Re: Aircraft Carrier
Phil has replied to my carrier letter. Here is his reply, verbatim.
He writes on 14 August, '01.
"Dear Bruce,
Thanks for yours of August 8 (came this morning). All those boats
look like nice work.
As for the aircraft carrier, it's perefectly feasible in principle,
though offhand we'd think your proposed power plants might not be
enough. Friction drag, which would be almost all the drag in this
case, goes up with the size in more than direct proportion. Also, you
have 2.5 times Wyoh's breadth: a cutwater might mitigate that.
The bow thrusters would be a T-50 in a concentric well.
Let us know, preferably in good time, when you're ready to go on it.
We did some work on a 100 X 12 Wyoh type some time ago, but the
client backed away at an early stage.
Phil Bolger
He writes on 14 August, '01.
"Dear Bruce,
Thanks for yours of August 8 (came this morning). All those boats
look like nice work.
As for the aircraft carrier, it's perefectly feasible in principle,
though offhand we'd think your proposed power plants might not be
enough. Friction drag, which would be almost all the drag in this
case, goes up with the size in more than direct proportion. Also, you
have 2.5 times Wyoh's breadth: a cutwater might mitigate that.
The bow thrusters would be a T-50 in a concentric well.
Let us know, preferably in good time, when you're ready to go on it.
We did some work on a 100 X 12 Wyoh type some time ago, but the
client backed away at an early stage.
Phil Bolger
Enough already, I have today snail mailed a query letter to PB&F
about the feasability of the Civilian Aircraft-Carrier Project based
on a doubled Wyoming hull. I enclosed the cartoon I'd made of it (see
files section on Bolger2 egoup) and a synopsis of the postings on
her. I'm sure this qualifies as open minded boating. I can hardly
wait to hear his response. Since drugs are for people who can't
handle reality, I'm having a tot of rum while I wait. Bruce Hector
about the feasability of the Civilian Aircraft-Carrier Project based
on a doubled Wyoming hull. I enclosed the cartoon I'd made of it (see
files section on Bolger2 egoup) and a synopsis of the postings on
her. I'm sure this qualifies as open minded boating. I can hardly
wait to hear his response. Since drugs are for people who can't
handle reality, I'm having a tot of rum while I wait. Bruce Hector
Enough already, I have today composed and sent a snail mail to PB&F
requesting Phils opinion on the carrier proposal. I enclosed the
cartoon I made of it based on a doubled Wyoming (see Bolger2 files)
and a brief synopsis of what's been posted back and forth about her.
I can't wait to hear back from Phil. Surely this is an example of
open minded boats clouded by insanity. Since reality is for people
who can't handle drugs, I'll have a ration of grog while waiting.
Bruce Hector.
requesting Phils opinion on the carrier proposal. I enclosed the
cartoon I made of it based on a doubled Wyoming (see Bolger2 files)
and a brief synopsis of what's been posted back and forth about her.
I can't wait to hear back from Phil. Surely this is an example of
open minded boats clouded by insanity. Since reality is for people
who can't handle drugs, I'll have a ration of grog while waiting.
Bruce Hector.
Would a doubled Wyoming, 106 feet long with a 16 - 20 foot beam be
unstable? She would have the flight deck only 8 feet above it's
bottom. With a maximum deck height of only half it's beam, on a flat
bottom, she'd have a lot of initial and reserve stability. I don't
think height will be a problem. 6' 6" head room with 12" laminated
roof/deck beams to take the landing loads. She'd be as low as a
regular sized Wyoh with tice the length and beam. I'd have nothing
above the flight deck except for a 24" high conning station. Even
this could be eliminated (or be a pop up as you suggest)and the boat
conned from a wheelhouse right forward on the main deck level, many
100' houseboats are conned from the main deck, the flying bridge
being primarily used as an entertainment centre. Remote video cameras
can scan aft.
Marina fees would be a bit steep, so anchoring out would be the norm.
A good launch could be kept instantly available on davits below the
aft flight deck overhang. Have you seen the sketch I posted on
Bolger2? What do you think? Mad Bruce
unstable? She would have the flight deck only 8 feet above it's
bottom. With a maximum deck height of only half it's beam, on a flat
bottom, she'd have a lot of initial and reserve stability. I don't
think height will be a problem. 6' 6" head room with 12" laminated
roof/deck beams to take the landing loads. She'd be as low as a
regular sized Wyoh with tice the length and beam. I'd have nothing
above the flight deck except for a 24" high conning station. Even
this could be eliminated (or be a pop up as you suggest)and the boat
conned from a wheelhouse right forward on the main deck level, many
100' houseboats are conned from the main deck, the flying bridge
being primarily used as an entertainment centre. Remote video cameras
can scan aft.
