Military recon powerboat concept

Failed Hovercraft Project

Doing a little exploring in Northern Fla today and ran across this projecr sitting out on the tarmac of an old airport just outside Green Cove Springs Fla

I say failed as I came back and looked it up:
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,9346.msg190847.html#msg190847

When I first looked at it I thought it might be alum construction with lots of fairing compound...but supposively it is all composite and hi-tech methacryalic adhesives

 

St Johns River Mothball Fleet

That failed hovercraft was on the tarmac at Lee Airport in Green Cove Springs Fla on the St Johns river south of Jacksonville. It was a sight used to mothball a hugh number of vessels following WWII

http://www.desausa.org/images5/mothball_fleet_at_green_cove_springs.htm

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2010-nov-exploring-clay-county-port-reynolds-park

 

Bladerunner

Looks like a bladerunner on steroids

 

'Disappearing' Warship

Austal, America’s newest warship-builder, is still scrambling to recover from the late-June revelation that the USS Independence, the Littoral Combat Ship it just built for the U.S. Navy, is “aggressively” disintegrating.


The 418-foot-long Independence (pictured) is slowly disappearing due to a process known as “galvanic corrosion,” where electrical current passes through a join between two different metals — in this case aluminum and steel — causing one of them to break down at the molecular level. Independence will be spending some time in San Diego for repairs.

The Navy has systems for dealing with galvanic corrosion, but did not include them in Independence’s design. And early on neither Austal nor General Dynamics seemed terribly alarmed at the omission. It’s possible they planned to control corrosion with rigorous, post-delivery maintenance procedures.

...more here:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/07/plenty-of-blame-to-go-around-for-disappearing-warship/

 

No comparison can be made; the two designs are wildly different.

(I've been involved with both in one way or another so I do know)

 

Would love to know your involvement in either........


Comparison can be made: Looks like a Bladerunner on steroids. Quite a good comparison:

Both look like a monohull with two outer hulls stuck on about half the length along.

So when thinking very generally about boat style, you can say all tankers look the same, all cats look the same, all monohulls look the same: Thus all bladerunner type boats look the same in a general sort of way.:idea:

So a comparison between this boat and the bladerunner is obvious.

 

A visual one perhaps.

The Austal vessel is essentially a full displacement super-slender monohull that is 'stabilised' in a static stability sense by the two small ama hulls to either side.

The Blade Runner is a fully planning hull with air-entrapment features built in to the bridging structure to the outer hull extensions; said extensions also providing lateral stability in turns.

 

Do you routinely cast aspersions like that, hinting people you have not the foggiest idea about are liars? Odd behavior, that.

I'll sit back and see if some on here who do know my 25-year track record in HPMV design, construction and trials chime in instead of wasting my own energy in a reply right off the bat.

 

Yes - that is the whole point of using the words 'LOOKS LIKE' - If I thought it was a planning hull like the bladerunner, perhaps I would have said something along the lines of 'goes like' or 'handles like' - but no - I decided it looked like a blade runner. And it does.

Too late, you replied twice!
And why would I need someone who knows you have 25 years experiance to tell me that you are correct and the boat does not look like a blade runner, when you have already said it does!!

I think I have a fair idea of everyone who had been 'involved' in the blade runner, from the designer, testing team, builder, design owner, and most of the people who have owned or raced one. And I dont see you in that list. So you may have 25 years of experiance, but I dont see your 'involvement' in the bladerunner being obvious to anyone, so thus I invite you to tell:

So please tell, so I can learn......





Some people have 25 years experiance, and others have one year experiance 25 times......

 

Indeed.

 

No, "invite me to tell" is not what you did at all. I can read. Although, it was actually the rolling eyes emoticon that probably underpinned the meaning you intended.

There was a time....when we provided craft design and construction support to an outfit headquartered in Hawaii. An 'early' Bladerunner was one of the vessels in that mix of craft under testing and evaluation. I count myself forunate that I was not on board the day it was rolled at nearly 60 mph in flat calm water. One of my counterparts still carries the scar from the stitches he received.

Not one of my favorite craft.

 

Atlas Hovercraft, I watched that critter grow from the ground up. Actually a USCG approved 150 pax vessel, all composite. Used a way cool polymer planking system for the deck.

The most unique concept was the construction process. It went together very fast with a pretty small crew and no real equipment other than a big forklift. Used a mold to make segments that glued together.

Here's a little more:

http://www.dejongandlebet.com/996_AtlasHovercraft.htm

Steve

 

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/07/plenty-of-blame-to-go-around-for-disappearing-warship/

Looks like General Dynamics got the last laugh to me.

RE: Atlas....................from a recent post in the HCA forum I made.
http://hoverclub.invisionzone.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=2118

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,9346.msg190847.html#msg190847

 

You might be correct.

What I cannot for the life of me fathom in that whole corrosion debacle is why standard off-the-shelf active corrosion control technology was not included right off the bat in that design. Its been around and in use in aluminum vessels for quite a while, including others built by Austal. The USN Sea Fighter catamaran was designed and built including an extensive active corrosion protection system...and that was in 2002-3.

 

Hi, first, Ihave not read the entire thread. It began with a stealth recon boat and even though it has become a hovercraft issue, all well and good, my comment is that what you began with what appears to me to be a gun boat concept, not a recon asset.

Recon are small unit ops and frankly don't need stealth protection from radar as these boats (RIBS) are usually small enough not to be of any concern. Larger RIBS, 40' are designed to be fast enough that in the event of detection they move fast enough to reduce any chance of hostile action. Usually for insertion, not recon.

A gun boat or patrol boat has a different mission, patrolling is not an offensive mission.

If the OP wants to design something for military use, you first begin with a well defined purpose, specialized mission performance with relevant tactical issues addressed. You don't design a boat or any vehicle and then decide what mission or use it may have.

Cool hovercraft, a hovercraft or airboat is not allowed on any Missouri waterway, when I asked why, I was told that they are difficult to control and would be a hazard, so not allowed on the rivers or lakes. I'd like a small one!