Hovercraft

This topic is empty.

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 29 total)

1 2 →

Author

Posts
25 December 2008 at 07:02 #17732
Paul T
Participant
@pault84577
Here is my Christmas conundrum

This years subject is not as contentious as last years (I still get emails) but has been bothering me for a few weeks.

WHAT IS A HOVERCRAFT?

The obvious answer is that a hovercraft is a hovercraft and therefore in a class of its own but how do you classify one?

Is a hovercraft an aircraft because when in motion it is not in contact with the ground?

Is a hovercraft a boat because it can travel over water?

Is a hovercraft an amphibian because it can travel between water and land?

Or is a hovercraft merely a vehicle because it can travel over most surfaces.

And lastly as modelers we have to get things right so which radio system should we use to operate a hovercraft do we opt for 35Mhz or 40Mhz?

Answers on a postcard and send it to me at:

Workshop Grotto North Pole.

I’m off to stuff a turkey and feed the reindeer then get to bed as I was very busy last night so Happy Christmas everyone.

Paul
Advert

25 December 2008 at 09:17 #17733
Bob Abell 2
Participant
@bobabell2
Mornin`…………………Santa!

That is an interesting point……………..35 or 40 meg!………………what about……………37.5 meg?……..Since it`s Christmas!

Now back to me bote……………….lol

Bob
26 December 2008 at 11:19 #17734
ashley needham
Participant
@ashleyneedham69188
Hi all, merry xmas etc. A hovercraft is undoubtably a TYPE of aircraft as it goes along with no contact with the ground. By extension, if the engine power was increased sufficienty it would undoubtably fly (think SRN1 for a mental picture,withouit skirt) .40M would be my guess as hovercraft do not usually attain sufficient altitude to compete with aircraft (normal aircraft that is ) Ashley ho ho ho
26 December 2008 at 12:55 #17735
Paul T
Participant
@pault84577
Hi Ashley

If its an aircraft then it should be 35Mhz.

Paul

HO HO HO
26 December 2008 at 19:22 #17737
the converter
Participant
@theconverter
hi all

i thing a hovercraft is merely a craft not vehicle/boat or plane so if this is the case then neither 35mhz or 45mhz should be used but as bob said use 37.5mhz

as clearly a hovercraft is neither land or air based craft but comes somewhere in between

merry xmas all

ron
27 December 2008 at 06:35 #17739
Paul T
Participant
@pault84577
The conundrum deepens.

I had not put a train in the list of possible classifications as I had thought that, like a submarine, a train could not be a candidate and then last night one of the elves reminded me about the "mag" train which hovers on a magnetic field.

So if we accept that by definition a true hovercraft need not be supported on a cushion of air we are forced to include trains in the list of possible classifications.

Santa
28 December 2008 at 15:34 #17770
Len Ochiltree
Participant
@lenochiltree67043
Dear Santa,

Are you thinking of making Rudolf and chums Redundant and using a Hovercraft? at least we would be able to hear and feel you coming!.

Did you get those very cheap workmate type of things?.

Happy New Year.

Regards Len ( worked every day over Christmas )
29 December 2008 at 08:21 #17773
Paul T
Participant
@pault84577
Hi Len

A hovercraft might be more comfortable than the sleigh but the reindeer have the advantage of being able to fly higher and faster so santa will be sticking with the rudolf the stealth reindeer.

No I didn’t get the workmate things as Wicks caught up with the pricing mistake and cancelled the order then they emailed me with all sorts of legal reasons why they were allowed to cancel, not that I was bothered as I knew it was a gamble but they were a little heavy handed.

Happy new year to you

Santa
29 December 2008 at 20:09 #17785
ashley needham
Participant
@ashleyneedham69188
Santa, so what is your flying, moose propelled sleigh classed as then ?? (I tracked your progress the other night courtesy of NASA) Ashley
29 December 2008 at 20:47 #17787
Paul T
Participant
@pault84577
IFO

(Identified Flying Object)

Those NASA chaps came up with a lighter tracking unit this year as in previous years it has been very heavy and upset the reindeer by causing undeerstear

Santa
9 January 2009 at 19:20 #3290
Paul T
Participant
@pault84577
Are they an aircraft or boat or amphibian
5 February 2018 at 02:21 #75592
Marty Hillier
Participant
@martyhillier
Not wanting to fan any dying embers but I think hovercraft should come under the broad classification of Surface Vehicles, along with hydrofoils, boats and cars/trucks. Maybe wing-in-ground-effect (WIG) machines should too, although it is interesting to note an air cushion racer by Max Zuijdendorp features in RCM&E.
5 February 2018 at 14:42 #75627
Paul T
Participant
@pault84577
Hello Marty

Thank you for injecting some oxygen into this floundering thread and doing an heroic job of keeping the discussion going.

I have had plenty of time to reflect upon the matter of wether or not a hovercraft should be classified as an aircraft or surface craft and I have come to the conclusion that a hovercraft should be considered as an aircraft in the same way that a helicopter is classified as an aircraft i.e. they both rise from a stationary position by means of a rotor or rotors, they can both maintain a fixed position when airborne and they are both operated in a similar way.