Marina fees would be a bit steep, so anchoring out would be the norm.
A good launch could be kept instantly available on davits below the
aft flight deck overhang. Have you seen the sketch I posted on
Bolger2? What do you think? Mad Bruce
Ah Rats
I had posted my 20 min response, and was happily following the thread
but without any involvement. Then last night my eldest son stumbled
across the thread and thought it was really neat. This started a
conversation which involved quite a bit of teaching and thought on my
part about carrier ops.
Everything I build has been built numerous time in my head already, and
this building is usually done at night, as I fall asleep, when I awake
in the middle of the night with a really hot idea, or as I wake up in
the morning. Last night I fell asleep with no thought in my mind but how
comfy my wife felt next to me, this morning my mind awakened and there,
unasked for, was The CIVILIAN AIRCRAFTCARRIER PROJECT. AAAH!
I have been working on a modified Tennessee idea, same hull, but with a
cabin more suitable to our climate. It is apparent that one of Bolger's
concerns about these narrow power sharpies is metacentric height. As you
increase the cabin size and height, the CG moves up making for an
unstable hull. Putting an Aircraft Carrier deck on one is defiantly
going to bring the CG up unless you do some really light weight
construction.
The walls on the house I have just finished building are foam panels
with OSB faces, with an occasional 2x6 to carry vertical loads. For the
Tennessee, I had thought to combine this technique along with some other
ideas from composite homebuilt aircraft methods. I hear from Fritz Funk,
that Seth Macinko had been talking to Bolger, and he and Susan had
already been thinking/experimenting with this technique using veneers
bonded to construction foam.
My thought is a really open frame of wood, the wood being where you need
to frame in openings, and where needed for fastening and in the case of
cabin sides, to carry vertical loads. The spaces would be filled with
foam, the same thickness of the wood. I would then bond veener/thin
plywood both sides and face with fiberglass where needed for abrasion or
weather proofing. For the carrier deck you would have to go with a
little more solid construction on the touch down area as this method is
not that puncture proof.
I have some veeneers on order to use for experimentation for my
Tennessee project, I will report back.
Next, CAP Hull Materials, Pop up steering stations, Pilot safety gear,
and whatever else comes up in those fertile morning hours of thought.
HJ
bruce_hector@...wrote:
I had posted my 20 min response, and was happily following the thread
but without any involvement. Then last night my eldest son stumbled
across the thread and thought it was really neat. This started a
conversation which involved quite a bit of teaching and thought on my
part about carrier ops.
Everything I build has been built numerous time in my head already, and
this building is usually done at night, as I fall asleep, when I awake
in the middle of the night with a really hot idea, or as I wake up in
the morning. Last night I fell asleep with no thought in my mind but how
comfy my wife felt next to me, this morning my mind awakened and there,
unasked for, was The CIVILIAN AIRCRAFTCARRIER PROJECT. AAAH!
I have been working on a modified Tennessee idea, same hull, but with a
cabin more suitable to our climate. It is apparent that one of Bolger's
concerns about these narrow power sharpies is metacentric height. As you
increase the cabin size and height, the CG moves up making for an
unstable hull. Putting an Aircraft Carrier deck on one is defiantly
going to bring the CG up unless you do some really light weight
construction.
The walls on the house I have just finished building are foam panels
with OSB faces, with an occasional 2x6 to carry vertical loads. For the
Tennessee, I had thought to combine this technique along with some other
ideas from composite homebuilt aircraft methods. I hear from Fritz Funk,
that Seth Macinko had been talking to Bolger, and he and Susan had
already been thinking/experimenting with this technique using veneers
bonded to construction foam.
My thought is a really open frame of wood, the wood being where you need
to frame in openings, and where needed for fastening and in the case of
cabin sides, to carry vertical loads. The spaces would be filled with
foam, the same thickness of the wood. I would then bond veener/thin
plywood both sides and face with fiberglass where needed for abrasion or
weather proofing. For the carrier deck you would have to go with a
little more solid construction on the touch down area as this method is
not that puncture proof.
