Wolfs Shipyard Forum

The new forum for Wolf's Shipyard
It is currently Sun Aug 19, 2018 11:09 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 11:04 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 4700
Location: Battlestar Hecate BSG-94
Nice design!

One little problem with vectored thrust...The thrust needed would probably turn the ground to some sort of molten amalgam of glass and stone. VTOL planes like the AV-8 Harrier, F-35 Lightning II, Yak-38 Forger, and Yak-141 Freestyle require specially reinforced and constructed landing decks for them to operate from a ship.

Based on what we saw in the miniseries (and the eps that showed air traffic in the Colonies) as well as the fleet fleeing New Caprica in Exodus, Pt. 2, I think that any thrusters shown firing down on the larger ships are more to give it some inertia to get away from ground and the "heavy lifting" (pardon the pun) is done via some sort of null-g system that would give the ship an effective "neutral buoyancy" in an atmosphere.

_________________
Kurt

Click the link to read Lady Hecate off line in PDF, .epub, or Kindle formats: http://www.bsg94.org/downloads/index.html
Click here for the Colonial Warbook for Lady H: http://www.photobucket.com/colonial_warbook


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 14, 2013 8:42 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 4700
Location: Battlestar Hecate BSG-94
It would blast anything loose away, but the ground itself would be somewhat close to the temperature of the exhaust...deploying troops onto something that's ~1000C is going to look like that scene in Volcano where the guy jumps from the subway car and sinks into the lava. :-(

_________________
Kurt

Click the link to read Lady Hecate off line in PDF, .epub, or Kindle formats: http://www.bsg94.org/downloads/index.html
Click here for the Colonial Warbook for Lady H: http://www.photobucket.com/colonial_warbook


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 4:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 2:00 am
Posts: 1744
You can get pretty close to lave without burning, so perhaps the craft lands, and then extends gantries and ramps to allow the troops to file off clear of the cooling material.

More than that, if they are driving off in infantry fighting vehicles, it wouldn't really matter anyhow, since the speed and NBC nature of such things means they can be well clear of the "hot" landing zone well before the external temps would become an issue.

Though i see form the accompanying image that this won't work, since the landing ramp opens down, right into the lake of lava this thing would be sitting in. (Taking off with chunks of cooled magma on the ship and around the landing struts would also be a serious issue here too!)

Since the Cylons can take entire Basestars and land them on planets, a much smaller Colonial vessel should be able to do the same with just contra-gravitic systems and maneuvering thrusters, right?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 16, 2013 11:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 392
kfeltenberger wrote:
Nice design!

One little problem with vectored thrust...The thrust needed would probably turn the ground to some sort of molten amalgam of glass and stone. VTOL planes like the AV-8 Harrier, F-35 Lightning II, Yak-38 Forger, and Yak-141 Freestyle require specially reinforced and constructed landing decks for them to operate from a ship.

Based on what we saw in the miniseries (and the eps that showed air traffic in the Colonies) as well as the fleet fleeing New Caprica in Exodus, Pt. 2, I think that any thrusters shown firing down on the larger ships are more to give it some inertia to get away from ground and the "heavy lifting" (pardon the pun) is done via some sort of null-g system that would give the ship an effective "neutral buoyancy" in an atmosphere.


kurt, i disagree about special flight decks for rhe harrier. when i was on the tripoli and the belleau wood, they landed all the time on an plain jane flight deck.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 12:45 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 4700
Location: Battlestar Hecate BSG-94
jeff762 wrote:
kurt, i disagree about special flight decks for rhe harrier. when i was on the tripoli and the belleau wood, they landed all the time on an plain jane flight deck.


Those ships were either designed for the Harrier or retrofitted with a coating that would protect the deck.

The general point is that just because a Harrier can land on a modern LHA or LHD, that same plane isn't going to land on a Burke, Spruance, Perry, or any other non-carrier without damaging the deck.

_________________
Kurt

Click the link to read Lady Hecate off line in PDF, .epub, or Kindle formats: http://www.bsg94.org/downloads/index.html
Click here for the Colonial Warbook for Lady H: http://www.photobucket.com/colonial_warbook


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 1:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 2:00 am
Posts: 1744
Since they perpetually utilize anti-heating efforts to combat reentry level temperatures, its pretty likely their grasp of the heat issue for landing isn't a factor really.

