The ‘Caspian Sea Monster’ rises from the grave

Re:The ‘Caspian Sea Monster’ rises from the grave by flohofwoe on Friday October 23, 2020 @05:09AM (#24867405)

Smaller "Class B" Ekranoplans (like the Orlyonok [1]) could also fly like an airplane, I wonder if "hopping over" ships would be an option also for the bigger ones if avoiding traffic is a design goal (I guess since the Lun was a cold-war weapon system, avoiding civilian traffic wasn't all that important).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-90_Orlyonok

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The ‘Caspian Sea Monster’ rises from the grave by jeffbee on Friday October 23, 2020 @12:22PM (#24871117)

What was the deal with the Soviet obsession over contra-rotating coaxial propellers? Was there just one senior designer in the USSR with this obsession and a lot of influence?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The ‘Caspian Sea Monster’ rises from the grave by flohofwoe on Saturday October 24, 2020 @08:38AM (#24878819)

I guess in this case the reason is that the Orlyonok simply used the engine of the Tu-95 bomber, this was the most powerful turboprop engine at the time (probably still is).

As for the Kamov helicopters, no idea, but apparently coaxial rotors are more efficient (e.g. better climb rate) than the traditional helicopter design. The "next generation" Sikorsky–Boeing SB-1 also uses coaxial rotors:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky%E2%80%93Boeing_SB-1_D...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The ‘Caspian Sea Monster’ rises from the grave by throwaway0a5e on Friday October 23, 2020 @07:16AM (#24868247)

> I wonder if "hopping over" ships would be an option

Yes, at the cost of forward speed. It would be similar to a parabolic climb in an aircraft.

[ Parent | on HN ]