Military recon powerboat concept

[DryFoot]

Why build manned stealth boats that only operate on an X & Y axis, when unmanned aerial vehicles are faster, cheaper and available in lethal numbers.

It would be capable of much greater carrying capacity, which translates to longer mission time w/out refuel/resupply, range, and mission flexibility. Just off the top of my head right now.

[Pericles]

By flying them off tankers , which can be easily fitted with flight decks, you have surveillance, investigation and retribution. In the past Israel had armed gunships constantly flying , in order to strike whenever the opportunity arose. now UAV,s carry out the function. Israeli fighters fly to be a visible presence. The UAVs have their own tasks.

It makes sense to keep highly trained personel out of harm's way. Appropriate technology is on its way.

Pericles

[DryFoot]

Originally Posted by Pericles

By flying them off tankers , which can be easily fitted with flight decks, you have surveillance, investigation and retribution. In the past Israel had armed gunships constantly flying , in order to strike whenever the opportunity arose. now UAV,s carry out the function. Israeli fighters fly to be a visible presence. The UAVs have their own tasks.

It makes sense to keep highly trained personel out of harm's way. Appropriate technology is on its way.

Pericles

The weight requirements to keep an UAV airborne is still an issue that prevents it from packing a heavy punch. The only example of an UAV that packs firepower stronger than man-portable weapon that I can think of off the top of my head is the Israeli Harpy, which is almost more cruise missle than UAV anyway.

Not to mention the limitation of progamming autonomus response in UAVs, and the inherent unreliability in having remote controlled weapon over a long range. While it may be tempting to keep trained personnel out of harms way, the modern technology still can't do that without sustaining a loss in capabilities. I doubt we have the tech to program an effective dogfighting UAV, or long range radio control device that can cut through all interference, natural or man-created.

And I'm not sure I want to have that sort of tech available, maybe it's because the SkyNet in the Terminator movies scared the beejeezus out of me.

Unmanned platform's role these days are to support manned mission, not the other way around. And I believe any military procurement and planning need to take that in mind.

[kach22i]

I promised someone to post a few of the bookmarks I have on this topic. So here they are.

http://www.dtic.mil/dticasd/sbir/sbir032/sbir108.html

http://www.afrlhorizons.com/Briefs/J...N_H_05_02.html

http://www.engadget.com/tag/uav

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by DryFoot

....And I'm not sure I want to have that sort of tech available, maybe it's because the SkyNet in the Terminator movies scared the beejeezus out of me.

Unmanned platform's role these days are to support manned mission, not the other way around. And I believe any military procurement and planning need to take that in mind.

I'm not sure I remember that film sequence, but I get a little concerned myself about an 'all powerful, all seeing, government', particularly after what this latest administration has promoted. I keep thing back about this statement by Eisenhower when I was growing up:

President Dwight Eisenhower, January 17, 1961

My fellow Americans, this evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen. We have been compelled to create a permanent armament industry of vast proportions. Three-and-a-half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. The total influence, economic, political, even spiritual, is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development, yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by brian eiland

President Dwight Eisenhower, January 17, 1961

...............we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence

I want in on "this" and feel that I should feel bad about it, but I want to get my project built.

If only the HoverFairy would answer my dreams.

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by brian eiland

I'm not sure I remember that film sequence, but I get a little concerned myself about an 'all powerful, all seeing, government'...

Here's an example of what's coming. Imagine this technology greatly expanded and/or in the hands of a dictatorial government

Automatic License Plate Recoqnition
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j_On_1zRig

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by brian eiland

Here's an example of what's coming. Imagine this technology greatly expanded and/or in the hands of a dictatorial government

Automatic License Plate Recoqnition
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j_On_1zRig

Looks like a good tool to have, I better keep up with my insurance.

[DryFoot]

Originally Posted by kach22i

I want in on "this" and feel that I should feel bad about it, but I want to get my project built.

If only the HoverFairy would answer my dreams.

Ain't that bad working for The Man. They've been footing my bill for awhile now lol.

