• Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!

  • Microsoft MSN, Live, Hotmail, Outlook email users may not be receiving emails. We are working to resolve this issue. Please add support@steelsoldiers.com to your trusted contacts.

 

Scary 60's

wreckerman893

Possum Connoisseur
15,611
1,981
113
Location
Akenback acres near Gadsden, AL
I would think you would have to have optimum weather conditions since high waves would screw up the lift.

We had "Star Wars".....the Ruskies had stuff like this.

We bankrupted them by keeping them caught up in an arms race they could not win.
 

plym49

Well-known member
1,164
171
63
Location
TX USA
The military always has the coolest stuff. And then, sometimes, 40 years later we get to have it for ourselves.
 

Stalwart

Well-known member
1,739
33
48
Location
Redmond, WA
There was a lot of interest in those when all the info came to light about 19 years ago (Aviation Week and Space Technology, June 1992). It was also picked up by other consumer science magazines.

The principle was sound but the limitations were numerous. You didn't have to deal with induced drag (drag associated with making lift), there wasn't any. You still had parasitic drag but that is MUCH lower than induced. High speed possible with MUCH less thrust required (no induced drag) BUT you were limited to a maximum altitude of 1/2 the wingspan. Go higher and induced drag is suddenly back with a vengeance. You could carry a REALLY heavy payload with small engines and small fuel flow. In most cases, all the engines were used for takeoff and getting out of the water, them MOST were shut down. Unless you were willing to make a truly HUGE one, you were still at risk of large ocean waves. Unless you were willing to make the worlds largest "highways" for them, you can't really go inland. The highway wouldn't need a surface per se, but would have to have a gentle slope and clear of trees, buildings and hills. Can you imagine trying to flatten a pass through the Rockies down to near sea level and a mile or two wide?
 

Bighurt

New member
2,347
46
0
Location
Minot, ND
We bankrupted them by keeping them caught up in an arms race they could not win.
Who's bankrupt now?

Ekranoplan was a cool machine I came across a number of years ago. They could still have a place in military equipment. They are so close to the water it's difficult to pick them up on radar. I don't imagine they are cheap to run though.
 

Stalwart

Well-known member
1,739
33
48
Location
Redmond, WA
They could still have a place in military equipment. They are so close to the water it's difficult to pick them up on radar. I don't imagine they are cheap to run though.
Well, they could be used, but only for crossing water and landing equipment to shore. Need to go over a mountain range or even big hills? They are done. They are not suitable replacement for an aircraft. As far as operating cost, their fuel consumption once airborne is a pittance compared to an aircraft. If I remember correctly, done right, they could have a fuel burn, per ton of cargo, nearly equal to the ships of their time. To make them truely safe, they'd need to be massive, perhaps 2-4 times the wingspan of a 747. BUT, they could carry an amount of weight that would probably surpass 20 or more 747's, actually WAY more than that!

They don't have to operate from water, in fact, it's better if they operate from land. The surface tension of the water is part of the reason the big Soviet jobs has so many engines. Some were there to blow air under the wings and hull to combat drag due to the water surface tension.
 
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website like our supporting vendors. Their ads help keep Steel Soldiers going. Please consider disabling your ad blockers for the site. Thanks!

I've Disabled AdBlock
No Thanks