hmm is that such a feat? landing on a carrier compared to landing on land? The variables involved should be pretty predictable and can be modeled accurately...
In fact, the aircraft always go to max throttle at touchdown, just in case they need to go around for another try. This, as opposed to going to max throttle after realizing there's a problem.
I hadn't really considered that before. Say the carrier is doing 20 knots then even on a one minute final approach the carrier will have moved by getting on for half a mile. ( very much fag-packet estimated maths but enough to show you can't just point at the carrier and land in a straight line)
Being accurate enough in turbulent weather to catch the hook seems to be the main problem.
Catching the hook while the plane is in a controlled crash, that's the problem.
The thing about a pitching deck is that it's somewhat, but not completely, predictable. Swells are measurable and generally periodic...but the generality breaks down enough to make it unpredictable. It's why boarding rates (i.e. the ratio of landings to attempt) drop by a factor of 2-3 (i.e. from around 90+% to 30-ish%) in pitching deck situations.