Landing the actual ship might be a problem, but landing a VTOL capable smallcraft on the ship isn't going to make one bit of difference really.

I wonder if Laura, the stealthy fighter, could reenter atmosphere safely though?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 392
kfeltenberger wrote:
jeff762 wrote:
kurt, i disagree about special flight decks for rhe harrier. when i was on the tripoli and the belleau wood, they landed all the time on an plain jane flight deck.


Those ships were either designed for the Harrier or retrofitted with a coating that would protect the deck.

The general point is that just because a Harrier can land on a modern LHA or LHD, that same plane isn't going to land on a Burke, Spruance, Perry, or any other non-carrier without damaging the deck.


as far as i know it was the same coating that is on a carrier's flight deck.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:40 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 4700
Location: Battlestar Hecate BSG-94
jeff762 wrote:
kfeltenberger wrote:
jeff762 wrote:
kurt, i disagree about special flight decks for rhe harrier. when i was on the tripoli and the belleau wood, they landed all the time on an plain jane flight deck.


Those ships were either designed for the Harrier or retrofitted with a coating that would protect the deck.

The general point is that just because a Harrier can land on a modern LHA or LHD, that same plane isn't going to land on a Burke, Spruance, Perry, or any other non-carrier without damaging the deck.


as far as i know it was the same coating that is on a carrier's flight deck.


Thus my comment about "non-carrier". ;-)

Could they land on a non CV/LHA/LHD in a pinch? Probably. Could they operate off of a non carrier long term? No. The Japanese recently built the Hyuga class DDH ships. Several articles have suggested that the Japanese will eventually station F-35B Lightning IIs on them, but the more technical of those articles also state that the flight decks will need to be upgraded to handle the jet blast and extra weight.

Ever since we did the AV-8A trials on the old USS Guam in 1974, the large decks have been able to handle the AV-8A/B. This isn't the case with other ships in other navies.

_________________
Kurt

Click the link to read Lady Hecate off line in PDF, .epub, or Kindle formats: http://www.bsg94.org/downloads/index.html
Click here for the Colonial Warbook for Lady H: http://www.photobucket.com/colonial_warbook


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 2:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:00 am
Posts: 229
Kurt,

That issue with the deck on Hyuga probably has more to do with the respective weights of an F-35 versus a SH-60 (IIRC the JMSDF doesn't operate any heavier helos). The Seahawk is just under 18,000 pounds fully loaded, an F-35 is over 49,500 pounds. If the deck was only designed for operating helos, even with a 25% safety margin, that deck is going to distort like heck if you park an F-35 on it. In theory, you could operate an AV-8B from any LAMPS III equipped surface ship. The maximum weight for a vertical take off is a hair over 20,000 pounds, so you'd be within the safety limits for the deck. Whether or not you'd want to is another matter...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 9:55 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:00 am
Posts: 4700
Location: Battlestar Hecate BSG-94
There's more to it than just mass; it's whether the deck can handle the heat from the engine in VTOL mode that's the killer.

From the last paragraph under the heading "Design" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America-cl ... sault_ship :

"In January 2014, the Navy began taking measures on the USS America in order to reduce damage from excessive heat given off by the F-35B and MV-22 to prolong the life of the flight deck. The F-35B engine gives off much more heat than the previous AV-8B Harrier STOVL fighter and the MV-22 Osprey's heat exhaust has been known to damage flight decks. Plans include 14 different modifications to the ship and limiting the number of flight operations that are conducted off the deck."

This is a ship that was designed from the ground up to operate those sorts of aircraft; something that wasn't designed to handle them would have a much, much worse time of it.

_________________
Kurt

Click the link to read Lady Hecate off line in PDF, .epub, or Kindle formats: http://www.bsg94.org/downloads/index.html
Click here for the Colonial Warbook for Lady H: http://www.photobucket.com/colonial_warbook


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 31, 2014 2:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:00 am
Posts: 229
Kurt,

Agreed. I'm surprised, given the amount of flight testing the V-22 has been through, that this wasn't recognized as a problem before now. All I'll say on the F-35B is that the best thing that can happen for the F-35 family is to go the way of the F-111B...


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group