Powered pontoons for assisted take-off

[Stargazer]

While going through the old Flight magazines, I came across this very interesting concept for an "undercarriage-less aircraft on powered pontoons." Although it seems that the concept was envisaged by the industry, the absence of a specific author or company for the design shown prompted me to put it in the "Theoretical and Speculative" section instead of the "Early projects" one.

Source: Flight, 13 April 1939, p.382

 

[hesham]

My dear Stargazer,


I sent this idea before,from Flightglobal;


http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3564.15.html


http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1939/1939%20-%201089.html

 

[Stargazer]

Hesham, please note that I already included the link to the original page in my post.

Besides, your own post was written in such general terms that it was impossible to track it. I really think this forum ought to get rid of all the "fit-all" kind of topics, or at least slim them down a bit, like Jens recently did.

 

[Lauge]

And landing would be accomplished how? ???

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg

 

[Arjen]

Easy. You land it on a couple of speeding Škoda Yetis. A certain J. Clarkson demonstrated a proof-of-concept with 1 (one) Robinson R-22 and 1 (one) Škoda Yeti with optional helipad.

 

[Jemiba]

Judging the cross section, this was an attempt to improve the aerodynamical efficiency of flying boats
by deleting the steps in the planing bottom. For landing they aren't actually needed, I think.

 

[Lauge]

Judging the cross section, this was an attempt to improve the aerodynamical efficiency of flying boats
by deleting the steps in the planing bottom. For landing they aren't actually needed, I think.

Looking at the illustration, if that thing landed on water like a conventional flying boat, the propellers would end up half submerged (the lower edge of the propeller arc is pretty much level with the bottom of the fuselage)

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg

PS: Which reminds me: "Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing. If the plane can be used again, it's a GREAT landing".

 

[Jemiba]

Looking at the illustration, if that thing landed on water like a conventional flying boat, the propellers would end up half submerged (the lower edge of the propeller arc is pretty much level with the bottom of the fuselage)

You're probably right, but at least before the war, that seems not to have been regarded always as a problem:
(from Jaques Moulins http://aerophile.over-blog.com/article-capra-r-90-63333663.html )

 

[Lauge]

......but at least before the war, that seems not to have been regarded always as a problem

Until you try to land, that is

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg