Seaplane Resurgence?

In addition to the C-130 Seaplane project:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...d-a01eb5e659b1


It looks like other seaplane ideas are being studied as well:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...7-b3cdb2aeb8fd

http://cisd.dt.navy.mil/div/cisd/fil...09dec2003).pdf


Japan and the (Former) USSR never really gave up on seaplanes, but
will they now make a comeback in the US?

On Sep 29, 5:02?pm, wrote:
In addition to the C-130 Seaplane project:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...plckController...

It looks like other seaplane ideas are being studied as well:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...plckController...

http://cisd.dt.navy.mil/div/cisd/fil...anes%20wo%20an...

Japan and the (Former) USSR never really gave up on seaplanes, but
will they now make a comeback in the US?

No- we have plenty of a/c carriers which Japan and the FSU/Russia
lack...

Rob

p.s. What happened to the Pelican???

"Rob Arndt" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Sep 29, 5:02?pm, wrote:
In addition to the C-130 Seaplane project:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...plckController...

It looks like other seaplane ideas are being studied as well:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...plckController...

http://cisd.dt.navy.mil/div/cisd/fil...anes%20wo%20an...

Japan and the (Former) USSR never really gave up on seaplanes, but
will they now make a comeback in the US?

No- we have plenty of a/c carriers which Japan and the FSU/Russia
lack...

Seaplanes perform strike missions? (That's what CVN's do)



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Sep 29, 5:40?pm, "Mark Test" wrote:
"Rob Arndt" wrote in message

oups.com...



On Sep 29, 5:02?pm, wrote:
In addition to the C-130 Seaplane project:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...plckController...

It looks like other seaplane ideas are being studied as well:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...plckController...

http://cisd.dt.navy.mil/div/cisd/fil...anes%20wo%20an...

Japan and the (Former) USSR never really gave up on seaplanes, but
will they now make a comeback in the US?

No- we have plenty of a/c carriers which Japan and the FSU/Russia
lack...

Seaplanes perform strike missions? (That's what CVN's do)

--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, AFAIK, that IS what the plan has been for years with new seaplane
projects apart from pure transports- arm them with Harpoons and
torpedos and other ordnance.

Also, military seaplanes can perform recon, sea rescue (on a carrier
performed by a helo), ASW, etc... all of which carrier-based aviation
does better.

The Soviet-era Ekranoplans were comparable to seaplanes as well and
carried a range of missiles.

Rob

Rob Arndt wrote:

The Soviet-era Ekranoplans were comparable to seaplanes

Not at all similar.

The Ekranoplans flew only in ground effect.

Graham

"Rob Arndt" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Sep 29, 5:40?pm, "Mark Test" wrote:
"Rob Arndt" wrote in message

oups.com...



On Sep 29, 5:02?pm, wrote:
In addition to the C-130 Seaplane project:


http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...plckController...

It looks like other seaplane ideas are being studied as well:


http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...plckController...


http://cisd.dt.navy.mil/div/cisd/fil...anes%20wo%20an...

Japan and the (Former) USSR never really gave up on seaplanes, but
will they now make a comeback in the US?

No- we have plenty of a/c carriers which Japan and the FSU/Russia
lack...

Seaplanes perform strike missions? (That's what CVN's do)

--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Hide
quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, AFAIK, that IS what the plan has been for years with new seaplane
projects apart from pure transports- arm them with Harpoons and
torpedos and other ordnance.

Also, military seaplanes can perform recon, sea rescue (on a carrier
performed by a helo), ASW, etc... all of which carrier-based aviation
does better.

The Soviet-era Ekranoplans were comparable to seaplanes as well and
carried a range of missiles.

they must be quite the adventure in a heavy sea.

On Sep 29, 6:04?pm, Eeyore
wrote:
Rob Arndt wrote:
The Soviet-era Ekranoplans were comparable to seaplanes

Not at all similar.

The Ekranoplans flew only in ground effect.

Graham

A technicality at best.

Ekranoplans are planes and are sea-based, so they are only a DIFFERENT
type of seaplane.

You can't call them flying ships- they are WIG aviation.

Rob

Rob Arndt wrote:
On Sep 29, 6:04?pm, Eeyore
wrote:
Rob Arndt wrote:
The Soviet-era Ekranoplans were comparable to seaplanes
Not at all similar.

