Sunday, May 19, 2013

Seaplane IV.

This is coolbert:
"no one ever said this was going to be easy"

The military combat seaplane continued.


Military combat seaplanes UNDERSTOOD as not being an air superiority warplane. That much UNDERSTOOD from the start. Warplanes providing an adequate measure of performance, a partial alternative to the "super" aircraft carrier.

A system consisting of the planes themselves, a seaplane tender vessel and floating piers on demand.

The U.S. Navy for the fraction of the cost of a brand new "super" carrier able to proliferate the oceans of the world with seaplane tenders and an associated air wing. Power projection, brown, green, and blue water.

Military combat seaplanes primarily function in the stand-off mode, a delivery system able to fire on enemy targets with a variety of ordnance.

From a variety of forums the difficulties with the combat sea plane recognized and categorized as obstacles, problems and factors:

"Seaplanes And Flying Boats (What Are The Obstacles)"

A. Four obstacles that need to be overcome.

1) Calm water.

2) Take-off speed.

3) Safety. Landing and taking off on water is dangerous.screwing up a landing on floats, it'll ruin your day.

4) Availability . . . Neither Boeing nor Airbus would be likely to develop a new transport [combat] category aircraft for such a narrow market.

B. Additional problems.

1) salt water spray ingestion does not enhance engine life.

2) Any submerged log at or just below the surface might ruin the day

C. Performance factors.

1) the boat-hull would add weight and actually shorten the endurance.

2) Their main disadvantage [sea planes] came from the way in which the bulk of their floatation gear penalised their performance compared to other fighters.

Off-the-shelf commercially available sea planes converted to military use obviously not in the same performance category as a F-4 Phantom, a F-14 Tomcat, a F-18 Hornet or a F-35 Lightning. Modification and conversion not that difficult [?] for existing commercial single and dual engine sea planes, ordnance lifting capability adequate for a variety of weaponry already in the inventory?

Numbers [greater], adequacy, cost and availability as considerations are the key factors here? Pentagon planners and naval brass will not perceive the military seaplane as a "sexy" item. But again, understood not to be so from the start.


No comments: