Russian Spruce Goose?

found this on another site, man its awesome! Here are some teasers for ya...

http://igor113.livejournal.com/51213.html

I don't read Russian. Did it ever fly? Love the steel (rebar?) bird-keeper-outer on the inside jets.

It certainly would fly like the Spruce did. Those are built to use ground effects to skim along the top of the water, very weird to say the least.

turboswede wrote: It certainly would fly like the Spruce did. Those are built to use ground effects to skim along the top of the water, very weird to say the least.

IIRC, there was video of this beast flying.

Although, the Spruce was supposed to be a real flying boat, whereas this one was to use ground effects, like turboswede points out. It would never get but a few feet off the surface of the water. In theory, there is less drag when you use the ground effects- so this would be a high speed transport that uses less fuel.

E-

Ekranoplan also called the Caspian Sea Moster (likely by the US analysts who first spotted it on satellites). They use ground effect (the increase in lift when you are flying close to the ground, you can watch sea birds do it)

More like the iron goose though. Those things were built more like ships then planes. The tubes on the top are anti-ship missles.

http://davidszondy.com/future/Flight/GEV.htm

You want weird, check this design out, apparently very much a functional design:

this is the only video i found...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2200021317530929051#

The word is to google is Ekranoplan.

This particular monster is the only one of this design. There's video of it firing missiles and you can spot it on Google Maps. I love it, it's science fiction made real.

http://jalopnik.com/5490236/the-nuclear-warhead+equipped-ekranoplan-soviet-invasion-machine

aircooled wrote: http://davidszondy.com/future/Flight/GEV.htm You want weird, check this design out, apparently very much a functional design:

Found from the same link 'Will a lava lamp work on Jupiter' This is completly awesome! http://neil.fraser.name/hardware/centrifuge/

I wonder how far along they were when the first inkling that all they really needed was a boat struck them.

Refinement of the Airwheel concept has been taking place recently by a guy named Pebbles in the UK.

Search on Fanwing for more information

turboswede wrote: http://jalopnik.com/5490236/the-nuclear-warhead+equipped-ekranoplan-soviet-invasion-machine

The text accompanying the video suggests this was an "invasion machine", aimed at Western Europe.

Seems like there is a link to Reagan's military-spending philosophy; Europe was pre-occupied with allocating funds to establishing democratic-socialist states while the US invested in ways to counter Europe's true adversary.

Not trying to flounder a thread about an awesome machine, just putting a little perspective on a bigger picture.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: I wonder how far along they were when the first inkling that all they really needed was a boat struck them.

Boats don't do 250 mph.

Keith wrote:

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: I wonder how far along they were when the first inkling that all they really needed was a boat struck them.

Boats don't do 250 mph.

Overweight planes that don't really fly are probably a lot easier to sink than a ship with all its magical buoyancy and armor. Planes that can really fly have missiles that have to slow down a lot to be going 250mph. Aaand just who did they think they were going to sneak up on all speedy-like in a flightless aircraft that you can see from space?

You'll notice they didn't make another one and the idea didn't really catch fire in other military organizations ;)

Actually, they made quite a few Eraknoplans. Just not another one of that behemoth. The smaller ones were much more effective.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: Overweight planes that don't really fly are probably a lot easier to sink than a ship with all its magical buoyancy and armor. Planes that can really fly have missiles that have to slow down a lot to be going 250mph. Aaand just who did they think they were going to sneak up on all speedy-like in a flightless aircraft that you can see from space?

Consider:

There is no ship with any amount of armor that is going to fair well against an anti-ship missile, the Missouri might stand a bit of a chance, maybe it they hit the belt armor.

It is highly unlikely an anti-shipping missle will track a 250mph boat and one of those things would probably shrug off an anti-aircraft missle (if it would even track it)

Since the eraknoplan is skimming over the water, it can only be seen on radar when it pops over the horizon (radar picket planes with doppler radar of course would help), at 250mph, destroys an entire fleet then zips away. Anti shipping planes will normally skim the water to get close to the target anyway.

6 anti-ship missiles could do a lot of damage.

Not a perfect weapon of course, but not a silly one either. Remember also that we are talking about 70-80 technology here.

In reply to aircooled:

Being that we are all on the GRM "wavelength", we are always talking about '70-80s tech. . Good points, though.

aircooled wrote:

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: Overweight planes that don't really fly are probably a lot easier to sink than a ship with all its magical buoyancy and armor. Planes that can really fly have missiles that have to slow down a lot to be going 250mph. Aaand just who did they think they were going to sneak up on all speedy-like in a flightless aircraft that you can see from space?

Consider: There is no ship with any amount of armor that is going to fair well against an anti-ship missile, the Missouri might stand a bit of a chance, maybe it they hit the belt armor. It is highly unlikely an anti-shipping missle will track a 250mph boat and one of those things would probably shrug off an anti-aircraft missle (if it would even track it) Since the eraknoplan is skimming over the water, it can only be seen on radar when it pops over the horizon (radar picket planes with doppler radar of course would help), at 250mph, destroys an entire fleet then zips away. Anti shipping planes will normally skim the water to get close to the target anyway. 6 anti-ship missiles could do a lot of damage. Not a perfect weapon of course, but not a silly one either. Remember also that we are talking about 70-80 technology here.

It wasn't a pleasure-craft intended to cruise the Baltic or Black seas so you could visit your neighbors' beach party.

oldsaw wrote: It wasn't a pleasure-craft intended to cruise the Baltic or Black seas so you could visit your neighbors' beach party.

If you listened to the Democrats of the 80's, that's what it was.

Anyone else wondering what a modern version of this beast would be like? That thing actually kind of spooks me when you think about how effective it could be at hunting down ships. Imagine if there were more of those things.

rebelgtp wrote: Anyone else wondering what a modern version of this beast would be like? That thing actually kind of spooks me when you think about how effective it could be at hunting down ships. Imagine if there were more of those things.

Intended as a large-capacity transport craft for military or civilian use, it would have a wingspan of 500 feet (152.4 metres), a cargo capacity of 1,400 tons (1273 metric tonnes), and a range of about 10,000 nautical miles (18,000 km). Powered by four turboprop engines, its main mode would be to fly 20-50 ft (6-15 metres) over water, though it would also be capable of overland flight at a higher altitude but lesser range. It would operate from conventional runways, with its weight distributed over 38 fuselage-mounted landing gears with 76 wheels.

That is so full of win.

Straining my Russian Language skills from college on that site!

I saw the Antonov 225 in Dallas once and have walked through a C5 and C17, I can't image what that looks like in person.

rebelgtp wrote: Anyone else wondering what a modern version of this beast would be like? That thing actually kind of spooks me when you think about how effective it could be at hunting down ships. Imagine if there were more of those things.

The B-52 was so good at ship-hunting the Navy insisted that the capability be removed.

And the Martin P6M was so good, that the Air force complained so loudly so it was relegated to a mine layer.