It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Could Wing In Ground Effect revolutionized warfare in the future?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 11 2005 @ 09:27 AM
link   


We have seen previous projects or concepts that have planes fly low to the water. But it seems to me that many people are still not following and producing these types of aircraft as back in the past.

Imagine an aircraft like this that can help hunt down submarines or sink naval warships while flying low to minimize detection and don't need runways when you have thousands of miles of space to land on, which is the ocean of course but where you can land undetected. I believe that these aircraft are being overlooked by the military because of some problems but if we put our effort into it and overcome those problems, then these aircraft will revolutionized how warfare would be fought. Imagine flying floating warships that is just as powerful as destroyers or cruisers that can only stay on water while the Wing In Ground Effect aircraft can stay in the air close to the water and move fast anywhere in the world. I believe they can make the aircraft go on land as well. So aircraft that can land on water as well as land, where warships cannot leave the water.




posted on Nov, 11 2005 @ 11:11 AM
link   
nice dream, just a shame WIG's dont work well over waves! sorta spoils the party!



posted on Nov, 11 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   
There was a programme on the History channel once about Soviet secret weapons or something and they built a few massive ground effect ships (They were called Ekranoplans) but when Khrushchev fell out of power the project was scrapped.


[edit on 11-11-2005 by UK_05_XM29]



posted on Nov, 11 2005 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by paperplane_uk
nice dream, just a shame WIG's dont work well over waves! sorta spoils the party!

I thought most can fly higher when needed, it's just that the efficiency (and whole point) of your ground effect then becomes less. Starting and landing in high waves may indeed be a different issue.

[edit on 11-11-2005 by Simon666]



posted on Nov, 12 2005 @ 01:09 AM
link   
If you add in the low engine performance for minimal altitude, they are just not worth it. A plane can do the samethings anyway.



posted on Nov, 12 2005 @ 02:41 AM
link   
Flying close to the deck sucks. All kinds of stuff to run into. No wiggle room on engine out. Can't see worth spit. IGE, go a little slower and fall out, or a little faster and climb out. Too much workload on the pilot- sure, a robot could pull it off hour after hour if you are talking RPV's. Autopilot, sure; it would reduce your radar signature (Howard Hughes already did that in spruce, no?). As a pilot do I like it? No. But to answer your question: yes. Certainly yes.

Too much war lately. Time to go hang gliding.



posted on Nov, 12 2005 @ 03:26 AM
link   
Yes, not a good idea, besides if the plane would fly so low it would be an easy target for anti air on vessels... And yes, at the moment subs don't have AA, but they had during WW2, and if planes like that are created, AA would very soon come to subs too...



posted on Nov, 12 2005 @ 04:12 AM
link   
I disagree FMF, just look at the huge Russian ekranoplans that were supposed to accomodate hundreds of troops, these would replace surface vessels, not aircraft, in the event of a 'D-Day' style invasion. Noow picture such a fleet of craft hurtling across the North Sea towards Britain (for example) at 350+mph at wave top height and Britains defences trying to react and stop them. Impossible and terrifying are the words that spring to mind for me. Thank god the Russians never folllowed the idea through.

For transport purposes, thats a different kettle of fish and I'm not sure how the economics of such craft stack up[ against other forms of transport but as an assault vehicle there could be no better way to effect a landing at high speed.

[edit on 12-11-2005 by waynos]



posted on Nov, 12 2005 @ 05:11 AM
link   
Hmm, yes i get your point... But those planes are then safe from noting else but subs... The fact is still that the planes fly very low, an easy target for AA in my opinion...


Nad please Waynos, due call me FIN, that's what everybody else do...



posted on Nov, 12 2005 @ 06:01 AM
link   
OK, FIN. will do


I think their safety is in their speed, any attack launched with these vehicles leaves the defending country with almost no time to react, compared with a normal seaborne assault, they are vulnerable to defensive fire only if the 'enemy' knows they are coming and has the appropriate defences already in place. Furthermore, if used in conjunction with paratroops dropped from such as the An 124 you have a virtually irresistable invasion force that can transport its tanks and trucks over with it rather than have to wait for ships.



posted on Nov, 12 2005 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Hmm, good point... However there is a good chanse that the enemy would know of a massive attack like this, haven't intelligence always been a major part of warfare...??

But still, I understand the planes advantages... And I have to edmit that I was wrong in a way...



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join