Speaking of SWATH designs, what is everyone's thoughts on the Quad44?
Before even going into anything "technical"...read the small print:
To install this app on your iPhone:
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Speaking of SWATH designs, what is everyone's thoughts on the Quad44?
Lisa Akoya - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Akoyaor the Icon 5 seaplane, promising marvels, now bankrupt with some customers who'll never seen their money. That was simply a small seaplane they tried to sell for 400000 USD when you can get one better for 180000 brand new but it's a 28 years old design.
That concept simply uses some hydrofoil lift instead of achieving all the hydrodynamic lift with a planing hull...to do exactly the same thing as just the planing hull on other sea planes. Any WIG effect would be small.Lisa Akoya - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Akoya
How about this one with the whiskers that look like they function as both wings and hydrofoils?
Seems like the idea could be that the foils get the hull above wave impacts before takeoff/landing speeds, and maybe some WIG effect to reduce speeds on takeoff/landing.
It's obviously just a "concept design". As far as producing that as a real vessel, it seems to display an extraordinary amount of structural complexity (and hence cost) with no obvious benefit. Perhaps the extra wetdeck clearance would provide some relief from cross-deck wave slams...although I doubt that design is intended for operation in large waves.At the risk of confirming my stupidity, it thought swath was a type of catamaran. Hence why I didn't ask which was better, but what are peoples thought on the concept. Whether we call it a swath, a catamaran or Neptune's undercarriage wasn't really the question.
No, a SWATH is not a catamaran except in the most simplistic definition of catamaran. As I said back in post #18 of this thread, SWATHs and catamaran hulls are selected and designed for entirely different requirements.At the risk of confirming my stupidity, it thought swath was a type of catamaran. Hence why I didn't ask which was better, but what are peoples thought on the concept. Whether we call it a swath, a catamaran or Neptune's undercarriage wasn't really the question.
LMAO.A "tri" SWATH with big center underwater hull with amas sorta like an Indy class LCS with big top structure spanning the amas. I heard an underwater body such as a torpedo can move with less energy if close to surface and "doming" some water over the top. So maybe a Tri-SWATH with amas would have the amas well in the water at rest but at speed the vessel would rise a bit so the amas were skimming/planning and the center hull would be doming but still fully submerged.
I single underwater unit should both reduce wetted area and be more practical as single large interior space.
Put big wings between the amas and main hull superstructure for WIG at speed with big flaps to give way when hitting waves.
... it thought swath was a type of catamaran....
....but what are peoples thought on the concept. ...
...Won't be in my lifetime...I'm sure of that. I'm out..this thread has gotten too silly.
https://www.foils.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/AliSWATH_FFI_07_JMeyer.pdfLMAO.
First...John Meyer's HYSWAS did demonstrate the benefits of a single tubular small-waterplane hull design with about 40% of the vessel displacement on the fins when it was operating at design speeds. Superb results..never replicated ever again for any commercial, naval or recreational craft purpose. Too bad..that. As for your wild ideas of some magic craft that could transition from there to being airborne...we'll need to wait until we can design and build such craft with structurally adequate materials that have nearly zero weight. Won't be in my lifetime...I'm sure of that. I'm out..this thread has gotten too silly.