Modelling > Aero-space
High-performance Seaplanes
dy031101:
Recently I'm starting to toy with the idea of derivatives of seaplane fighters......
...... except the toying primarily concerns with "high-performance" by modern day standard:
This one, said to be Lockheed Hydrostar project, came to my attention:
I am interested in thinking of an electronic warfare variant in the same vein as how EA-18G is derived from the Super Hornet. Having said that, even though I am not entirely sure how jamming and emission detection hardwares are supposed to work, I don't think I should mount them under the wings......
Would mounting the receivers and transmitters for those hardwares over the wings lead to complications? I am under the impression that these receivers and transmitters should have a "line of sight" of sorts to all-around below the aircraft (unlike, say, missiles, which only really need forward), no?
Or would it be do-able to try incorporating the receivers and transmitters into some kind of wingtip floats (better water-proofing than external pods taken straight from land-based planes?)? Or are there other alternative placements for those receivers and transmitters?
Thanks in advance.
Weaver:
Yeah, you don't have to be an expert to figure out that electronics and water don't mix...
The primary need for field of view is in the horizontal plane: if your sensors need to look straight downward to point at the radar, you are WAY too close to it! You could do a lot of that from a pod on the tip of the fin, and you could also have overwing pods, mounting them above the wing on relatively tall pylons so that they have some downwards view or the wing edges.
The better solution for all electronics is to put it completely inside the fuselage with the aerials behind dielectric panels. The only reason for adopting external pods in the real world is that SEAD aircraft are adaptions of other types. A flying boat has a naturally large hull volume for buoyancy anyway, so it would be easier to make them internal.
LemonJello:
--- Quote from: dy031101 on May 25, 2016, 11:48:25 AM ---
--- End quote ---
I want to make this one as a land-based fighter!
Nice finds.
dy031101:
--- Quote from: Weaver on May 25, 2016, 04:10:45 PM ---You could do a lot of that from a pod on the tip of the fin......
--- End quote ---
Tailfin-tip antenna pod is definitely on.
--- Quote from: Weaver on May 25, 2016, 04:10:45 PM ---The better solution for all electronics is to put it completely inside the fuselage with the aerials behind dielectric panels. The only reason for adopting external pods in the real world is that SEAD aircraft are adaptions of other types. A flying boat has a naturally large hull volume for buoyancy anyway, so it would be easier to make them internal.
--- End quote ---
I wonder if there would be an internal weapons bay of some sort for me to mess around with in the base design, too, seeing that even over-wing pylons would likely have been subjected to some water during water takeoff and landing, and the artist impressions don't show any external weapon carriage, either.
And then, if some weapons for self-defense or anti-radiation missiles are still desired, throw in a pair of enclosed missile pods over the wings.
Weaver:
I wouldn't worry too much about spray and the like hitting overwing stores, after all, they have to fly through rain, right? It's being completely immersed in salt water after a landing that rules out underwing stores, plus the difficulty of loading them, of course.
Another thing you could do for sensors is have them retractable or movable. For instance, you might have sensor pods that hang below the wingtip in fight, but which then rotate 180 deg to be above the wing for landing and take-off.
Generally speaking any kind of maintenance procedure is more difficult to do from a boat alongside a landed seaplane than it is in a hangar on land. The hangar doesn't bob up and down, and if you drop a spanner in there, you don't need a diver to get it back for you. Now extend that situation to include the loading of heavy, dangerous, expensive ordnance.... ???
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version