Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Like gliding backwards through porridge.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                               

jet powered ground effect flying boat hotels

cruise ships are too slow bring back the flying boat hotel!
  (+2, -1)
(+2, -1)
  [vote for,
against]

many many many ground effect boat planes have been designed.

they are , old school.

modern day cruise ships do a pretty fine shop of cruising the oceans with thousands of people at 20-25 knots. the problem is that this is pretty damn slow if you want to fly a massive city of people to different places ALL the time. it really is slow.

flying jet engines for massive boats have been developed decades ago and succesfully flown many times by the russians.

but no one ever tried developing a jet powered flying boat hotel, but ordinary propeller powered boat hotels were designed liked the caproni. ca.60.

instead of perpetual decades long dream of re-animating the idea of flying airship hotels ( quasi zepplins of old bringing floating flying hotels back to life) ---building a flying hotel for 300 people wouldnt really be that much of a technological challenge.

the hotel can easily do 80 knots with jet propulsion and massive huge blended wing body , with the vehicles bottom about 10 meters from the sea surface.

in wavy conditions the sheer enormous weight of the wing would power through any smallish wave crests and would really be a robust system.

80 knots is a world of difference from 25 knots. you could cross the atlantic in a reasonable amount of time. hell, you could cross the pacific in a reaosnable amount of time.

more importantly you could easily outrun storms at sea. and if you could not, you would still be big enough to wait them out like a conventional cruise ship.

teslaberry, Mar 11 2014

russian jet boat http://en.wikipedia.../wiki/Beriev_Be-200
[teslaberry, Mar 11 2014]

anotehr russian jet boat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_A-40
[teslaberry, Mar 11 2014]

the infamous caproni which crashed upon its first test flight http://en.wikipedia.../wiki/Caproni_Ca.60
[teslaberry, Mar 11 2014]

Rogue Waves http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_wave
[bs0u0155, Mar 11 2014]

Ekranoplan http://4.bp.blogspo...-5w/s1600/58005.jpg
[bs0u0155, Mar 11 2014]

[link]






       + Ekranoplans are cool <link>   

       - They're a nightmare to get out of the water   

       - Big waves <link>
bs0u0155, Mar 11 2014
  

       // in wavy conditions the sheer enormous weight of the wing would power through any smallish wave crests and would really be a robust system //   

       You might want to go and check the data for sea conditions in the North Atlantic …   

       Another problem is speed. If you have crowded sea lanes with most ships plodding along at 10 - 15 knots, and then you introduce a vessel travelling at 80 knots, see- and-avoid becomes a bit more difficult.
8th of 7, Mar 11 2014
  

       I am somewhat shocked that the phrase "China Clipper" appears but once in the HB.   

       [ ] Usually I rubber stamp anything to do with flying boats but: jet engines are too noisy and lack fuel efficiency (the Russian ones are for military or S&R, not civilian transport); what 8th said - you need to be able to quickly hop up past "ground effect" on occasion; poor and passive aggressive posting habits are annoying.
FlyingToaster, Mar 11 2014
  

       Yes, [FT], so why do you continue to do it ?
8th of 7, Mar 11 2014
  

       A European luxury yacht builder is buying up and refurbishing old Soviet Lun-class transports as toys for the ludicrously rich, so this Idea is pretty much baked but not what I'd call WKTE.   

       Don't take it personally, [tes]; all that means is that you were second in line with a good idea. Have an encouragement bun!
Alterother, Mar 11 2014
  

       ^^Well, it's not annoying to *me* now, izzit. Anyways, I confine myself to the annotations, and I've a doctor's note, for the mumbling.
FlyingToaster, Mar 11 2014
  

       ^   

       <Zaphod Beeblebrox>   

       "Hey, don't try to outweird me, eight eyes, I get stranger things than you free with my breakfast cereal !"   

       </Zaphod Beeblebrox>
8th of 7, Mar 11 2014
  

       You're not   

       <Arthur Dent> the <\Arthur Dent>   

       one who can quote from H2G2.
MaxwellBuchanan, Mar 11 2014
  

       //I am somewhat shocked that the phrase "China Clipper" appears but once in the HB.   

       Well, the porcelain ones kept breaking up at sea, so they went back to making them out of wood. That's why mariners still say "you'd be a mug to get on one of those, my old china" and that's truth.   

       But anyway. Isn't this just a faster version of the Titanic? The [insert nationality of] captain decides to [do something highly inadvisable] because [insert very stupid motive].
not_morrison_rm, Mar 11 2014
  

       You could use most of the internal volume of a dirigible as passenger area by replacing the N2 with H2, creating a rather effective yet breathable lifting gas, sans all those heavy containment bags. Just sayin'.
FlyingToaster, Mar 11 2014
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle