Autogyro embarked in Battlships

[Weaver]

I've just watched a film of them doing it. The ship's going very slowly: just fast enough to make the mat 'stream' properly, and the sea is calm:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObsHmDgvMak

Note that the ship is in a turn, so that the aircraft can taxi along the smooth area in the middle of it's stern wake until it's alongside. That effect can't last forever though: imagine trying to do this in a heavier swell and/or when the ship is going faster and making a bigger bow wake. The chance of the plane ending up hitting the side of the ship is pretty high.

[PR19_Kit]

With a proper Skyhook they wouldn't have had to land.........



Google Imaging 'Skyhook Harrier' brings up all SORTS of weird stuff! 

[Weaver]

Yeah, I can see a fundamental problem with the combination of an autogyro and a skyhook though Kit...

[PR19_Kit]

Yeah, I can see a fundamental problem with the combination of an autogyro and a skyhook though Kit...

Just a bit of development work needed. The Hook can go underneath maybe?

Or rotate the hook at the same speed as the rotor?

[jcf]

Hook on the top of the rotor mast and a big ring on the crane. 

The giro-pilot flies onto the ring/bar of the stationary crane like an F9C pilot hooking up to the Akron/Macon. 

[Nick]

You're looking at this all wrong. The hook goes on the underside of the autogyro, attached to a long rope. The pilot comes in low over the ship, lowers the rope, a sailor secures the hook to a motor on the landing pad and the bird is winched down.

[Weaver]

You're looking at this all wrong. The hook goes on the underside of the autogyro, attached to a long rope. The pilot comes in low over the ship, lowers the rope, a sailor secures the hook to a motor on the landing pad and the bird is winched down.

That's pretty much what the 'beartrap' system does for real for big helicopters on small ships!

[jcf]

You're looking at this all wrong. The hook goes on the underside of the autogyro, attached to a long rope. The pilot comes in low over the ship, lowers the rope, a sailor secures the hook to a motor on the landing pad and the bird is winched down.

The problem with that is autogiros can't hover, they do not fly like a helicopter.

[Weaver]

You're looking at this all wrong. The hook goes on the underside of the autogyro, attached to a long rope. The pilot comes in low over the ship, lowers the rope, a sailor secures the hook to a motor on the landing pad and the bird is winched down.

The problem with that is autogiros can't hover, they do not fly like a helicopter.

It would only work if the ship is moving forwards: then the autogyro would be in the same situation as an Fa 330 Bachstelze aurogyro kite being reeling in by it's parent submarine. Whether the ship's speed is enough to keep the autogyro flying depends on the design of the latter.

I think the bigger question is, what's the point? If the ship can keep the autogyro flying at zero relative airspeed, then the autogyro can do that for itself, so it might as well just free land on the ship. The cable system would also only work when the ship was at pretty much maximum speed, so if it was stopped or moving slowly, the autogiro would still have to free land on it, which would still need a short runway.

I still think the simplest option is to design a ship (probably more appropriate for a cruiser than a battleship) with a transom stern and a relatively long flush quarter deck, and then have a simple landing/take-off deck on the latter. If there isn't enough space between the stern and the aft turrets, then have the deck offset to run past the turret, with the barrels turned to whatever angle give the most free length. You could even design a scout cruiser along the lines of some of the German pre-war 6" cruisers which had their two aft turrets offset to left and right.

[rickshaw]

I've just watched a film of them doing it. The ship's going very slowly: just fast enough to make the mat 'stream' properly, and the sea is calm:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObsHmDgvMak

Note that the ship is in a turn, so that the aircraft can taxi along the smooth area in the middle of it's stern wake until it's alongside. That effect can't last forever though: imagine trying to do this in a heavier swell and/or when the ship is going faster and making a bigger bow wake. The chance of the plane ending up hitting the side of the ship is pretty high.

All true but the point is the ship is underway and so is the aircraft.   My point is IMO proven.

[Weaver]

I've just watched a film of them doing it. The ship's going very slowly: just fast enough to make the mat 'stream' properly, and the sea is calm:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObsHmDgvMak

Note that the ship is in a turn, so that the aircraft can taxi along the smooth area in the middle of it's stern wake until it's alongside. That effect can't last forever though: imagine trying to do this in a heavier swell and/or when the ship is going faster and making a bigger bow wake. The chance of the plane ending up hitting the side of the ship is pretty high.

All true but the point is the ship is underway and so is the aircraft.   My point is IMO proven.

Technically, yes, but slowing down to five knots is almost as undesirable as stopping completely, so I still claim it as a disadvantage of floatplanes.

[rickshaw]

I've just watched a film of them doing it. The ship's going very slowly: just fast enough to make the mat 'stream' properly, and the sea is calm:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObsHmDgvMak

Note that the ship is in a turn, so that the aircraft can taxi along the smooth area in the middle of it's stern wake until it's alongside. That effect can't last forever though: imagine trying to do this in a heavier swell and/or when the ship is going faster and making a bigger bow wake. The chance of the plane ending up hitting the side of the ship is pretty high.

All true but the point is the ship is underway and so is the aircraft.   My point is IMO proven.

Technically, yes, but slowing down to five knots is almost as undesirable as stopping completely, so I still claim it as a disadvantage of floatplanes.

Fair enough.  However, I feel you are wrong.  Movement occurs.

[jcf]

Summat fer both a yez :



Hypothetical design from 1935 by a Flight artist, proportions of engine and rotor system to fuselage are a wee bit wonky. 

When I saw this illo a few years back my first thoughts were about converting the old Merit/Smer 1/48 Walrus
into something similar, may still get around to it some day.

[Weaver]

Nice one Jon - cheers!

Like you say, the Walrus is the first thing that springs to mind, but really you could do something like that with just about any flying boat that has a slim fuselage and biplane or pylon-mounted wings.

Every picture of autogyros on floats that I can find on a quick search shows them with steps, so I think the artist got that wrong too.

[rickshaw]

Nice one Jon - cheers!

Like you say, the Walrus is the first thing that springs to mind, but really you could do something like that with just about any flying boat that has a slim fuselage and biplane or pylon-mounted wings.

Every picture of autogyros on floats that I can find on a quick search shows them with steps, so I think the artist got that wrong too.

I'd agree.  As the function of the step is to help the hull "unstick" by ejecting turbulence and air under the hull, through forward speed and as the Gyrocopter cannot, as you pointed out, hover or vertically take off, it would need IMHO all the help it could get to become unstuck from the water's surface.