"Submarine Aircraft Carriers and Submersible Planes" Topic
6 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please be courteous toward your fellow TMP members.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Modern Naval Discussion (1946 to 2013) Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase ArticleThe first militia for the AK47 "opposing army."
Featured Profile ArticlesargonII, traveling in the Middle East, continues his report on the gates of Jerusalem.
Featured Book Review
|
Tango01 | 19 Apr 2014 10:29 p.m. PST |
"If submarines possessed the high vision and quick speed of aircraft, they could dramatically extend their reach. If aircraft took off and landed from underwater platforms, their staging and strikes would be stealthier and more secure. But combining the two epoch-making weapons has proved difficult. Only one country really pulled it off—and too late to win a war. But the tremendous potential of the aircraft-sub combo may make an historic comeback thanks to drones and Special Operations Forces. The underwater stealthiness of submarines comes with a great downside—blindness. Subs rely on a few sensors—and help from other military assets—to comprehend their environments
" Full article here. link Amicalement Armand |
miniMo | 20 Apr 2014 6:13 a.m. PST |
We knew that in 1970: link |
Coelacanth | 20 Apr 2014 6:34 a.m. PST |
Man, I loved that sub! Ron |
TheBeast | 20 Apr 2014 7:44 a.m. PST |
Truly, Skydiver was a marvel, but I knew in '65, with the second season of Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea. See: Flying Sub ;->= Doug |
John the OFM | 20 Apr 2014 8:59 a.m. PST |
I designed many similar craft when I was in 6th Grade. Too bad my papers and specs have not survived, or I might be a rich man! |
Lion in the Stars | 20 Apr 2014 12:25 p.m. PST |
Holy cow, I didn't realize that LockMart had made a mockup of the Cormorant! YouTube link
It's quite an interesting idea, really. The biggest problem is the recovery process. Another difficulty would be the very small production run, since 4 Ohio-class SSGNs would only carry 4 birds each (don't want to sacrifice too many Tomahawks@7 per tube,N-ATACMs @3 per tube, and/or 155mm vertical guns @1 per tube; and Ohio SSGNs only have 20 usable tubes). I can't really see a reason to build more than 32 of them, unless the Navy really wants to give a few to EVERY ship in the fleet. LockMart would definitely prefer to make lots of them, and I'd assume that the Navy would rather have a large production run to maximize economies of scale. As a bonus, making it public that almost every USN ship can carry a couple Cormorants makes it easier to conceal submarine-launched operations. |
|