h a l f b a k e r yBuy 1/4, get 1/4 free.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
the problem with battleformation tactics for aircraft carriers is that you want your main ship to be surrounded by a group of small low value agents that can do the electronic scouting for the main ship (the carriers). this maximizes the battlespace within which the carrier may detect hostile targets
while minimizing the ability of the hostiles to detect the carrier, or, if they detect it, to succesfully attack it.
the problem here is that, with a multitude of small ships..........you wind up having a batteship group limited by fuel issues, as the most aircraft carriers are nuclear powered, their capabilities, while unlimited, are severely restrained by the restraints of their scouts.
so....why not creat a series of low power requirement unmanned drone ships, or drone flying wings, that can be controlled by operators onboard the carrier, AND, that can also be powered remotely by a microwave power emitter onboard the carrier. if things go wrong , the drones can be repaired onboard the carrier.
the idea is to minimize the need for the carrier to be limited by supply of oil onboard. while the jet fuel limitations of the carriers aircraft are a logisitic restraint, there is no sense in ignoring the logistic demands of resupllying the fleet with diesel. ideally, the navy can rid itself of ALL diesel demand, operating solely on nuclear power for its submarine and air craft carrier force.
the cost of fuel will become a real strain on the navy (and armed forces generally) as the dollar plummets. furthermore, as mideast states seem to be maneuvering towards selling oil in a non-dollar currrnecy, or in a basket currency, the price of oil is set to skyrocket, enormously.
New idea? It's been patented!
http://www.patentst...atents/5503350.html
[21 Quest, Oct 06 2009]
[link]
|
| |
[-] for relying on nuclear energy and hands-off military hardware |
|
| |
The use of phased-array radar should enable the ships to project microwave power to targets far out, but if there is enough power in the volume the drone occupies to refuel it, the area around will get a fair share too. |
|
| |
//their capabilities, while unlimited,// never saw them creating world peace. Aren't they trying? |
|
| |
If you can find a way, and describe it, to project enough
microwave power for such a purpose, and for the drone to
harness it, you might be on to something. As is, there's nothing
original about the desire for such technology, or the discussion
of using such technology for this purpose. The prize money goes
to guy who can make it work. Now, there is at least one warship
that carries unmanned drone planes, called the Sea Wraith
Corvette. But UAVs aren't exactly new, either. [Marked-for-
Deletion] not a new idea, and the lack of the crucial "how"
makes it magic. IMHO. |
|
| |
(21Q}, I'd disagree. Using airborne drones to extend a carriers vision and using beamed microwave power seems completely doable and really useful. All you need is an accurate tracking and targeting system on the carrier (baked), a large power source (baked), a power antenna (baked) and a rectenna on the drone to recharge onboard batteries (bakable). The drones would have to be designed around having a relatively enormous profile area provided by an oversized tail fin, this seems eminently doable. Or put the rectennas on the bottom of the wings and then have them come in and circle overhead for recharging. (+) |
|
| |
Using airborne drones to extend vision is doable, you're right.
It's also Baked, as I mentioned, by the Sea Wraith Corvette. The
only part of this idea that's not Baked is the microwave power,
and you think that's a new idea? |
|
| |
I agree with [MrQ] -- add some solar panels on top to augment, maybe, although power/weight might suffer. I was under the impression that broadcast power was very inefficient though. |
|
| |
I like the idea of a swarm of fliers around the carrier -- very zerg-ish. |
|
| |
it's an integration-type idea [21] |
|
| |
One of the advantages of nuclear powered vessels is they have room left over to carry extra fuel for non-nuclear vessels. We frequently replenished ships in our battle group while underway. |
|
| |
I don't know about the microwave idea. It seems to me I'd just build a microwave seeking missile and be done with it. |
|
| |
If the key idea here is to reduce the reliance on hydrocarbon fuels bought from middle eastern nations, then : |
|
| |
Why not just use hydrogen-powered airborne drones, that have a decent residence time and can then autonomously land and refuel from the aircraft carrier. It'd be fairly simple to include a decent sized electrolysing plant aboard the carrier to supply the fuel from sea water. As you say, the carrier has an abbundance of *electrical* energy available. If it turns out that the small turbine engines used for your drones aren't all that good with hydrogen, I'm pretty sure we can generate methane or even methanol or ethanol from water and CO2. |
|
| |
Alternative option. Autonomous hydrogen powered hullabaloon drones. |
|
| |
//Using airborne drones to extend vision is doable, you're right. It's also Baked, as I mentioned, by the Sea Wraith Corvette. The only part of this idea that's not Baked is the microwave power, and you think that's a new idea?//
I think so. How easy is it to land a drone on a ship in a storm? I mean I guess you just get a big net and fly it in, but these you would almost never have to land. Electric power means they could be sealed from the elements and be nearly silent. So yes, the use of microwave power to keep a drone permanently aloft is the new or as [CC] said integration-type idea. The fact that you didn't think it was possible alone gives this idea some originality. Microwave power is kind of new tech though Tesla probably did it, but it never caught on. I have only seen it tested in two places, space power transmission and tether climbers. So from that is it a natural progression to orbiting drones? I don't think so. |
|
| |
I've posted a link to the patent for this exact idea. It describes
the technology in detail, even the size of the antenna and
rectennas, as well as power output. New idea, my ass! This is a
shameless rip-off that a Google search for the very reasonable
phrase "microwave powered aircraft" would have prevented. Got
it on my first try. [Marked-for-Deletion] Not a new idea. |
|
| |
Whoah there nelly! Maybe it's right to point out that a google search would have found the result, but accusing [zev] of ripping it off is a little harsh. |
|
| |
Or maybe even a lot harsh. Pull ye head in, knave. |
|
| |
Wow, from magic to a patent. It must be a patent on magic. That is cool. |
|
| |
True this is baked. I wouldn't have been automatically swayed by an existing patent, but the reference to the 1988 Pop. Mech. article has to put it in the realm of general knowledge. Transitioning that to water based planes are still slightly novel, but not much.(-) |
|
| |
[Post deleted 'cause [21] said sorry.] |
|
| |
PS milk crate furniture is the new black. |
|
| |
Look... this is just a very bad night for me. Not the fault of the
HB, or anyone here, but I'm in a very foul mood. I won't go into
details, but please accept my self-deleted rant and sincerest
apologies. Good night, guys. I'll get Baked with you later... if
you'll have me. |
|
| |
I hope it wasn't me, [21Q]. I wasn't baiting, or maybe just a little. Hope today is better. |
|
| |