I have some veeneers on order to use for experimentation for my
Tennessee project, I will report back.
Next, CAP Hull Materials, Pop up steering stations, Pilot safety gear,
and whatever else comes up in those fertile morning hours of thought.
HJ
bruce_hector@...wrote:
>
> I can't stop the insanity.
I can't stop the insanity. I've posted a jpeg to the Bolger2 file
folder of the CAP. Civilian Aircraft-Carrier Project. Yes the CH-701
can be put on floats, but that would not fulfill my life long dream
of becoming a fixed-wing carrier pilot. The catamaran idea has some
merit, but 100-130 feet of deck will still look tiny on approach, a
60'er would be like landing on a postage stamp. Possible in the 701,
but with zero room for error, drift, crab, whatever. Such a vessel as
a doubled Wyoming would make a spacious, to say the least, retirement
home. It wouldn't be too expensive to operate in the inland waters
and rivers. Just anchor out to save those horendous marina charges
and use the launch that would hang on davits below the aft flight
deck overhang to go in. Cost to build would be in the area of a
house, and the Zenair costs no more than a new car. It is feasible,
but is it sane? I may actually have to send this propoasl to Phil for
the wizards imput. All coments welcome. Bruce Hector
folder of the CAP. Civilian Aircraft-Carrier Project. Yes the CH-701
can be put on floats, but that would not fulfill my life long dream
of becoming a fixed-wing carrier pilot. The catamaran idea has some
merit, but 100-130 feet of deck will still look tiny on approach, a
60'er would be like landing on a postage stamp. Possible in the 701,
but with zero room for error, drift, crab, whatever. Such a vessel as
a doubled Wyoming would make a spacious, to say the least, retirement
home. It wouldn't be too expensive to operate in the inland waters
and rivers. Just anchor out to save those horendous marina charges
and use the launch that would hang on davits below the aft flight
deck overhang to go in. Cost to build would be in the area of a
house, and the Zenair costs no more than a new car. It is feasible,
but is it sane? I may actually have to send this propoasl to Phil for
the wizards imput. All coments welcome. Bruce Hector
Wow! A kindred spirit!
Miles, the long-gone British aircraft manufacturer best known for its
trainers, seriously proposed its Messenger light planes for anti-
submarine patrol off merchant ships during WWII. The Messenger was a
low-wing plane with slots and flaps, much like the French/Polish
Rallye glier tugs. The were to operate from a 60-foot square deck
with rope arrestor cords and a bungee-sprung net for backup. For
demonstration flights, they marked out a square on the airfield and
packed in 5 passengers to represent the weight of equipment and a
depth charge. It all worked great, but bureaucracy killed it.
Here's a link to some Messenger pics:
http://www.bigwig.net/museumofberkshireaviation/miles_extant/messenger
_g_akvz.htm
For a real imagination-starter, got to James Wharram's site and check
out some of his larger catamarans, up to 60'. I would think that you
could power one of his big cats with a couple of small diesels to
make a fantastic little carrier. Or, you could go with an ultralight
on floats and use the boat as a seaplane tender, and get away with a
much smaller boat.
http://www.wharram.com
Keep dreaming!
Matthew
Miles, the long-gone British aircraft manufacturer best known for its
trainers, seriously proposed its Messenger light planes for anti-
submarine patrol off merchant ships during WWII. The Messenger was a
low-wing plane with slots and flaps, much like the French/Polish
Rallye glier tugs. The were to operate from a 60-foot square deck
with rope arrestor cords and a bungee-sprung net for backup. For
demonstration flights, they marked out a square on the airfield and
packed in 5 passengers to represent the weight of equipment and a
depth charge. It all worked great, but bureaucracy killed it.
Here's a link to some Messenger pics:
http://www.bigwig.net/museumofberkshireaviation/miles_extant/messenger
_g_akvz.htm
For a real imagination-starter, got to James Wharram's site and check
out some of his larger catamarans, up to 60'. I would think that you
could power one of his big cats with a couple of small diesels to
make a fantastic little carrier. Or, you could go with an ultralight
on floats and use the boat as a seaplane tender, and get away with a
much smaller boat.
http://www.wharram.com
Keep dreaming!