Here's an example of what's coming. Imagine this technology greatly expanded and/or in the hands of a dictatorial government

A truly dictatorial evil tyranical government would actually care about license plate search result and the idea of getting the right man?

[FAST FRED]

"The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."

The more Gov attempts to do , the bigger the chance for the "employees of last resort" to screw it up.

Still dreaming of enforced borders , and constitutional money.

FF

[StianM]

Originally Posted by kach22i

It's not a "cat", it's sometimes called a SEC or SES standing for Surface Effect Craft or Ship. The skegs or fins on the side just keep the air in, they do not provide lift, the air pressure does that. They typically are just wide enough to get the drive systems through them.

How wrong is that? It's not fins it's hulls just like it is on a normal cat. The SES skirts are there to provide lift to decrease the wetted surface. I seen this boat a couple off times and it stay afloat well abow water without it's fans running.

Originally Posted by kach22i

The US Navy last time I read is supposed to purchase some of these craft in lieu of paying some American company to develop one of their own, guess they want to save some money. How unAmerican.

The MTB's they used in Vietnam was also off norwegian design in norway called tjeld class MTB fitted with british Napier Deltic engines.

The americans bought penguin rockets from norway for years now.

http://www.hoverclubofamerica.org/fo...=460&hl=Skjold

Intresting thread

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by StianM

How wrong is that? It's not fins it's hulls just like it is on a normal cat. The SES skirts are there to provide lift to decrease the wetted surface. I seen this boat a couple off times and it stay afloat well abow water without it's fans running.

I take the term hull to be the part of the watercraft which floats. In a SES there is a hull and it has side extentions which are designed to keep the pressurize air "captured". The SES will never float on the side extentions alone therefore I don't think of them the same as I would a catamaran as the function is completely different even though their is a resemblance.

Originally Posted by StianM

The MTB's they used in Vietnam was also off norwegian design in norway called tjeld class MTB fitted with british Napier Deltic engines.

The ones which changed history, should I thank you?

PTF
http://www.hnsa.org/ships/ptf3.htm

First in the series of U.S. Navy NASTY Class Patrol Torpedo Fast boats, PTF 3 marked the return of the wooden PT Boats to the U.S. Navy. Commissioned in 1963, PTF 3 was sent to South-east Asia in the fall of 1963 as a "Spook Boat" operated by MAC V SOG, Maritime Special Ops, PTF 3 along with 5 other PTF boats began raids against North Vietnam by attacking shore installations and inserting special operations teams.

It was during a series of raids from 31 July to 4 August 1964 on Hon Mei Island in North Vietnam that the North Vietnamese counter attacked the PTF Boats with their torpedo boats, chasing the PTF Boats away from the coast and into the path of two U.S. Navy Destroyers the U.S.S. Maddox and the U.S.S. Turner Joy. The ensueing naval battle is known to history as the Tonkin Gulf Incident.

Within a week President Lyndon B. Johnson presented the Incident to the American People as an unprovoked attack of U.S. Naval Ships on the High Seas. The Congress of the United States passed the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, authorizing President Johnson to escalate, what had been a civil war in Southeast Asia into the Vietnam War of 1964-1975.

Another link:
http://www.ptfnasty.com/ptfnorway.htm

To whom it may concern:

I am researching the history of US Navy PT boats (motor torpedo boats)
after World War Two. A group of 80 foot long Elco class PT boats was
sent to Norway in the early 1950s and used by the Royal Norwegian Navy
into the 1960s. Also, two firms built a total of 14 Tjeld/Nasty class
boats (known as PTFs in the US Navy) for service in Viet Nam. Two of
those boats were shipped directly to the United States (US Navy hull
numbers PTF-3 and PTF-4). The rest were transported to Subic Bay Naval
Base in the Philippines for modifications and then sent to Da Nang, Viet
Nam for duty. There might be some information of interest to you at the
website www.ptfnasty.com.

I am interested in obtaining pictures of the Elco class PT boats in the
Royal Norwegian Navy and Nasty/Tjeld class boats under construction,
being launched or tested for the US Navy and service in Viet Nam. Is
there someone specific I should communicate with? Do I have to come to
the museum or can I select photos from the USA?

