i think it was called ground effect research or something i remember watching a show on it a while back they built a few of them of different size and they flew a few feet off the water. pretty cool but i dont think id wanna be in it.
Not just a research project, they are in service. I have always wondered what their efficiency is like........ one one hand they have a fantastic L/D ratio, on the other hand they are burning lots of fuel down at sea level.
I wonder if they would be a feasible option for transoceanic travel. Certainly much slower than an A380, but you sure could cram a lot of people comfortably into one for cheap. A return of the "clippers" perhaps?
The Russians were doing tests on these things back in the 60's and the nick name for the big one was the Caspian Sea Monster. The Americans actually saw one crash on a Satellite picture.
They were very efficient in ground effect and were missile platforms (see below) and troop carriers -- they could actually fly out of ground effect but them the fuel consumption went off the clock --
WIG -- wing in ground effect --
It's become more of a sport now but there are a few companies developing commercial wigs
and by the way, not exactly a new concept. Sometimes the DO-X had to fly upwards of the first thousand miles of a trip in ground effect until the fuel load lightened.
I've been thinking that engine technology is what would hold one of these back. The thrust requirements for takeoff conflict with the low-altitude efficiency requirement to fulfill its cruise potential.
I was thinking about this once and came up with an idea of a sort of compound turbofan, with a low-bypass afterburning turbofan as its core. This drives a high-bypass outer fan with a variable pitch. For takeoff the fan goes to fine, the core spins right up, and the burner gives it a kick. For cruise the fan goes coarse and the core throttles back. Not overly complicated, and not as much weight as carrying around all of those extra engines.
I also like the idea of the hydrofoils and variable upper/lower surface blowing on the orlyonok class.
couple of the responses referred to the efficency of this beast. The exhaust of the jets in a couple of the vid shots probably sum it up very well. that black smoke is a good sign that those engines probably were not designed with fuel economy being a big consideration. of course it was the time of the cold war and like the west, the ruskies were also all wraped up in all that make it work and push it out the door crap.
i wonder how big an area was needed to do a 180 turn.
---------- ADS -----------
Q: How many Microsoft Programmers does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
A: It cannot be done. You will need to upgrade your house.
picture one of those suckers going through Active Pass and I know the Russians never built a quiet airplane -- now that would be a hand full of thrust levers --
BC Ferries should definitely be looking into this,
I wonder how long it would take to drive into an island if you were screwing in the cockpit of this thing. All that speed, so low to the water, I'd be horny enough to try