Matthew
With reference to Harry James 20 minutes of dreaming, I've been
dreaming and making nautical hen scratches for months now. I see in
the months Houseboat Magazine that Fantasy Houseboats has launched a
130' X 21' houseboat. There's a photo of the second deck being lifted
on by crane which lets you see how it could be built with 130' of
perfectly flat flight deck. Arrester hooks and cables...nah, the CH-
701 gets down in under 100' with no headwind. How about male velcro
boots over the tires and female velcro pads near the bow? We're
taling an approach speed of 30 knots into a minimum 15 kt. wind.
Closing at only 15! No need for catapaults, although the image of
slinging it off the bow with a reversed bungee cord bundle comes to
mind. Although a WAR Replica Corsair coming in with everything
dragging is a mental picture I thank you for. Perhaps a group could
get together to fund it. It would be a real challenge to Phil, don't
know if he'd love it or not. The CAP, Civilian Aircraft-carrier
Project....could it get off the ground.
dreaming and making nautical hen scratches for months now. I see in
the months Houseboat Magazine that Fantasy Houseboats has launched a
130' X 21' houseboat. There's a photo of the second deck being lifted
on by crane which lets you see how it could be built with 130' of
perfectly flat flight deck. Arrester hooks and cables...nah, the CH-
701 gets down in under 100' with no headwind. How about male velcro
boots over the tires and female velcro pads near the bow? We're
taling an approach speed of 30 knots into a minimum 15 kt. wind.
Closing at only 15! No need for catapaults, although the image of
slinging it off the bow with a reversed bungee cord bundle comes to
mind. Although a WAR Replica Corsair coming in with everything
dragging is a mental picture I thank you for. Perhaps a group could
get together to fund it. It would be a real challenge to Phil, don't
know if he'd love it or not. The CAP, Civilian Aircraft-carrier
Project....could it get off the ground.
OK Harry - you've got, what, 20,000? 30,000? way more? (more than I can
count anyway) hours in every type of large and small fixed and rotary
aircraft imaginable. Lets hear some more about what's going on behind those
eyeballs! A miniature Corsair? I hear a good letter to Phil in the works....
Talk about boats with an open mind! There's a few lakes I can think of
that a rig like this combo would open up...no it wouldn't be practical,
just fun. And its no fair just taking your Blackhawk in there! Would this
be possible? I'll build the carrier, you build the plane?
--Fritz
----------------
Fritz Funk
Email:fritzf@...
Phone: (H): (907)780-4261 (W):(907)465-6113
Snail: 6017 Sunset Street, Juneau, AK 99801-9728
My Boat Page:http://www.alaska.net/~fritzf/Boats/Boats.htm
(Bolger power sharpie Sneakeasy and other projects)
B-24 Aircrew "Roger the Lodger":http://www.alaska.net/~fritzf/B24/
count anyway) hours in every type of large and small fixed and rotary
aircraft imaginable. Lets hear some more about what's going on behind those
eyeballs! A miniature Corsair? I hear a good letter to Phil in the works....
Talk about boats with an open mind! There's a few lakes I can think of
that a rig like this combo would open up...no it wouldn't be practical,
just fun. And its no fair just taking your Blackhawk in there! Would this
be possible? I'll build the carrier, you build the plane?
--Fritz
----------------
Fritz Funk
Email:fritzf@...
Phone: (H): (907)780-4261 (W):(907)465-6113
Snail: 6017 Sunset Street, Juneau, AK 99801-9728
My Boat Page:http://www.alaska.net/~fritzf/Boats/Boats.htm
(Bolger power sharpie Sneakeasy and other projects)
B-24 Aircrew "Roger the Lodger":http://www.alaska.net/~fritzf/B24/
Don't they sell a pontoon kit for the CH 701?
--- In bolger@y..., bruce_hector@h... wrote:
> I know it sounds a little off the wall, even for this group, But
has
> anyone ever seriously considered a civilian, fixed wing, aircraft
> carrier? I am. Perhaps doubling Wyoming (how the heck is that
> spelled, I'm Canadian. Can you spell Saskatchewan?) to 106' @ about
> 20' beam. With a flat upper deck stressed to take the landing load
of
> an ultralight Short Take Off and Landing (STOL) aircraft such as
> Zenair's CH 701 Zodiac. It lands and takes off in under 75 feet
with
> zero wind and has an approach speed of about 30 knots. I think such
a
> vessel could quarantee a 15 knot headwind. Which would mean an over
> the deck approach speed of about 15 knots. Heck, you might not even
> need any arrester cables. Anyway, I'll be at the messabout this
> weekend, the idea should sound even better as the rum bottle
drains.
