dammed from begin to end, drop it and get on with it, fast! PS I've got some idea's of my "own" but I wanted to see what other could come up with. No, the V22 should be canceled, and SOON. if there ever was a blundering plane it's THAT one.

Here is what the Navy is using today the C2 Greyhound as a cargo carrier plane based upon the Grumman Hawk Eye aircraft. This aircraft will likely evolve closely into your idea of a future cargo/carrier aircraft. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/c-2-ar.htm Please note that I said the Next Generation of V-22 type aircraft not the disaster that Marine Aviation is trying to make due with today.

Ok sorry My bad, I still think that the whole tilt rotor idea should be thought out a bit more. Even with the tilt wing (original agusta?) it will need some doing to make it viable

And also, you have heavy lifting to do for the Navy, it comes to you from the replenishment ships. What size and weight would you need to have flown in to the carrier that requies that much space 7 capacity?

If this aircraft had a modicum of LO and a modular munition/cargo/AC-X bay, I could see a lot of uses for it. Ferrying mail to/from CVNs probably wouldn't be high among them.

nice idea BUT airplanes in the final analysis are not heavy haulers. I have recently seen a presentation about seaplanes to support seabase ops. And the problem with the design was it tried to lift so much payload, it got to the gigantic size. BTW IMHO what the navy needs is long range troop airlifters. The blasted USAF can't hack that job anymore as Starlifters go away and the other big transporters like C-17 and C5s are too expensive and too few to move lots of troops. (No the CRAF doesn't really cover that job!)

With a pervious thread in mind, how about an airship or airship/hybrid for COD. The Navy has a long tradition of airships. In the 30's the Navy had ships to dock the Akron and Macon. It would be even easier today with weather radar and modern day airships having station keeping manuvering engines. The German CL-160 project which I think died or is dying for lack of money, had a 160ton payload cargo pod that is lowered from the airship. I know there would be problems to work out but would it be any more difficult than tranfer supplies ship to ship.

A similarly ancient idea would be to use a biplane. This would allow a smaller wingspan for the lift. Plus it would be funny. I think that would be the real attraction. I think high speed transport boats are already in the works, which doesn't answer all the needs that interested is trying to meet, but it will probably answer enough to drain all the impetus for a large, carrier-capable transport.

I too initially thought of a tri/biplane, but how much height can you have landing and taking off from a carrier? Could you get up to much speed with that much leading edge? That might rule out inflight refueling missions. The wings must be high to allow for wobble and unprepared landing areas. How about narrow, but large area wings and tail. The large control surfaces would be handy at low speeds and the lift would offer a long loiter time. maybe you could have a second wing that fits into the main wing after take-off (deployed before landing)?