[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
[PSUBS-MAILIST] Re: Flying submarines
CWall@swri.edu wrote:
>
> Hi guys- new poster here.
>
> There were actually two flying submarines that I recall- I don't have any
> references, however.
>
> The first was built by a junior high school class and their teacher (but don't
> ask me where).
I'd never heard of this one.
> The kids had the idea, and the finished product was a mongrel assortment of Cub
> wings and an open frame fuselage, with two occupants seated side-by-side and
> the engine on a pylon above the wing. The thing flew, of course, and landed on
> the fuselage hull bottom. The inovation was that the engine and instruments
> could be sealed against water and the machine sunk to the bottom for
> concealment. When I read about it in one of the flying magazines, they had
> yet to install the electric motors for underwater propulsion. I doubt they
> ever did, because the damned thing wasn't about to go anywhere submerged. (It
> didn't fold up, and airplanes underwater have a LOT of drag.)
Well,m if I had seen pictures, I'd have assumed it wouldn't work
very well at all. And/or that it was designed bya bunch of kids.
Funny thing about that ...
> The military picked up on the idea from what the kids and their teacher had
> done, and tried to do it better. I believe they got as far as an airplane that
> would sink and recover, which is to say: no further than the kids got.
The flying sub I've seen had folding wings. It really would fly
fairly well and it would submerge, but drag was high in the water.
It was an interesting idea and an even more interesting execution,
but the cost of doing the development work was too high for the
father-and-son team who created it, and the Navy was begining to
gear up for 'Nam, so they were distracted.
I suppose it worked as well as anyone might expect. It still
might be worth playing with. As a starting point this time,
I'd suggest a British MSC under a Rogallo wing, powered by a tiny
jet engine (or two).
Mike