HTHL vs VTVL - Thunderbirds to the rescue

Andrew Gray wrote in message ...
In article , The
Enlightenment wrote:

Control systems to auotmatically land and 'capture' helicopter on an
rolling miitary ship exist. (this is a version of the above
situation) as well as auomtaitc arrested landings on aircraft
carriers.

As I understand it, the situation with helicopter landings is that the
helicopter lands on the deck, and then is latched onto - it doesn't
"land on" the locking device, but the locking device gets it once it's
down. Very quickly once it's down, mind you, but...

(I can check this with Them As Knows More About It, when I next see him,
but I do know there's two commonly used systems - I may only have
understood one)


I'm not sure if the helicopter is automatically guided to land but I
don't see why not.

The automated arrested landing on an aircraft carrier is more of an
analogy. The carrier is moving at perhaps 20-30 knots. The aircraft
is moving at perhaps 120 knots and is located to a precise point on
the aircraft carrier so that it can capture the cable with its
arrestor hook. Corss winds complicate matters.

Mercedes Benz has developed an "Electronic Towbar" so that two semi
trailers can be linked up such that a trailing semi-strailer follows
the leader with a gap of less than 1 meter while sterring and braking
in unision. In this way fuel saving from slip streaming are
accumulated while the drivers can rest by taking turns. Conceivably
the second trailer might even be unmaned.

Some kind of matorised sled for boosting takeoff and landing might be
possible. Takeoff would be relatively easy, sleds having been in use
for years. I recall the germans made used them on the Arado 234 Jet
reconaisence aircraft and also the Me163 rocked fighter. In both
cases the aircraft landed on a ski. (The only problem they had was
that the aircraft took 20 minutes to retrieve which was a tense time
to wait while allied straffing was common)

However co-ordinating the acceleration and postion matching of the
sled and spacecraft would require vry precise 4 dimensional
naviagation and very reliable equipment.

Inflatable hovercraft like skirts are also possible for landing.

(The Enlightenment) wrote in message . com...
...
Inflatable hovercraft like skirts are also possible for landing.

The russian Ekip concept uses a hovercraft-like air cushion for
landing but somehow does it without a skirt.

http://www.ekip-aviation-concern.com

(The Enlightenment) wrote in message . com...
...
Inflatable hovercraft like skirts are also possible for landing.

The russian Ekip concept uses a hovercraft-like air cushion for
landing but somehow does it without a skirt.

http://www.ekip-aviation-concern.com

(Oren Tirosh) writes:

(The Enlightenment) wrote in message
. com...
Inflatable hovercraft like skirts are also possible for landing.

The russian Ekip concept uses a hovercraft-like air cushion for
landing but somehow does it without a skirt.

http://www.ekip-aviation-concern.com

Hovercraft don't _need_ skirts; skirts simply make them more efficient,
more stable, and facilitate operating with a higher ground-clearance
(e.g., on the order of meters, as opposed to tens of centimeters) without
consuming unreasonably large amounts of power and excavating too much dirt
with the underjets.

Christofer Cockrell's original hovercraft did not use a skirt; it got by
using only the "momentum curtain" effect produced by the downrushing,
inward-directed air jets running all the way around its rim. So as long
as the runway the "EKIP" is hovering over is reasonably smooth (no rocks,
shrubbery, or large clods of dirt to get in the way), operating "sans skirt"
is not an unreasonable proposition; however, I question how effectively
it can take off and land from a _totally_ unprepared surface...


-- Gordon D. Pusch

perl -e '$_ = \n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'