> Bruce Hector
OK Bruce, I read your letter, my eyes rolled back up, my mind started
racing. Details of design, arresting wires, rigging of hooks, how to
build a cheap stabilized ball, deck storage, different aircraft that you
could land. What would it take to get the WAR replica Corsair on. Dreams
of once again rolling out on final and calling the ball.
20 minutes later my eyes focused back on the screen.
I shook my head, yesterday's gone, and there are not enough years left
in my life to do all the things I want to. Still thank you for a few
good minutes.
HJ
bruce_hector@...wrote:
racing. Details of design, arresting wires, rigging of hooks, how to
build a cheap stabilized ball, deck storage, different aircraft that you
could land. What would it take to get the WAR replica Corsair on. Dreams
of once again rolling out on final and calling the ball.
20 minutes later my eyes focused back on the screen.
I shook my head, yesterday's gone, and there are not enough years left
in my life to do all the things I want to. Still thank you for a few
good minutes.
HJ
bruce_hector@...wrote:
>
> I know it sounds a little off the wall, even for this group, But has
> anyone ever seriously considered a civilian, fixed wing, aircraft
> carrier? I am. Perhaps doubling Wyoming (how the heck is that
> spelled, I'm Canadian. Can you spell Saskatchewan?) to 106' @ about
> 20' beam. With a flat upper deck stressed to take the landing load of
> an ultralight Short Take Off and Landing (STOL) aircraft such as
> Zenair's CH 701 Zodiac. It lands and takes off in under 75 feet with
> zero wind and has an approach speed of about 30 knots. I think such a
> vessel could quarantee a 15 knot headwind. Which would mean an over
> the deck approach speed of about 15 knots. Heck, you might not even
> need any arrester cables. Anyway, I'll be at the messabout this
> weekend, the idea should sound even better as the rum bottle drains.
> Bruce Hector
>
>
Bolger has designed a submarine. I don't know if it's "instant"
construction or not.( Brings a metal picture of a cigar shaped craft
with outside chines) So why not an aircraft carrier.
construction or not.( Brings a metal picture of a cigar shaped craft
with outside chines) So why not an aircraft carrier.
Further to my wild rantings about an aircraft carrier, I'll be at the
messabout in either a Diablo, Nymph, Skimmer or Pirogue. Whatever it
is it'll be flying a Canadian flag. My pick-up is unmistakeable. It's
Tremclad Yellow with huge, fake, painted on rust holes. Black cap,
we'll be sleepoing inside. Bruce.
messabout in either a Diablo, Nymph, Skimmer or Pirogue. Whatever it
is it'll be flying a Canadian flag. My pick-up is unmistakeable. It's
Tremclad Yellow with huge, fake, painted on rust holes. Black cap,
we'll be sleepoing inside. Bruce.
I know it sounds a little off the wall, even for this group, But has
anyone ever seriously considered a civilian, fixed wing, aircraft
carrier? I am. Perhaps doubling Wyoming (how the heck is that
spelled, I'm Canadian. Can you spell Saskatchewan?) to 106' @ about
20' beam. With a flat upper deck stressed to take the landing load of
an ultralight Short Take Off and Landing (STOL) aircraft such as
Zenair's CH 701 Zodiac. It lands and takes off in under 75 feet with
zero wind and has an approach speed of about 30 knots. I think such a
vessel could quarantee a 15 knot headwind. Which would mean an over
the deck approach speed of about 15 knots. Heck, you might not even
need any arrester cables. Anyway, I'll be at the messabout this
weekend, the idea should sound even better as the rum bottle drains.
Bruce Hector
anyone ever seriously considered a civilian, fixed wing, aircraft
carrier? I am. Perhaps doubling Wyoming (how the heck is that
spelled, I'm Canadian. Can you spell Saskatchewan?) to 106' @ about
20' beam. With a flat upper deck stressed to take the landing load of
an ultralight Short Take Off and Landing (STOL) aircraft such as
Zenair's CH 701 Zodiac. It lands and takes off in under 75 feet with
zero wind and has an approach speed of about 30 knots. I think such a
vessel could quarantee a 15 knot headwind. Which would mean an over
the deck approach speed of about 15 knots. Heck, you might not even
need any arrester cables. Anyway, I'll be at the messabout this
weekend, the idea should sound even better as the rum bottle drains.
Bruce Hector