View Full Version : The Navy's swimming spy plane
WE Branch Fanatic
4th Mar 2006, 12:17
See this from CNN (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/02/24/cormorant/index.html).
Any volunteers for the manned version?
LowObservable
4th Mar 2006, 12:25
Whatever will these journos make up next?
BillHicksRules
22nd Mar 2006, 15:54
LO,
The Soviets actually had a similar idea in the 1930s. I cannot for the life of me remember what it was called.
Cheers
BHR
Conan the Librarian
22nd Mar 2006, 16:11
The Japanese had a few subs with hangars on the upper deck, with the idea of being able to strike US targets, but although the Continental defences would have been light, the overall value of a light floatplane attack would have been of little more than propaganda value.
The Germans were playing with an idea to piggy back V-2 rockets to New York as well. The idea that I heard about was to build a seperate "Hangar" for the firework, which detached from the sub and then filled its base with water to get the assy to float upright. Then, it was a case of Light blue touchpaper and retire. The later German research fed back into navies Worldwide, but the Soviets used many further developed versions to provide their first missile subs, in which the missile was housed from keel to the top of a lengthened conning tower, I believe.
I suppose the CNN report is only a logical progression, but I wonder what range it would have? The idea of an Ohio operating in anything other than deep water seems a bit unlikely to me, as a layperson.
Conan
Where R We?
22nd Mar 2006, 17:20
LO,
The Soviets actually had a similar idea in the 1930s. I cannot for the life of me remember what it was called.
Cheers
BHR
We did too in the form of the M2 submarine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_M2)which now sits in 30 odd meters of salt water near Weymouth after sinking in 1932.
SpotterFC
22nd Mar 2006, 17:55
That'll teach 'em to leave the hangar doors open!!!
Oggin Dodger
22nd Mar 2006, 18:04
Just done a trial up in Benbecula where the "spy plane" ended up 150ft underwater.
Widger
22nd Mar 2006, 18:09
There are more RAF aircraft in the sea, than submarines in the air!
buoy15
23rd Mar 2006, 03:56
WEBF
Go for it - everybody is famous for 15 minutes - (Woody Allen)
Trust that when the trials are complete, we can expect no more posts from you
Magoodotcom
23rd Mar 2006, 04:24
The Japanese had a few subs with hangars on the upper deck, with the idea of being able to strike US targets, but although the Continental defences would have been light, the overall value of a light floatplane attack would have been of little more than propaganda value.
Wasn't this meant for an attack on the Panama Canal in order to slow the reinforcement of the Pacific Fleet from the Atlantic as the war in Europe came to a close?
Magoo
teeteringhead
23rd Mar 2006, 07:17
Of course, if we had hangars on submarines.......
....... we could put SHARs in them!!;) (blah organic air defence of the fleet, blah littoral cover blah) ...
Conan the Librarian
23rd Mar 2006, 10:34
Mr. Magoo, you could well be corrrect on that one. So long ago that I read it, that I can't remember the details, but that sounds a winner :}
Conan
BillHicksRules
23rd Mar 2006, 10:48
Where R We,
The Soviet machine was actually a flying submarine.
Like a X-Craft with wings. Designed to fly into the area (past torpedo netting etc), land like float plane. Fill the floats with water and submerge. Tootle along under the water to the target. Attach mines etc. Tootle away again. Refloat and take off and escape.
Cheers
BHR
I think Gerry Anderson holds the patent with skydiver.... :cool:
http://ufo.sfdaydreams.com/skydiver.jpg