Now who will be brave enough to throw petrol on this growing conflagration by offering another alternative.

Paul
5 February 2018 at 14:51 #75628
ashley needham
Participant
@ashleyneedham69188
BUT….as a model, you would need to use boat radio frequencies?? Ashley
5 February 2018 at 15:09 #75630
Colin Bishop
Moderator
@colinbishop34627
Full size hovercraft invariably operate over water or mud/sandflats and therefore interact with other marine traffic which is why they are normally classified as marine vehicles for regulatory purposes. They do not interact with aircraft and are not subject to air traffic control although a line of them in the stack over Heathrow would certainly be a sight to see.

Hydrofoils are definitely boats as they only operate in water and when they slow down float in the same way as any other vessel. They are simply a high speed version of a marine craft.

Wing in ground craft again generally operate over water although they do actually fly. However there are hardly any of them operational to my knowledge and they are only owned by the Russian military so probably no need to regulate them at the moment.

Colin
5 February 2018 at 19:22 #75639
Paul T
Participant
@pault84577
Ashley

As long as they don't submerge we could use 2.4GHz?

Colin

Thank you for your sensible commentary but even though I agree that Hovercraft have been dumped in a general class to ease the lives of regulatory officials I would beg to differ with the reasoning as by the same logic it could just as easily be classified as a HGV, Bus or Train.

However no surface vehicle can interact with water, mud and land in the same way as a hovercraft ….but a Helicopter can…so, and with the greatest of respect I maintain that Hovercraft should be classified as aircraft.

Paul

Edited By Paul T on 05/02/2018 19:24:38
5 February 2018 at 20:41 #75641
Colin Bishop
Moderator
@colinbishop34627
Paul,

I don't see how a hovercraft could be placed in the same category as buses, trains and HGVs just as Daleks are known to be unable to climb stairs.

You are most unlikely to see a hovercraft proceeding along your local high street. Nor will you see buses, trains and HGVs crossing from Portsmouth to Ryde! (unless they are on a ferry).

Colin
6 February 2018 at 12:50 #75654
Paul T
Participant
@pault84577
Colin

If a hovercraft can be placed in the marine category because of its frequent interaction with water borne traffic then logic dictates that, due to the hovercrafts ability to travel over most surfaces, it can equally be classified as a land based surface vehicle.

Whilst it is true that you don't see hovercraft tootling down the high street they are very suitable for carrying heavy loads or passengers over tundra or desert, in fact they are better suited for these tasks than HGVs or Buses.

What other machine is capable of carrying people or materials over great distances of tundra or desert without needing pre-built infrastructure?

Paul

p.s. Daleks don't need stairs as the writers thoughtfully added an ability to hover / fly
6 February 2018 at 13:30 #75655
Colin Bishop
Moderator
@colinbishop34627
What other machine is capable of carrying people or materials over great distances of tundra or desert without needing pre-built infrastructure?

Camels?

Colin
6 February 2018 at 14:38 #75659
Paul T
Participant
@pault84577
Colin you are such a wag.
7 February 2018 at 08:44 #75688
Empire Parkstone
Participant
@empireparkstone
Helicopters are merely Rotary winged aircraft as opposed to fixed wing
7 February 2018 at 13:36 #75698
Chris Fellows
Participant
@chrisfellows72943
I think trains can be taken out of the options as they have to travel on or above a rail i.e. along a pre-determined route whereas a hovercraft doesn't. Road trains don't count!

And as for it being an aircraft it doesn't actually leave the ground does it as the skirt remains in contact with the ground or water?

And as for with having sufficient power it could rise above the ground like an aircraft, I don't think so, it would be far too unstable.

Chris
7 February 2018 at 14:51 #75702
Paul T
Participant
@pault84577
Chris

Thank you for your comments.

Likening hovercraft to trains was merely to demonstrate that hovercraft can be used in most surface transport applications, I agree that trains require tracks to run on and hovercraft don't but both can be used to carry people or cargo overland from A to B.

A hovercraft does ride on a cushion of air and there is a gap between the ground and the skirt.

The whole point of a hovercraft is that it has the power to lift it off the ground, admittedly only 300mm but it still fulfills the requirement of being airborne, and when hovering 'flying' over water or solid ground it is perfectly stable.

Paul
7 February 2018 at 17:39 #75706
Bob Wilson
Participant
@bobwilson59101
I have always regarded hovercrafts as "hovercrafts," The simple name indicates exactly what they are, and no further definition is required in my view! – Bob
7 February 2018 at 18:17 #75707
Kev.W
Participant
@kev-w
I think you lot have missed the "bloody obvious", A 'Hovercraft' is what it says on the label, it is a 'craft that hovers', nothing more, nothing less.

An 'Aircraft' is a vehicle that travels in the air, it is useless on land, as far as going anywhere is concerned.

Another way to look at it is, an 'Aeroplane' does what it says on the tin, it 'planes' on the aer (air in modern parlance).

A water craft (be it boat or ship) can go nowhere on dry land (apart from the camel)

So a 'Hovercraft' is a type unto itself, just like the 'Helicopter', in fact, if you want to put it in another way,, a 'Hovercraft' is a 'Helicopter' that can't get it's 'end up'.
Author

Posts