Model Boat Mayhem
Mess Deck: General Section => Model Boating => Topic started by: tonyH on December 20, 2010, 07:35:50 pm
-
No, not a spelling mishtake nor am I tired and emotional but hows about this for a project? {-)
-
a hydrofoil i presume could be fun to do :-))
-
Sorry, but I can't believe that;
1: why would you?!? :o
2: hydrofoils are built as lightly as possible- DUKW's are not
3: there is a big black 'chop' line in the top left hand corner!
4: the wheels are in 'compressed' position as when on land, if they were in mid air they would be hanging down.
5: if those were on a DUKW there would be a far more substantial method of fixong than two big 'black dots' that I assume are supposed to look like rivets! {-)
That said, if it were real I'd love to have a go in it!!!!
Greg
-
is this an april fools day pic ,come early ? i know from doing the mvt road runs that the gmc 353 is only good for about 50 mph on the road , when in the dukw it got to be slower still !
-
Well, pluck a dukw! %)
-
All I can say is that I was looking for details of the Miami 'Crash Boats' and this pic came up on the Miami site along with what appeared to be a 'flying' 3 tonner. Very few details apart from the fact that the USN carried out feasibility trials post war.
Look for www.foils.org/miami.htm
:embarrassed:
Tony
-
So as Mythbusters would say... " Plausible" %%
-
Mmmm very interesting reading- a landing craft with a gas turbine and foils lower than it's wheels so it couldn't land- I want to believe this guy, but I'm finding it very hard!
That guff about one planing at 20 knots, I actually laughed at that point- the very last thing a DUKW wants to do is plane- and why oh why would the army/navy or whoever pay for the conversion/maintainance/fuel costs of a 30 knot landing craft- there were PT's and MTB's doing just that far more efficiently and for less money way before gas turbined hydrofoiled DUKW's came on the scene.
It really does seem so implausable.
I would think about building a model though- at scale weight and power, see if you prove all us sceptics wrong... :-))
Greg
-
I just wonder if Robert Johnson (who wrote that article) sold his soul to get the Dukw to plane %)
-
Yo bro, he must have sold it to play blues guitar as he did ;)
-
Very successful for transporting 4 people? That Flash steam boiler in the back takes a lot of room though.
Regards Ian.
-
So, the follow-up question has to be whether, using probably a brushless/lipo combination, the power to weight ratio is feasible in a model. This assuming that ALL THE NORMAL FUNCTIONS of a 6 ton DUKW were included. A 1:12 scale version would be 31 inches long with a theoretical scale displacement of 7lbs.
I know that it would be beyond me :((
Tony
-
but how many functions of the dukw could you have removed to save weight ? , the engine/transmission are cast iron as are all six axles , the hull is all made from thick steel plate , and its got a nice heavey chassis too ! ive seen plenty of them in various states of rebuild , ive also had the pleasure of working on the truck variant as lots of friends own them .
-
surely the hull is aluminum.
-
Mmmm very interesting reading- a landing craft with a gas turbine and foils lower than it's wheels so it couldn't land- I want to believe this guy, but I'm finding it very hard!
That guff about one planing at 20 knots, I actually laughed at that point- the very last thing a DUKW wants to do is plane- and why oh why would the army/navy or whoever pay for the conversion/maintainance/fuel costs of a 30 knot landing craft- there were PT's and MTB's doing just that far more efficiently and for less money way before gas turbined hydrofoiled DUKW's came on the scene.
It really does seem so implausable.
I would think about building a model though- at scale weight and power, see if you prove all us sceptics wrong... :-))
Greg
it was not a landing craft design. It was a hydrofoil testbed. The gas turbine took up all the useable cargo space.
Edit: a Lycoming gas turbine rated at 1400 hp no less.
-
This bit -
" To our surprise we were greeted by unhappy Army personnel. Having assumed that the test craft would be lost during the towing, they had assigned all unaccountable material for their DUKW operations to our loaner. Now they had to undo all that paperwork!"
- rings very true to me.
Barry M
-
it was not a landing craft design. It was a hydrofoil testbed. The gas turbine took up all the useable cargo space.
Edit: a Lycoming gas turbine rated at 1400 hp no less.
Sorry, must have been confused by this bit;
The successful HALOBATES sea trials led the US Army to become interested in applying foils to their landing craft. Colonel Frank Speir, one of the fathers of the Army's DUKW, thought that foils could increase the sea speed of this vehicle
As you say, 1400hp is a lot of power to be playing with, but throwing power at hull with that much resistance I really can't see it planing, these things squat like a slightly bouyant brick at the best of times! As I said the only real way to test it is to build a true scale model.
Greg
-
I must admit that the way I read it was that they were trying to reduce the most vulnerable approach period and so it was a system test rather than just an engine test.
-
surely the hull is aluminium . the ones ive seen at the specialists near reading are definetly made in steel !