The Ekranoplans flew only in ground effect.

Graham

A technicality at best.

Ekranoplans are planes and are sea-based, so they are only a DIFFERENT
type of seaplane.

You can't call them flying ships- they are WIG aviation.

Rob

Oh, please, seaplanes can fly overland, fly at altitude, don't have
to go around islands, can fly over rough seas and a few other things
WIGs can't do. Even you should be able to see that, xenia.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

but will they now make a comeback in the US?

Short answer: No, IMHO.

Longer answer: Attempts at large-scale revival of seaplanes in the U.S. will likely meet the same ends as attempts to revive LTA.
a.. Too few suitable seadrome possibilities near most U. S. coastal population centers. And no possibilities at all in the continental heartland, other than the Great Lakes cities like Detroit or Chicago.
b.. Constant pre-landing obstruction clearance would be a major headache for near-urban seadromes - would not take a very large piece of harbor flotsam to hole a hull at takeoff or alighting speed.
c.. Need for major infrastructure improvements (large hangars, ramps, etc.) along increasingly expensive / scarce near-urban shoreline.
d.. Even a modest sea state can hinder or prohibit operations in more open waters.
e.. Higher cost of maintenance, especially for corrosion control, versus landplanes.
This does not say that seaplanes may not be suited for other locales. The freshwater lake interior regions of Russia and Canada come to mind as possibly suitable.

Just not a winner for the U.S.

--
Mike Kanze

"The greatest threat to our democracy is not from evil or incompetent leaders, but from an electorate with the attention span of a gerbil on crack."

- James Tulip, San Francisco Chronicle (7/25/2007)

wrote in message oups.com...
In addition to the C-130 Seaplane project:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...d-a01eb5e659b1


It looks like other seaplane ideas are being studied as well:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs...7-b3cdb2aeb8fd

http://cisd.dt.navy.mil/div/cisd/fil...09dec2003).pdf


Japan and the (Former) USSR never really gave up on seaplanes, but
will they now make a comeback in the US?

On Sep 29, 6:52 pm, Dan wrote:
Rob Arndt wrote:
On Sep 29, 6:04?pm, Eeyore
wrote:
Rob Arndt wrote:
The Soviet-era Ekranoplans were comparable to seaplanes
Not at all similar.

The Ekranoplans flew only in ground effect.

Graham

A technicality at best.

Ekranoplans are planes and are sea-based, so they are only a DIFFERENT
type of seaplane.

You can't call them flying ships- they are WIG aviation.

Rob

Oh, please, seaplanes can fly overland, fly at altitude, don't have
to go around islands, can fly over rough seas and a few other things
WIGs can't do. Even you should be able to see that, xenia.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So how would you define an Ekronoplan? Seacraft? It is piloted and
flies. I believe ti has a/c controls as well...

Here is a dated article from New Scientist and their description, used
as an example:

Spacecraft may one day take off from the backs of seaplanes travelling
at half the speed of sound. That's the future of space travel if
Russian and Japanese scientists get their way, according to the
journal New Scientist.

Here's their plan. A spaceplane is placed on the back of a 1500-tonne,
rocket-propelled seaplane, or what Russians call an "ekranoplan". The
seaplane skims the water on a high-pressure cushion of air. When the
ekranoplan reaches speeds of more than 600 km/h, the spaceplane's
rockets fire and the two crafts separate. The spaceplane continues to
fly until it reaches its escape velocity of around 966 km/h.

Researchers believe this technology could be at par with the
traditional vertical take-off system such as the space shuttle.

Alexander Nebylov, director of the International Institute for
Advanced Aerospace Technology in St. Petersburg, says the high initial
launch speed gives this system an advantage over a conventional take-
off.

To land, Nebylov says the spaceplane will dock with a moving
ekranoplan when it returns to Earth.

Nebylov points out that the craft can be launched from any point in
the ocean - and that's important in achieving orbit. Scientists prefer
to launch as near as they can to the equator since the Earth's extra
rotational velocity in that area helps a spacecraft get into orbit.

Nebylov and Nobuyuki Tomita of the Musashi Institute of Technology in
Tokyo plan to conduct initial sea trials next year with a scaled-down
ekranoplan weighing 400-tonnes.

Rob