Thank you for your time and any assistance.

Chip Marshall
Silver Spring, Maryland USA

[StianM]

Originally Posted by kach22i

I take the term hull to be the part of the watercraft which floats. In a SES there is a hull and it has side extentions which are designed to keep the pressurize air "captured". The SES will never float on the side extentions alone therefore I don't think of them the same as I would a catamaran as the function is completely different even though their is a resemblance.

Then how do they float when the fans is stoped? or when they change the skirts? They tear 2cm a hour at 50knot last time I heard
If you removed the skirts it would become just another cat maybe doing only 45-50 instead off 60knot.

Originally Posted by kach22i

The ones which changed history, should I thank you?

I don't think annything the americans brought into vietnam changed mutch except a extra grave now and then.

In addition, Deltic diesels served in MTBs and PT Boats built for other navies; particularly notable being the Norwegian built Tjeld (Nasty) class, which were also sold to Germany, Greece, and even the United States Navy. PTF Nasty class boats served in the Vietnam War, largely for covert operations.

http://www.wis.co.uk/justin/deltic-engine.html

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by StianM

Then how do they float when the fans is stoped?

All hovercraft and SES craft can float on their hulls (not sidewalls). They either have foam filled hulls or air tight chambers for this purpose. This can be a problem in heavy seas should they lose lift power. In heavy seas they may become not much more than a top heavy raft being tossed by the waves. Not a good situation because they can capsize then - just a warning.

I guess I need a picture to help explain the message here, it always helps me so indulge me.

A Comparison of Power Catamaran Hull Types
RePrinted from the Spring 2000 Issue of Power Multihulls Magazine
by Prof. Jacob van Renen van Niekerk
http://www.multihullsmag.com/magazin...at%20hulls.htm
Characteristics of Type-F

F. SES (solid side skirt) hovercraft with low tunnel and skirts at bow and stern.

The solid side skirt hovercraft is not considered a catamaran by many, but it does have two long, slim sponsons almost like Type-E, but with the addition of flexible skirts fore and aft. The skirts are there to contain the cushion – air that is pumped into the big empty space between the sponsons, skirts and tunnel roof to lift the craft up to where it has minimal draft and wetted area. The SES was developed by people who were unhappy with the normal hovercraft where air-propulsion is needed. They thought that these slim sponsons would allow populsion by waterjet or propeller and so make it more efficient. Another handicap of a pure hovercraft is its susceptibility to cross winds and its consequent need to wheathercock to counter them. So don’t be surprised if you see one traveling almost sideways to go along a certain course. Having slim hulls in the water helps offset this to a considerable extent.

But it is costly to build and maintain and its ride characteristics are not acceptable to many. It is load-sensitive and the CG has to be dead right. The ride is wet and becomes hard when the waves hit the relatively low tunnel. On the upside, it is capable of good speeds in calm conditions. As an afterthought, it is probably unfair to compare it with normal cats.

NOTE: Click the link above and read about the differences, the pictures are worth a thousand words.

StianM, because you made me do an image search I found some new stuff, so it was not a waste of time. Below is what I found.

Hull is where the lift fans empty, not the side sponsons/sidewalls.
http://www.stepi.re.kr/researchpub/a...96-022-006.HTM



More images:
http://www.dyferry.com/usefulinfo_type_2.asp




More (hull is upper part with fans):
http://www.ivt.ntnu.no/imt/courses/t...n_support.html




SES - nice visual of many types:
http://www.australianhovercraft.com/design_effects.htm


Sidewall SES (typical)
http://www.australianhovercraft.com/design_effects.htm
may also be propelled by water jets





Aircat, with wide buoyant hulls .........not a typical SES - might be sole example. Looks to be similar to what you thought all SES were like based on their outside look. The side sponsons/sidewalls on this craft do provide some lift, although I doubt it's more than 15% of overall.
http://www.australianhovercraft.com/design_effects.htm

[StianM]

I'm not aruing the priniple, but the error is your statement.

Your statement is that the boat float on the aircoushin alone.